Forums

Posted: 11-04-2002 14:28 Post subject:

I saw the program where they found the hair sample inside an old tree. I think it was a local guide that pointed the tree out as a resting place for a Yeti, or whatever the local name is? It was a fascinating show. Was this finding ever announced in the mainstream news or in any scientific publications?

Posted: 11-04-2002 17:52 Post subject:

Wild humans might account for some of the Central Asian reports, like the Russian almas. They can supposedly interbreed with humans, so (I think) they would have to be at least from genus Homo.

Posted: 11-04-2002 20:58 Post subject:

Posted: 12-04-2002 00:33 Post subject:

Cheers for the links, Tang

I have recollections of the news story now, but didn't take much notice... It didn't get the exposure that Graham Hancock finding the latest "Bimini Wall" has got today...

Posted: 12-04-2002 10:50 Post subject:

It was an excellent programme. Its sad that when a scientist discovers evidence for a new species of bird or bat, for example, it is usually published in journals or announced somewhere on TV. If only Cryptozoology was taken more seriously and had better funding:(

Posted: 13-04-2002 10:55 Post subject:

Fijnding a new bird or bat is also cryptozoology.

Posted: 13-04-2002 11:36 Post subject:

I guess also when we all the time hear that _now_ they have found proof of the yeti or so, and it turns out to be nothing, they don't really feel like reporting it. It's actually amazing we can still get headlines like "Peace in the Middle East", they should have learned a lesson by now.

So any nudists out there? If I look at my body hair it seems that there is less in areas I'm wearing a lot of clothes. Like my leghair seems to stop where my boxershorts begin. I guess it just gets worn off. So what about when you run around naked a lot, do you find the body hair gets more excessive in any way?

Posted: 13-04-2002 13:06 Post subject:

Posted: 13-04-2002 13:18 Post subject:

Hmm, yeah honestly.

Didn't they say they believed it was from a bear, but not from a known kind?

Also do anyone here know something about how a DNA test is performed? Do they need to match it with other DNA samples or can they look at them alone and say where they are from?

Posted: 13-04-2002 14:39 Post subject:

Have there been any main stream expeditions to find the yeti, big foot etc? I would have thought that it would be far easyer to find than a newspecies of bat or bird.

Posted: 13-04-2002 20:21 Post subject:

Posted: 22-06-2013 06:03 Post subject:

There seems to be maybe something about all this that's sort of a side-effect of the Multiregional Hypothesis. Over a vaguely-defined period of time, vaguely Homo erectus-type creatures wandered out of Africa, and eventually filtered into most suitable habitats in the Old World. And then they gradually evolved into various versions of Homo sapiens. But they couldn't have all "gotten the memo" at the exact same time, and there must have been isolated populations off the main migration tracks who "got it" quite a bit later than everybody else, if at all. What became of them? The Homo not-quite sapiens, the Homo sapiens wannabes, the transitional Homos who missed the evolutionary boat. The hinterland hold-outs, did they just die off, or get killed off by the more evolved H saps? Did they flee or get driven into the wild inaccessible places, dispersed into ever smaller and more isolated groups, eventually losing whatever limited proto-culture they may have had, becoming truly "feral" at last, with little or no language or tool-making skills, no mastery of fire, etc? And, did they endure for any length of time? Maybe long enough to be described by a few ancient writers as "wild men" or ogres or similar names? Long enough to be in a few myths and legends, eventually in medieval heraldry etc?

Posted: 22-06-2013 20:49 Post subject: