The Starchild Skull

a reply to: Harte

Teach my wife. I disregarded the song by The Coasters, and now I pay the price.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte

How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.

I usually don't trouble to repeat myself ad nauseum simply because people such as yourself or tanka are being ignorant on the internet.

I provided you all the replies I've made in the past. If you could just figure out how to click on a link, then perhaps you would have understood that.

Wait... maybe that's assuming too much.

Harte

All I've seen you do is act like the library of congress, while doing nothing except argue semantics. Just grab the microphone and spread those peacock feathers. Your buddy is still arguing about "free" 'is not free' with like 6 pages of microphone hogging claptrap. Are you both in competition? It is pretty entertaining though. Thanks for that.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

If you mean me, I argued if you pay for it, then it's not free. Can you explain how it is free when you pay for it?

originally posted by: tanka418
...the botched discredit of Dr. Ketchum.

~sigh~

Melba Ketchum tried to publish a paper with a collection of 'Bigfoot' genetic samples that show it was a hybrid with a human mother and an unknown ape father. The paper was rejected by all mainstream journals, so she self published it in February 2013.

Let see why it was never taken as anything but a joke. First her questionable references:

She used a known satiric report as evidence of her findings!! This is from her paper:

The above commonly reported traits, as well as other scientific evidence lending credence to the existence of Sasquatch, have been thoroughly researched and documented in both books and in peer reviewed manuscripts.[4-13]

The above reference is from here, an April Fool reference!!! lol
www.lanevol.org...

More here: www.cryptozoonews.com...

Then in her conclusion she says:

All our analyses clearly indicate that the yeti is nested several nodes within a specific ungulate group (i.e., the perissodactyls, cf. Fig. 1) and, more specifically, forms a subclade with sequences U02581 and X79547 (cf. figure legend). These results demonstrate that extensive morphological convergences have occurred between the yeti and primates. It is quite remarkable that Haddock already identified 44 years ago the correct phylogenetic position of the yeti (despite he had seen only footprints in the snow) when he yelled at it ‘‘You odd-toed ungulate!’’ (Herg
e, 1960, p. 26

Let see.... odd toed ungulate.... Perissodactyls: en.wikipedia.org...

Horses???

And this is what real scientists trained in evolutionary biology think of her:
doubtfulnews.com...

She is not a joke, she is a scammer and a hoax who makes money from her ridiculous paper.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

All I've seen you do is act like the library of congress,

Harte is smarte.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Learn the difference between RANDOM sampling and NON RANDOM sampling.

Wow...

So that's the kind f shark you think you are...okay.

You are now going to have to show just how extrapolation is different when used with random and non random samples. You shouldn't have much trouble...with your education is "stats"...oh wait...extrapolation isn't used on samples, though One can if necessary...guess that solves that; the extrapolation is valid.

"Stats" what is that exactly? Are you talking about statistics? if so, that has never been something One can get a degree in, although, it is a subset of mathematics...something you should have learned...apparently you slept trough most of that.


Ya know, I was perfectly willing to attempt to work with you, but, that iron jaw of or has made that quite impossible now. I was thinking that your serious misconceptions of data were the product of another area of science not quite jiving, but, it appears that your knowledge of Data Science is just made up to suit yourself. And that of course cannot work.

You did not have to go back, I just reposted it, here it is again. It perfectly illustrated why your point is incredibly stupid. I expect you to not answer it again.

Well that's a good thing; I would never have recognized that as something worthy of a response.

What if 1% of the population voted and they simply extrapolated those votes to decide who the winner is. Let's say we extrapolate from rural Arkansas every year. That's fine, and will give the same answer as allowing 100% of the population to vote, right? You'd get the same results as if we extrapolated 1% of the votes from urban Boston, right?

And, it still isn't worthy.

However, IF 1% of a vote was counted and then the final results extrapolated; it is very likely that no one would notice any differences. This can be rather easily evidenced by taking nearly any scientific poll and comparing the results of that poll against reality...the polls typically do rather well...hence the reason that "scientific polls" are a multi-million dollar industry in and of itself.

So now we've come full circle; and...the results of the mtDNA have not changed; there are far too many differences between the starchild skull and Humans for the skull to be human...period.

Now, back to the other; anytime you wish to actually do any of this correctly, you may respond to my challenge...if you decide not to; then we shall know you are just blown' smoke.

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: tanka418
...the botched discredit of Dr. Ketchum.

~sigh~

Melba Ketchum tried to publish a paper with a collection of 'Bigfoot' genetic samples that show it was a hybrid with a human mother and an unknown ape father. The paper was rejected by all mainstream journals, so she self published it in February 2013.

Let see why it was never taken as anything but a joke. First her questionable references:

She used a known satiric report as evidence of her findings!! This is from her paper:

I think you have misunderstood!

Firstly; there is nothing wrong with anybody self-publishing...with the exception of a decent distribution...self publishing typically means that a good distribution of One's data isn't realized. I wouldn't expect either you, Dr. Ketchum, or Occam to understand that, and the reasons are rather technical, and convoluted (search engine algorithms and all)...though mostly convoluted.

Second, and what I was objecting to: the condemnation of and attempt to discredit Dr. Ketchum based on no real data...only the listing of a single, unreferenced / unknown source. While demanding that I provide "sources"...that is a two way door, and it does in fact swing both ways.

I was unable to find the references you mentioned in the source material you provided. In the first article the word "sasquatch" is used twice, and not in the context you represented. The second lacked context as well.

Further, the good doctor, and, her work are not the issue here. It is the behavior and demands that have been made that she was "caught up in" that are the issue...the display of hypocritical behavior.Seriously, if y'all can't engage in a discussion with some semblance of Honor...what is the point?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
By the way: what has eaten up so many pages has bee your refusal to back up your own claims. In this case using the available data to prove the mtDNA is Human.

For some reason you seem to think you are above the necessity of backing up your claims, yet you subject others to the requirement.

So, now, with an expanded demand; kindly back up your assertion. Prove the mtDNA to be Human using available data. AND, explain to us all just why you think you are above this simple requirement?

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte

How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.

I usually don't trouble to repeat myself ad nauseum simply because people such as yourself or tanka are being ignorant on the internet.

I provided you all the replies I've made in the past. If you could just figure out how to click on a link, then perhaps you would have understood that.

Wait... maybe that's assuming too much.

Harte

All I've seen you do is act like the library of congress, while doing nothing except argue semantics. Just grab the microphone and spread those peacock feathers. Your buddy is still arguing about "free" 'is not free' with like 6 pages of microphone hogging claptrap. Are you both in competition? It is pretty entertaining though. Thanks for that.

I find arguing with idiots to be tiresome.

Took me a while though.

Harte

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

All I've seen you do is act like the library of congress,

Harte is smarte.

does not mean he's right

Closed for staff review.

The sheer number of post removals throughout this thread could only be added to, especially within the last few pages.

To remove them is justified, however those pages will begin to look like swiss cheese and smell like limburger.

For that reason, this thread will be permanently closed.