SOME QUESTIONS FOR MELBA KETCHUM ON BIGFOOT DNA THAT SHOULD BE ASKED IN THE INTERVIEW TONIGHT ON COAST-TO-COAST AM RADO

TONIGHT ON COAST-TO-COAST AM,
Bigfoot DNA Paper Publisher and Author and Apparently Editor and Peer-Reviewer of Her Own Paper, MELBA KETCHUM.

INFO HERE: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/02/17
Date: 02-17-13
Host: George Knapp
Guests: Dr. Melba S. Ketchum, Lynne D. Kitei M.D.
1st Half: Joining George Knapp, Dr. Melba S. Ketchum discusses the official release of her DNA analysis of possible Bigfoot hair samples.

That is right. Will they ask the tough questions, however?


An anonymous DNA Project insider sent these questions to me last night, and I think they are important. Here you go... maybe someone can get through and ask them live on the air?

SOME QUESTIONS FOR MELBA KETCHUM THAT SHOULD BE ASKED IN THE INTERVIEW TONIGHT ON COAST-TO-COAST AM.
(Submitted to me by someone who wishes to remain anonymous.)

1. Dr. Ketchum's excuse for not uploading the data to GenBank has been disputed by a scientist at Princeton. How does George know her "documentation" is valid? Is it something that could have been faked? Can he actually SPEAK to someone at GenBank to get a confirmation directly from them and NOT filtered through her?

2. Can he SPEAK with the editor of the "journal" where her paper passed peer review for direct confirmation of her story, including the sequence of events?

3. What is the name of the original journal?

4. Can this editor confirm the purchase of the journal?

5. How did Melba fund the purchase of this journal?

6. What scientific society owned it previously and how/why did they agree to the sale?

7. How much did acquisition of the journal cost?

8. What happened to the journal's staff and editor? Did they lose their jobs? If not, why are they not listed on the website?

9. Why didn't the purchase of the journal include its original website? Why throw together such a cheap-looking one with none of the standard information you see on other journal pages?

10. Why didn't she keep the original journal's name and publication record?

11. Why are there no citations for this journal?

12. Why is there no evidence of this journal ever existing before?

13. Who are these "top" geneticists who have come forward to review the paper?

14. Why must they be anonymous?

15. When they have their findings, will this be made public with their NAMES and professional credentials/affiliations provided? Or will this information also be filtered through her while they remain "anonymous?"

16. Why have two of her coauthors said that they never even saw the paper (as reported on JREF).

17. Why are her coauthors silent? Why have the coauthors not spoken up about their roles in the paper, or to defend its findings?

18. If GenBank's refusal of her data is legitimate, will she freely share this data with other researchers in an open-source manner?

19. Will she provide her data to Sykes? Immediately?

******

More Info. Here, from Bigfoot Evidence Blog: http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2013/02/dr-melba-ketchum-to-be-interviewed-by.html

The best scientific news article questioning this study so far released, by Ars Technica:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bigfoot-genome-paper-conclusively-proves-that-sasquatch-is-real/

URGH. I hope to have answers from my two scientist friends re. all of this soon. At this point it doesn't look good for "finding Bigfoot" with Real Science.

The "Come On" and "Ketchum Head" Bigfoot Image Controversy

The Bigfoot art of Alexa (Alex) Evans if pretty fabulous. Bigfoot geneticist and media maven Melba Ketchum thought so, too--enough to try to possess two pieces of her art without paying for them, claiming rights despite having no contract with Evans, and refusing even a very fair offer of $75.00 for exlusive use. This seems pretty odd for a now-famous woman appearing on CNN and Coast-to-Coast AM and such, one formerly rolling in the cold cash of benefactors, and one claiming such high purposes of constitutional rights for a so-called "human" Sasquatch. What about rights for human artists???

Read the full story, The Crypto Crew: Bullying From Dr. Ketchum?, here:
http://www.thecryptocrew.com/2012/12/bullying-from-dr-ketchum_31.html
You will see that the loyal crew of the Ketchum Project are rapidly jumping ship, and for what appears to be good reason.

The deal is this: Evans drew a nice Bigfoot face from a blurry photo provided by Melba Ketchum. They never signed a contract. Nothing was ever paid. No rights were transferred. It is clear in copyright law that an artistic rendition inspired by a photograph is the property of the artist, not the photographer. In this case the details had to be added as the original image was not very clear. This further cements the artist's clear rights. Here is that drawing, The "Ketchum Head":

Drawn in 2011, inspired by a photo.

Before ever seeing the Ketchum photo Evans drew a similar image, entitled "Come On," and publicly posted on the Oregon Bigfoot site over a year earlier. Ketchum tried to claim ownership of this OTHER image for her DNA project or Sasquatch Wild Wear clothing line, even though it had nothing to do with her or her photo or any commission agreement. It was done from a witness' sighting description. Here is that image:

"Come On," Ketchum! Drawn over a year earlier, from witness description.

It should be clear to anyone that the similarity is the style of the artist, not the source, save that they both depict Bigfoot heads. Why Ketchum would threaten a cancer-survivor on limited income with a lawsuit is clear: she thought she could scare the artist into surrendering her rights for fear of an expensive legal case.

Here is some email between Alex and myself:
ALEX EVANS: "...she provided a photo of a bigfoot face, which was a good photo, but still, small and when I blew it up, had little real detail I could use in a practical way, so I did my best with it and made a drawing, which I just called ketchum head for reference. I will send that to you as well.  Anything else I can help with this controversy, just let me know, I'd be happy to lend some truth to what's happened.
THIS BLOG: So, no legal issues with K are legitimate??
ALEX EVANS: No, none.... I never signed over any copyrights to my drawings or signed any sort of agreement with her.

What, weren't all those hundreds of thousands of dollars from Wally and Adrian enough for you, Melba? Despicable. Does she really even care about Bigfoot? Or is she just in this for the money and fame? I'll let you decide, but know that some of her most loyal associates are now saying it is clearly the latter.

IMAGES ABOVE ARE COPYRIGHT BY ALEX/ALEXA EVANS, AND USED WITH HER PERMISSION. THEY ARE NOT OWNED BY MELBA KETCHUM, SO NEENER-NEENER TO YOU DNA DIAGNOSTICS.