Meldrum simply alludes to the fact that the paper appears to be self-published in a journal that isn't backed by professionals while Streufert says that while Melba Ketchum might indeed have some convincing evidence, but that she "screwed up the scientific process" and that the study is "flawed". Ars Technica states much the same thing, saying it is very possible that the Bigfoot genome paper “conclusively proves” that Sasquatch is real, but the "results are a mess." Ars Technica also gives us a look at one of the paper's accompanying videos, a 6 second clip of what they describe as a "very shaggy carpet" sleeping in the forest. Researcher Davide Paulides adds his voice to the fray, agreeing with the Colorado Researchers [who say] DNA proves Bigfoot is real Paulides, author of Missing 411, estimates nearly 50,000 Bigfoot may be living in the United States in secluded, remote locations. The reaction to the publication of Ketchum's DNA study are almost completely in agreement-the paper may really have some convincing DNA evidence to prove Bigfoot exists but that the results are confusing and have not been handled professionally. We've had a chance to read over the entire thing ourselves and we agree. To us is seems that somewhere along the way between gathering the DNA samples and publishing the results, something went awry.