Could the glowing raccoon possibly be… a Yeti???
Noooooo!
Your cite disagrees with you, btw:
One other thing: The only classification level for which there is some sort of “governing body” is the species level. No such body exists for levels above or below that. And while there are certain, commonly accepted guidelines about what makes a subspecies, any scientist can say “this population is a subspecies” or “that population is a subspecies”. On guys saying something like that has very little meaning.
So if we’re gonna toss around CSICOP cites:
https://www.csicop.org/si/show/bigfoot_as_big_myth_seven_phases_of_mythmaking
Btw…the boggy creek monster is known as the Fouke Monster in these parts. (South Arkansas).
I see all sorts of Yeti signs around here.
You know, like this. 
The mystery was “solved” a long time ago. People’s imagination got the best of them. This is no more solved (in your sense) than Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster.
The fact that someone tried to pass off bear hair as Yeti hair doesn’t mean that everyone who claims to see a Yeti is seeing a bear. There any number of photos of Yeti prints in the snow that are clearly not bear and are clearly hoaxes.
Yep, Joe Nickell has authored some good articles about “yetis” and other pseudoscientific/occult silliness. I like the part about the true believer who claimed that alien “star people” were directing her to buy property with sasquatch populations (it was probably just an unusually persistent real estate agent).
Another Skeptical Inquirer article delving into Bigfoot “DNA analysis”:
I thought “Yeti” was a Yeshiva boy’s name.
I’m not comfortable with the way that makes me feel…
It’s the Chupacabra you have to fear. Big foot is an amateur.
Updating this thread:
[spoiler]Of course there at naysayers around–for example at the New York Times with the suggestion these tracks are make by a bear and her cub:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/world/asia/yeti-footprints-indian-army.html[/spoiler]
Interesting, but DNA evidence show that yeti is indeed a bear. A very rare or even unknown species or subspecies perhaps, but a bear nonetheless.
Oh, happy day. If the Bigfoot doesn’t eat you some new undiscovered bear will. Just what I needed to hear, living in the boonies.
How is this different from Edmund Hillary’s results from his 1960 Everest expedition that gathered evidence about the yeti?
I read about this in Hillary’s 1962 book High in the Thin Cold Air, which includes pictures of the “Yeti scalps” and other artifacts. It’s not a particularly well-written book, but in this case it’s the author and subject matter that are important.
I have read stories from reputable people who have seen a bigfoot type creature.
I dont know.
Despite it being pointed out by Chronos in the second post of this thread (and several times thereafter) you are persistently ignoring the point that your claim that the yeti “is” a bear is nonsense. It remains to be seen whether some instances of claimed sightings of mysterious animals were actually bears; but however that turns out, there is no such thing as a yeti.
This is the same problem that arises when considering evidence for the historicity of Jesus. What are the minimal set of attributes for some real historical figure (or real animal) that are sufficient to make a reasonable claim that a proven historical person “is” Jesus; or in this case that a real animal “is” the yeti? If some proven real entity possess none of the remarkable attributes of the mythical entity, it’s spurious to claim that it “is” the mythical entity, or that it constitutes proof that the mythical entity is “real”.
I’m gonna go with “if it’s a bear, it’s not a yeti”, and “there’s no such thing as yetis”.
I’m an ayetiist.
Look, people have been reporting a “yeti” for 1832, and the natives before that. The word Yeti means “rocky place bear”.
So certainly there is a Yeti. It’s a bear. That is the local word for that type of bear. It’s a type of bear the natives call “rocky place bear” aka “Yeti”. Are you saying the natives can’t call a type of bear by using the word “Yeti”? :dubious:
Now yes, there is a mythological animal that shares the same name but more often “Abominable Snowman”. It shares many of the lore associated with the bear. Some people think it’s a ape.
This is very Western White man centric, saying that the natives can’t use their own word for their yeti bear because some Western white dudes postulated it could be a mythical ape or something. That somehow that means “there is no yeti”. :rolleyes:
They can call bears whatever they want in their language. However I speak english, and in english “yeti” doesn’t mean “bear”.