Comment: Regarding your Yahoo link,

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Bigfoot DNA Discovered? Not So Fast (see in situ)

Regarding your Yahoo link,

which I just now read, by the deputy editor of "Skeptical Inquirer," many of his points are valid criticisms, ones I've echoed myself. However, having read Ketchum's actual report, I am impressed with her commitment to scientific methodology in the conduct of her research on the 110 samples. She describes multiple steps taken to eliminate contamination, consistent no doubt with her company's forensic and animal genealogy work. She may be female and blonde but she seems to know her business. Furthermore, she contracted seven independent labs to replicate her tests, ran control tests, and ran human DNA profiles on many if not all who provided the samples.

It is no surprise to me that Ketchum struck out with the normal peer-reviewed journals. Paleo-anthropology can accommodate minor adjustments to its prevailing theories and evolutionary/migratory timetables but radical findings are universally repudiated as if Holy Doctrines were being challenged by unwashed heathens or apostates. I'm sure Ketchum would have preferred not to self-publish and I'm equally sure that her paper and findings will be reviled until such time as they are replicated by other researchers.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.