I don’t know. If it did, it would have big feet. Plural. That’s about all I got. On the OP’s question, I mean; not the end of my legs, which are frequently being pulled by such inane matters. I don’t mind but my legs get no longer, I note.
I have also looked into “bigfoot” and the so-called “evidence” of Native American myth and legends are vague, fabricated or not properly documented. Bigfoot is 100% hoax and recent hoax, too.
Now, a Yeti? Lots of native evidence going back centuries. Doesn’t mean there are any now, or even if there were giant snow apes in recent millennium. But, with that much smoke, going back that far, I think there’s something. Likely a sub-species of a local bear? Maybe even a new species? I mean scientists have never seen a live or whole Tibetan blue bear.
New, and “large” species are found, every decade. Generally the natives are totally aware they exist, but “white man” misunderstood or didn’t believe or misclassified:
Olinguito (Bassaricyon neblina)
Caqueta monkey
Blossom bat Syconycteris sp nov,
mountain porcupine of Brazil Coendou baturitensis
Laotian giant flying squirrel.*Biswamoyopterus laoensis * (These were been eaten as “bush meat!”)
Oncilla = Leopardus tigrinus
yellow-striped chevrotain *(Moschiola kathygre) *
Large-Antlered Muntjac (Muntiacus vuquangensis)
Myanmar snub-nosed monkey (*Rhinopithecus strykeri) *
These are all decently sized Mammals. Not Yeti sized, by no means, but the Muntjac weighs maybe 100#.
So, that’s a new species of mammal, small human sized, “discovered” only a decade or so ago.
No Bigfoot, no. But having the “yeti” be a undiscovered bear? Sure, why not?
Because “white men” have been looking for physical evidence for decades. If there was a new bear species, they most likely would have been found by now, or the locals would have a hide or bone or something.
The bottom line is there simply is no reason to believe that Bigfoot is real other than wishful thinking. Honestly, I’m surprised that old myth is still alive, as I’d thought it had died before I even left the US.
:dubious:
Blossom bat 20g
Olinguito 900g
Caqueta monkey 900g
Laotian giant flying squirrel 1.5kg
Oncilla 2kg
mountain porcupine of Brazil 4kg
yellow-striped chevrotain 9kg
Myanmar snub-nosed monkey 20kg
Large-Antlered Muntjac 40kg
Of your 9 “large” species:
One weighs about as much as three quarters and would comfortably fit in your pocket.
Four of them weigh less than a large bottle of soda and would fit in a shoebox.
One weighs as much as a house cat, one as much as two housecats. Either would fit in a bucket.
None of them weighs anywhere near as much as an adult human; the largest of them weighs less than the smallest rottweiler.
IOW 6 of these animals would live inside a rabbit hutch, and the remaining three are smaller than a popular family pet regularly kept inside apartments.
The other point to note is that these animals all live in areas with multiple other closely related and near-identical species. It’s not like somebody discovered a new species of porcupine living in France or a new species of monkey living in Australia. To the extent that these animals were discovered, it was a discovery that they were new species, not a discovery that an animal of that size, shape, ecology and genus was common in the area.
And of course the criticism that is always justifiably leveled at these discoveries. These species were either new classifications of existing known animals and/or always well known to the local populations who could obtain specimens on demand.
If the yeti exists, none of this pertains. It has to be larger than 60kg in size, it has to be of a type of animal radically different to any known to already exist in the area and it has to be unable to be trapped even by the local population. It has to be so clever and reclusive that the locals can’t even obtain hair or dung.
All of that makes it fairly much impossible for a yeti to exist.
Data in hand, we can at least learn more about these reclusive creatures that leave behind no physical evidence.
First let’s consider the correlations between bigfoot sightings and state characteristics. For those less familiar with statistics, the correlation coefficient is a number between -1 and 1: a value of zero indicates no relationship.
. corr bigfoot pop area percap
(obs=50)
bigfoot
| sightings pop area percap
-------------+------------------------------------
bigfoot | 1.0000
pop | 0.6301 1.0000
area | 0.0960 0.1079 1.0000
percap | 0.0335 0.2435 -0.0448 1.0000
There’s a decent positive correlation between bigfoot sightings and state population, but almost no relationship with state area or state per person income. It’s surprising that Bigfoot doesn’t favor states with wide open spaces: I guess he likes people.
Now let’s look at the multivariate effects: after controlling for population, maybe there is a relationship with these other variables.
. reg bigfoot pop area percap
Source | SS df MS Number of obs = 50
-------------+------------------------------ F( 3, 46) = 10.77
Model | 248411.77 3 82803.9234 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual | 353508.81 46 7684.97412 R-squared = 0.4127
-------------+------------------------------ Adj R-squared = 0.3744
Total | 601920.58 49 12284.0935 Root MSE = 87.664
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bigfoot | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
pop | .0000116 2.07e-06 5.61 0.000 7.45e-06 .0000158
area | .0000242 .0001435 0.17 0.867 -.0002646 .000313
percap | -.0026393 .0024473 -1.08 0.286 -.0075655 .0022868
_cons | 120.8771 88.80452 1.36 0.180 -57.87709 299.6314
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, not really. State bigfoot sightings only have a statistically significant relationship with state population.
Since there are only 2 variables of interest, we can view the scatterplot:
http://wm40.inbox.com/thumbs/7e_130b40_7a31e5_oP.png.thumb
There’s a rough relationship between state population and bigfoot sightings, with 2 outliers. Washington State and to a lesser extent Oregon have more sightings than that which would be predicted by their population. Unsurprisingly, as the fad started there.
I was told there would be no math.
Well, they do have Yeti scalps and etc, they just are not willing to hand them over. And, cientists have never seen a live or whole Tibetan blue bear or even significant parts there-of.
I didnt call those species “large” I called them "decently sized’. I did say “New, and “large” species are found, every decade.” But I didn’t call any of those mammals anything but “decently sized”. The Muntjac gets to over 100#, which is MUCH larger “than the smallest rottweiler” (which according to wiki weigh in at 35-60kg and you say yourself the Muntjac weighs 40kg, but which wiki sez is “30–50 kg”, so indeed they weigh just about what a rottweiler does). I admit some people are crazy enuf to keep a very large dog like a rottwieler is a apartment, but that’s pretty rare.
And I *said *that they were usually known to the local natives- which indeed the yeti is.
Nor does the yet have to be of a type of animal radically different to any known to already exist in the area many think they are simply a misidentified bear. Bears do exist in that area, and there are several species in that area which are so rare as to be almost unknown. It’s then quite possible this is just a very rare new species or variant of bear. In fact one of the "yeti artifacts’ was found to have DNA of some bear species- which they weren’t able to identify.
IF there is a Yeti, and it is found simply to be a new rare bear species, I doubt if this would shock the scientific community. If it is some species of Gigantopithecus? This is so very doubtful that I’d be shocked. In fact, I’ll go so far as to say impossible.
Many reputable scientists are saying that the yeti is simply either a misidentified known bear or quite possibly a new rare bear species. Why is that so hard to accept?
When I connected the Yeti with Gigantopithecus, I said that it was possibly a legend based on finding remains of Gigantopithecus, or, less probably, legends that had been handed down from a time when it was possible humans and Gigantopithecines existed at the same time. The second is doubtful, but it is accepted science that Gigantopithecus went extinct only 100,000 years ago.
Yes, and also cougar hunting with packs of dogs who try to chase the cougar down and corner it or tree it so the hunter can shoot it. If there were Bigfoot up in the mountains around here, the hunters would be bringing down a couple every year.
Wow. The guy in the Bigfoot suit who gets shot by a hunter is a situation just begging to happen.
Well, gee, I wonder why?
They have analyzed fur and bone samples. With modern DNA methods, any piece that contains DNA is “significant”.
It was found, and the locals did.
They were willing to hand over enough for DNA analysis to an Oxfird university research team in 2013 though. Which showed that some of the “scalps” matched already known creatures of the area, but several samples, independently obtained over an 800 km range, had a 100 % genetic match with an extinct variety of polar bear.
Evidence?
Yes, you’d think one of them would have, as a poster upthread said, fallen off a cliff or gotten killed by a bear or something.
One article found via google Yeti mystery solved? Geneticist links Abominable Snowman hairs to bears
In any case, if Bigfoot were real, the species would have been established on this continent since prehistoric times. It would have left traces in the fossil record (maybe even a whole skeleton or two in the La Brea Tar Pits, if it ever ranged that far south). But no trace has ever been found of nonhuman anthropoid primates in the Western Hemisphere pre-Columbus. The only native nonhuman primates here are monkeys.
There are also no valid native legends, tales or stories. If there was a Bigfoot, the indians would know of it.
From the Article
Scientists who talk to the press before the journals always make me a bit skeptical. I did a search for papers by Sykes B* with the key words Yeti, Bear and Ursa and came up empty so it sounds like he still hasn’t published.