I would like nothing more than the proof of various cryptids, alien civilizations, even alien visitors to be found. But that proof will come only through rigorous science and objective analysis, and by holding evidence to the highest standards of scrutiny. Born in south eastern Pennsylvania, i have found myself at one time or another living in Chicago, Cleveland, Raleigh-Durham, on the island of Kaua'i and finally landed on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State. I have turned my hand to various professions from early work in 3d graphics to historic building restoration, carpentry and log home building to working in a bronze art foundry on the WWII Veterans Memorial. Currently I am a writer, script writer and working for a non profit organization called Empowerment Through Connection which is involved in equine assisted therapy for veterans, at risk teens and women.

Yes, I know there is no missing link, however when you read this article it will sound an awful lot like that is what is being proposed. Melba Ketchum is broadening her studies to include coneheads and giants and looking for funding to somehow relate them all to each other.

OK, let’s get this DNA testing done. Every time I mention it, I get a good response but then it dies out. I really appreciate all of the donations so far but it’s not enough to get it done. Let’s all work together and solve this mystery once and for all. Between the DNA I have on the coneheads, the red headed giants and the Sasquatch, there should be a genetic link that will tie this all together, just like there is a proven maternal link between the Orang and the Sasquatch.

Aren’t the Paracas Skulls presumed (by their owner who puts them on display in his museum, and his main researcher who owns a tourism company) to be alien in origin? Are we all alien hybrids now?

And I’m sorry, “A proven maternal link between the Orang and the Sasquatch”? It was my understanding that the findings were Sasquatch was the result of a human female and an unknown hominid. Where did the female Orang come from? And is there a video of that party?

If you feel inclined to make a contribution, you can find the site at Go Fund Me.

For a contribution of $100, you get this fine t-shirt.


I assume this study will pass peer review.
[email protected]

Follow us on FaceBook for updates and more.

  • IThinkso

    Dogma!

  • It is not dogma until it is said to be truth without the support of any facts.
    There is at least an effort being made to show connection here. When, as with the bigfoot DNA fiasco, the results do not support the conclusion and that conclusion is continued to be touted as valid, and others carry on with that validity, then it becomes dogma.

    Just like the bible.

  • Shawn O

    No, not just like the Bible. Like your opinion of it. What a crappy attitude to dis others because you don’t personally agree with what they do. And yes, I am well educated, btw, in case you may have considered following my comment with some derogatory comment about people who do believe the Bible.

    ShawnO, B.S. Biology, B.A. Anthropology/Archaeology, Ret. Geomatics Professional

  • Shawn O

    There was some mtDNA tested from fresh blood & tissue in 2003 that was determined (2nd hand info, but I was told by the evidence collector) to be unknown primate, most closely related to the subfamily Ponginae. Of course we know that the only known extant members of this subfamily are the two species of orangutans. The genus Gigantopithecus has been placed in this subfamily also. I believe that Ketchum was the one who tested the mtDNA, but I am not 100% sure. Unless that is what she is referring to, I am as much at a loss as you are, because I saw no mention of anything related to “orang” anything in the paper. Hit me up & I’ll give you a lead for the 2003 event if you want. My knowledge only goes as far as what I’ve just posted.

  • Belief is a choice. Facts remain the same despite belief.
    The bible is supported by no facts, expresses a very few pieces of historical information, though with a highly skewed and agenda driven perspective.

    My agreement is irrelevant. There are no cases supported by fact or legitimate science which support the bible as factual, yet people continue to propose it as such, to the point of killing over it. They propose that it is all the education necessary, and should go unquestioned and unchallenged. That is dogma.

  • Shawn O

    Henry, the Bible is in fact supported by many historical and archaeological finds and facts, and I know of no group in modern times that has killed over it. Perhaps you are referring to the dark ages, the Spanish Inquisition, the abuse of power by many political leaders of the past who used religion (not just Christianity) as a guise to accomplish their goals, etc.).

    I live in the Deep South, where there is a church on every corner, and I have never met or corresponded with any person or group who proposes the Bible is all the education necessary. Perhaps you are referring to the Puritans or Amish, or some small cult I am unaware of. The Bible contains no information on science, world history, mathematics, language (other than literature), etc., and was never meant to be used for those purposes.

    As I write, anthropologists, historians, archaeologists, and scientists in various fields of biology, geology, etc., who are all Christian, are researching various claims of the Bible (in other words, they are questioning and challenging it). I only mentioned that Christians in those fields are carrying out that research in order to make the point that Christians, as well as secular scientists are doing the same thing, and that this questioning is coming from inside the church.

    I’m sure that you know of my areas of academic study from my earlier post. I’ve studied the archaeology of the Levant (though my primary areas of study have been North America and the peopling of the Americas). I’ll post just a few Biblical references verified by archaeology:

    Hittites – The Hittites were thought to be non-existent, since their only mention at all was in the Old Testament until the discovery of physical evidence of their kingdom in the late 19th Century. Later excavations found that the Hittite kingdom was vast, and was one of the most important in the entire region in the Late Bronze Age and are considered the forerunners of the Iron Age.

    Abraham – Abram, the patriarch of Judaism, came from Ur in ancient Sumerian Mesopotamia. The names of Abram and his direct ancestors, Terah (his father), Nahor (his grandfather), and Serug (his great grandfather), among others have been found in Old Assyrian and Babylonian texts and typographical references in Neo-Assyrian texts correspond with places in the Euphrates-Habur region of Syro-Mesopotamia, agreeing with the Biblical accounts of Abram’s origins and settlements.

    Additionally, the pre-Israelite Jordan region (3,000-2,000 B.C.) place names contain variations of the names of not only Abram, but also Isaac, Ishmael, and others of his family of the period. The ruins of places named in the pre-captivity period mash up well with the Genesis narrative descriptions and locations, including Ur, Hebron, Beersheba, Bethel, Ai, and the cities of the upper Jordan plain, which include Sodom and Gomorrah. The ruins of Sodom show several occupations and destructive events, the last of which burned the entire city to the ground so quickly that skeletal remains have been found in positions as if they had burned up instantly while attempting to escape, not as if they had died from smoke inhalation. After this last destruction, the site remained uninhabited for over 700 years.

    I didn’t write any of this in order to sway your beliefs, but rather to ask you to open your mind in regard to the beliefs of others and avoid simply writing them off because you don’t know of any supporting facts or because you don’t like the ideas or ideals of those beliefs. I respect your beliefs and your right to have them, and I won’t insult you or your beliefs. I’ll merely disagree in a respectful manner or agree to disagree. I would like the same respect for myself and my beliefs. I hold to them because I believe, after having a strong secular education, that the evidence supports them. Evidence, in science and law, is subject to interpretation. Proof is not.

    Thank you for opening the comments and allowing me to express my response.