Bigfoot DNA Study

[SPECIAL REPORT

Bigfoot DNA Study: Making an End Run Around Science A Texas veterinarian and other forensic specialists publish a study that purportedly shows novel DNA sequences that they conclude are evidence of Sasquatch. But the drama surrounding the paper is just the latest in a long series of events surrounding the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA project.

SHARON HILL

s this the news Bigfooters have been waiting decades for? Or will it all end up a bust? A convoluted and controver- Isial story of Bigfoot DNA evidence came to a head on February 13, 2013, when a long-promised paper by veterinarian Dr. Melba S. Ketchum was finally released. The study, titled “Novel North American Hominins, Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies,” was published in the inaugural issue of DeNovo: Journal of Science. The press release for the publication states that, with ten coauthors, Ketchum analyzed DNA from 111 high-quality samples submitted from across North America.

The publication of the study was The statement noted that twenty Melba S. Ketchum preceded by another press release whole mitochondrial genomes were months before announcing the conclu- sequenced and three whole nuclear coming—as she had been stating for sions. DNA Diagnostics, a veterinary genomes were obtained from sam- well over a year prior. laboratory headed by Ketchum, had ples purported to be from Sasquatch. The Ketchum study began back in 2008, when her lab was picked to an- issued a press release on November 24, Ketchum and coauthors concluded that alyze an alleged Bigfoot/Yeti hair from 2012, that intrigued cryptozoologists Sasquatch mitochondrial DNA (inher- Bhutan collected as part of Josh Gates’s and was covered by the mainstream ited from the mother) is identical to adventure show, Destination Truth. She media, some of it featuring skepticism modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch then connected with several individuals provided by SI’s Benjamin Radford. It nuclear DNA is “a novel, unknown said in part: and entered partnerships that provided hominin related to Homo sapiens and her with suspected Bigfoot samples A team of scientists can verify that other primate species,” making Sas- to test and funding for the project. their 5-year long DNA study, cur- quatch a hybrid species—“the result of Ketchum had filed a copyright notice rently under peer-review, confirms males of an unknown hominin species the existence of a novel hominin in September 2010 for a media project hybrid species, commonly called crossing with female Homo sapiens.” that would describe “a new tribe of liv- “Bigfoot” or “Sasquatch,” living in Science by press release is undoubt- ing humans.” The theme of a proposed North America. Researchers’ exten- edly bad form. Unfortunately, the No- book and video was to be “Sasquatch sive DNA sequencing suggests that vember news was not accompanied by as a modern human with some genetic the legendary Sasquatch is a human the paper or any other data to support mutations accounting for their physi- relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross its incredible claims. Ketchum, a grad- cal appearance.” This copyright notice of modern Homo sapiens with an un- uate of the Texas A&M veterinary pro- foreshadowed the DNA study results. known primate species. gram, stated that the paper was forth- The actual paper detailing the study

12 Volume 37 Issue 3 | Skeptical Inquirer and results was supposedly submitted to an undisclosed journal in late 2010 or early 2011. Since peer review takes several months, Ketchum kept enthu- In a curious disclosure to her followers, siasm alive for those who followed her progress by providing teasers and as- Ketchum declared that she had actually seen surances on social media: “Our data is amazing and beautiful and all cutting the Bigfoot creatures herself and observed that edge” (posted to her Facebook page in they were “peaceful and gentle.” February 2012). Ketchum’s business, DNA Diag- nostics (also doing business as Shelter- wood Laboratory), appeared to be having difficulties. Ketchum had been party to a suit for patent infringement that required her lab to stop using cer- tain tests (OptiGen vs. Texas A&M, Shelterwood, Ketchum, et al.). DNA Diag nostics was not in good standing with the Better Business Bureau, having received an “F” rating due to com- plaints. Issues regarding taxes and lost contracts were also rumored. In Octo- ber 2012, the building that housed the lab in Timpson, Texas, was observed to be closed and advertised for rent, and the business’s phone line was discon- nected. Ketchum failed to appear in person at two Bigfoot-themed conferences at which she was scheduled to speak (one in October 2011 and another in May A still of a supposed Bigfoot from Adrian Erikson’s YouTube video. 2012). She mentioned that she felt threatened and was shocked at the neg- ative response she had received from Nondisclosure agreements had been Following the release, she appeared some members of the Bigfoot research signed among participants of the in a few interviews. In one, she dis- community who had grown impatient Ketchum DNA project so that infor- closed that high-definition video would with continual promises of evidence. mation would not be leaked prior to accompany the release of the DNA Some began to accuse her of perpetrat- the reveal. But that did not stop Igor data in conjunction with a project run ing a hoax. Burt sev, the self-appointed head of by Adrian Erickson who supposedly In a curious disclosure to her follow- the Russia-based International Cen- collected DNA and video evidence of ers, Ketchum declared that she had ac- ter of Hominology, from issuing the the creatures. Further sensationalism tually seen the Bigfoot creatures herself following “urgent” announcement on of the story occurred as reporters keyed and observed that they were “peaceful his Facebook page on November 23: into the claim that Ketchum had char- and gentle.” In April of 2012, she made “The DNA analysis of the Bigfoot/ acterized the “unknown novel DNA” public a photo of an array of sticks in Sasquatch specimen conducted by Dr. as “angel DNA.” Ketchum denied ever the forest that she said she took with Melba Ketchum the head of DNA Di- using that term. her mobile phone, suggesting that it agnostics, Timpson, TX, USA has been On December 6, 2012, Burtsev, was made by the creatures. The picture [sic] over!” Ketchum acknowledged this who promotes the existence of the Yeti of “blurry sticks” did not go over well leak of the study as “unfortunate.” A in Siberia, stated, again via Facebook, with the Bigfoot community, as many day later, she issued the official press that the paper had been rejected by supporters abandoned hope for the le- statement without supporting docu- U.S. journals. He was harsh toward gitimacy of Ketchum’s scientific work. mentation. what he considers the closed-minded

Skeptical Inquirer | May/June 2013 13 [SPECIAL REPORT

American scientific establishment and have made it a priority to protect these Unanswered questions loom large claimed that they rejected the paper indigenous people from being hunted, regarding the source of these sus- only on the grounds that it was associ- harassed, or even killed.” This website pected Sasquatch DNA samples, how ated with Bigfoot. He hinted that the was inaccessible by the evening of the they were collected, how they were paper may appear in a Russian journal. paper’s release. analyzed, and the justification for the Response from the Ketchum camp via The DeNovo website and its related conclusion that the DNA is attribut- her spokesperson continued their stand sites were notably poor—amateurishly able to Bigfoot/Sasquatch. Some critics that the paper was in peer review and designed, hosted on free, low-volume have stated that the DNA may have “very scientific.” servers, and riddled with errors (typo- been contaminated. Ketchum assured When the paper appeared in an un- graphical and coding). The DeNovo her audience on the Coast to Coast AM known, brand-new journal, allegations site stated “open access” but accessing radio show of December 23, 2012, that of self-publishing arose. Where did this the Ketchum paper, the only one in the she fully accounted for contamination new journal come from? Its origins are journal, costs thirty dollars. Ketchum issues. The initial quick matching by reviewers with access to a genetic da- tabase showed correlations to human Ketchum attempted scientific credibility and other various animals in parts, but much of the material was not a match through the process of peer review. with anything (the “unidentified” She had never been a lead author on any paper DNA). What does the Ketchum study show? It’s not yet clear. much less one that makes such an Ketchum attempted scientific cred- extraordinary claim. The paper’s poor editing ibility through the process of peer review. She had never been a lead author and presentation fueled speculation that on any paper much less one that makes the paper itself was a joke. such an extraordinary claim. The paper’s poor editing and presentation fueled speculation that the paper itself was a joke. She attempted to court favor with the Bigfoot hunter crowd as highly suspicious. Ketchum says that made the paper available to some Big- its potential savior who will herald in an (unnamed) journal had accepted the foot web bloggers but not to other sci- a new era of respectability with scien- paper after peer review was completed, entists or science writers. Accompany- tific “proof.” Instead, the project played but the journal’s lawyers advised them ing the paid or complimentary version out in a way that eroded support from not to publish due to the disreputable of the paper was Erickson’s video sup- both circles. Her associates did not help topic. Ketchum then stated on a web- posedly of a sleeping Sasquatch. The the cause and often provided fodder to site for the study, Sasquatch Genome short clip, made public shortly after, discredit her. Her missteps and disclo- Project, that she acquired the rights to showed a brown, furry mass apparently sures about her own personal beliefs this unnamed journal and renamed it sleeping on a woodland floor. sabotaged her reputation. DeNovo. Her excuse for this unconven- Two days later, Ketchum announced Professional critique of the paper tional turn was that she did not want through social media that “top level is likely forthcoming, and additional to wait any longer. “We encountered scientists that have volunteered” were allegations of chicanery arise daily. the worst scientific bias in the peer re- assessing her data. Meanwhile, the few Regardless of the drama surrounding view process in recent history,” she said, experienced geneticists who viewed the this project, it is clear that this set of calling it the “Galileo Effect” and sug- paper reported a dismal opinion of it, highly questionable results will not gesting she was treated unfairly. At the noting it made little sense. Three of the serve to be indisputable “proof” of Big- same time, Ketchum also launched her references used in the paper were discov- ■ foot as believers had so hoped. own website called the Melba Ketchum ered by careful readers to be questionable Global Sasquatch Foundation on in validity, and one was an openly stated Sharon Hill is a CSI Techni- which was stated “Due to the efforts April Fools prank. Ketchum conceded cal Consultant and editor of our founder Dr. Melba Ketchum she was told to include all references, but of the Doubtful News web- it has been proven that the Sasquatch she did not concede that she knew they site. are a human hybrid. Here at G.S.F. we were not serious scientific works.

14 Volume 37 Issue 3 | Skeptical Inquirer