Search This Blog

Thursday, September 25, 2014

The Scott Carpenter File II: More on the Sykes paper

Scott Carpenter concludes his recent commentary (see at right) on the recent Sykes paper (see at right) by saying:

"This paper would have never stood up to the peer review process that the Ketchum DNA Study was subjected too (sic) by the Journal Nature. In short this paper in my opinion was no more than an attempt to discredit the American Bigfoot Community, muddy the water, and discredit the Kethcum DNA Study. I say MAJOR FAIL Dr. Sykes….."

REALLY, Scott?

Just for background on The Royal Society (see : https://royalsociety.org/about-us/), which published the Sykes paper in its Proceedings:

 
The Royal Society is a Fellowship of the world's most eminent scientists and is the oldest scientific academy in continuous existence.”

“The origins of the Royal Society lie in an 'invisible college' of natural philosophers who began meeting in the mid-1640s to discuss the new philosophy of promoting knowledge of the natural world through observation and experiment, which we now call science.

“Its official foundation date is 28 November 1660, when a group of 12 met at Gresham College after a lecture by Christopher Wren, then the Gresham Professor of Astronomy, and decided to found 'a Colledge for the Promoting of Physico-Mathematicall Experimentall Learning'. This group included Wren himself, Robert Boyle, John Wilkins, Sir Robert Moray, and William, Viscount Brouncker. “  (And, Scott, the spelling above is period 1660's, so don't get to blogging.) 

"There are approximately 1,600 Fellows and Foreign Members, including around 80 Nobel Laureates. "

"We do all we can to ensure the peer-review process is fair and we aim to minimize bias.
  • All papers submitted to Royal Society research journals are peer-reviewed in a single-blind fashion (Author names are not concealed, but Referee names are)."
Scott, the two journals, Nature and Proceedings of the Royal Society, have comparable peer review processes, and the Royal Society are no fools.  I wish I could say the same for you.

Furthermore, Prof. Sykes acknowledged in his paper the assistance of  "American Bigfoot Community" individuals such as Justin Smeja, Bart Cutino, Derek Randles, Jeff Meldrum, Maxwell David, Loren Coleman, among others.  Your assertion that Sykes attempted to "discredit" them is outrageously stupid.  They were part of his project and provided samples to him.  Unlike you, Scott, these honest individuals, though they may have participated in the Ketchum study, are more interested in exploring all avenues to finding the truth than covering for Melba.  I commend them for their open mindedness.  You should follow their example.

Since you gave a grade to Prof. Sykes, I give you one, Scott:  "Expelled permanently for perpetrating falsehoods."  Please collect your belongings, proceed to Security, turn in your badge, and leave the (bigfoot) premises. 

In a coming blog I will analyze the peer reviewers' comments on the Ketchum paper as submitted to Nature in the light of new discoveries as well as Scott Carpenter's assessment of them.  Thanks, Scott, for providing me with so much material - your misinformation and uninformed, biased viewpoints.   I'll never be wanting.  I wish I could write faster.