NationStates Jolt Archive

Some news agencies are claiming that the footprints of a Yeti are found.

Many people will cry out: hoax!

But face it, it's possible that a big animal isn't discovered yet.

Few years back, scientist discovered a 'new' type giant ape in the north of Congo. It was a kind of a mix between gorillas and chimpanzees. According the local people, it's a ferocious animal, capable of killing lions...

So why is it not possible that the Yeti is alive?

Yeti Source:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1079091/Pictured-Yeti-footprints-adventurers-Nepal.html?ITO=1490

New Ape Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3730574.stm

I wonder what Yeti tastes like...

This is old news.

That's like saying the Loch Ness monster's real de facto. Both the Yeti and Nessie may be plausible, but also highly unlikely.

This is old news.

No it's not.

You're mistaken by earlier discoveries of Yeti footprints.

i find it doubtful.

what would an ape-ish creature live on in that area?

That's like saying the Loch Ness monster's real de facto. Both the Yeti and Nessie may be plausible, but also highly unlikely.

I don't think that Nessie and Yeti are on the same line.

I try not to think about it. Makes my brain hurt. :p

No it's not.

You're mistaken by earlier discoveries of Yeti footprints.

No, I'm not. For one thing, I think this is about the 47th footprint or set of footprints found of there. They've been finding these for a good two hundred years now that we know for sure and a lot longer if you believe the tales.

But, then, science can always explain this away. It's good at explaining away what it doesn't want to accept.

i find it doubtful.

what would an ape-ish creature live on in that area?

There are some well know monkees living in snow areas, by instance the Japanese macaque.

There are some well know monkees living in snow areas, by instance the Japanese macaque.
yeah well known

and in a much more hospitable area.... all hospitable areas in nepal are already taken by people.

No, I'm not. For one thing, I think this is about the 47th footprint or set of footprints found of there. They've been finding these for a good two hundred years now that we know for sure and a lot longer if you believe the tales.

But, then, science can always explain this away. It's good at explaining away what it doesn't want to accept.

Almost every year new big animals are discovered in 'human-free' areas.

...

So why is it not possible that the Yeti is alive?

Yeti Source:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1079091/Pictured-Yeti-footprints-adventurers-Nepal.html?ITO=1490

New Ape Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3730574.stm


Because Sarah Palin would be hunting it from a helicoper....

yeah well known

and in a much more hospitable area.... all hospitable areas in nepal are already taken by people.

That's actually the prevailing theory as to why yetis would be up in the mountains to begin with. The idea that humans slowly forced them up there. How they're surviving, if they exist, is unknown, but nature's spawned far weirder.

I don't think that Nessie and Yeti are on the same line.

Yes, they are. Mythic monsters that someone sees once in a while, thinks he/she has proof, but nothing is conclusive. Nessie and the Yeti and the Sasqwatch, they're all along the same line. And although I do not desestimate the theory that these may be real creatures, I also find their existence a bit far-fetched.

Because Sarah Palin would be hunting it from a helicoper....

I think that the kill is for Obama. They say that the Yeti is white. :p

Almost every year new big animals are discovered in 'human-free' areas.

There are examples of animals that science had to be forced to accept. In particular, the coelocanth and giant squid come to mind. When someone walks in with a body and says, "If this doesn't exist, then how the hell am I holding it?", science tends to shut up about saying it doesn't exist.

There are examples of animals that science had to be forced to accept. In particular, the coelocanth and giant squid come to mind. When someone walks in with a body and says, "If this doesn't exist, then how the hell am I holding it?", science tends to shut up about saying it doesn't exist.

The oceans are loaded with big animals we never saw before.

The oceans are loaded with big animals we never saw before.

Do you, Hairless Kitten, believe the Yeti exists?

Yes, they are. Mythic monsters that someone sees once in a while, thinks he/she has proof, but nothing is conclusive. Nessie and the Yeti and the Sasqwatch, they're all along the same line. And although I do not desestimate the theory that these may be real creatures, I also find their existence a bit far-fetched.

I would say they're far-fetched, except nature's produced worse. Did you know there's a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean floor which can see ultraviolet light? There's no way ultraviolet light can penetrate for it to see, yet it still can see that specific type of light.

I see no evidence to say the Yeti and Loch Ness Monster exist, but I'm not going to rule out that they exist simply because there's no evidence.

Do you, Hairless Kitten, believe the Yeti exists?

I don't know. One could say, if it was there, it should be discovered yet. On the other hand, we discover other 'new' big animals almost every year.

A few weeks ago, people discovered an enormous amount (from my head, a few 1000) of gorillas in a certain spot in Congo. Nobody knew they were there, just because people don't live in that area...

EDIT: It were even more than 100.000 gorillas !!!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/08/05/congo.gorillas/index.html

I would say they're far-fetched, except nature's produced worse. Did you know there's a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean floor which can see ultraviolet light? There's no way ultraviolet light can penetrate for it to see, yet it still can see that specific type of light.

I see no evidence to say the Yeti and Loch Ness Monster exist, but I'm not going to rule out that they exist simply because there's no evidence.

I do not deny that they might exist. But since there's no concrete evidence, I'm not going to go ahead and believe that they do exist.

I do not deny that they might exist. But since there's no concrete evidence, I'm not going to go ahead and believe that they do exist.

I cannot argue against that position in any way without contradicting my own position.

I don't know. One could say, if it was there, it should be discovered yet. On the other hand, we discover other 'new' big animals almost every year.

A few weeks ago, people discovered an enormous amount (from my head, a few 1000) of gorillas in a certain spot in Congo. Nobody knew they were there, just because people don't live in that area...

That also happened with an Indian tribe in the Amazon. No one knew they existed until photos of them were take from an aircraft. But, as I already said, I will not deny they might exist, but I'm not going to say they DO exist since there's no evidence as of yet.

That also happened with an Indian tribe in the Amazon. No one knew they existed until photos of them were take from an aircraft. But, as I already said, I will not deny they might exist, but I'm not going to say they DO exist since there's no evidence as of yet.

Actually, the Indian tribe one was proven to be a hoax. It turned out it's a known tribe that's been known for quite some time.

That also happened with an Indian tribe in the Amazon. No one knew they existed until photos of them were take from an aircraft. But, as I already said, I will not deny they might exist, but I'm not going to say they DO exist since there's no evidence as of yet.


I understand. But there are some signs. Not all the retrieved Yeti footprints are labeled as false. So there's some room...

Actually, the Indian tribe one was proven to be a hoax. It turned out it's a known tribe that's been known for quite some time.

It was? Dang it.:(

I understand. But there are some signs. Not all the retrieved Yeti footprints are labeled as false. So there's some room...

There's indeed room. For many years people thought the giant squid was a myth and then one carcass was found off the coast of New Zeland, I think, and zas!, the giant squid is a reality.

I'm just like Saint Thomas, seeing is believing.:wink:

It was? Dang it.:(

It were the last Republicans on this planet. A kind that wanted to return to nature. :p

That's like saying the Loch Ness monster's real de facto. Both the Yeti and Nessie may be plausible, but also highly unlikely.


The Yeti is more plausible than Nessie. Ive got to give the old brute that.

The Yeti is more plausible than Nessie. Ive got to give the old brute that.

Perhaps. I'll believe it when there's hard evidence to sustain it.:wink:

Perhaps. I'll believe it when there's hard evidence to sustain it.:wink:

You never saw me, so I do not exist.

You never saw me, so I do not exist.

Who knows, HK. We might be figments of someone else's imagination. I tend to feel like I was invented by someone else. Maybe we're like the Yeti and Nessie, and no one has found us yet. We give clues, and yet no one has found us.:tongue:

It was? Dang it.:(

Yep.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/22/hoax-the-lost-amazonian-t_n_108541.html

Personally, I was quite saddened to learn it was.

I would say they're far-fetched, except nature's produced worse. Did you know there's a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean floor which can see ultraviolet light? There's no way ultraviolet light can penetrate for it to see, yet it still can see that specific type of light.

I see no evidence to say the Yeti and Loch Ness Monster exist, but I'm not going to rule out that they exist simply because there's no evidence.
i am sure that there are animals yet to be discovered

i have severe doubts that those discoveries will include yetis, bigfoots or the loch ness monster.

animals dont exist singly. they have mommies and daddies eh? they have to have a big enough gene pool to have gotten this far and to continue their species.

in places like the remote jungles of africa there may be some overlooked large ape species that has been mistaken for chimps or gorillas in the past. being unclassified is not the same as being unknown--the locals know they exist. (the assertion of nutcase fundamentalist anti-evolution activists claiming that dinosaurs exist in the jungles of the congo are not included in this scenariao)

but to suppose that there is some kind of giant fish/reptile in a lake in scotland that exists all by itself is silly. where did it come from? where is its mommy? why havent there been giant fish/reptile corpses washed up on the shore from time to time? creatures dont exist singly. even if nessie is the last of his species there should be the remains of those that came before him.

the same with the yeti. the wilds of the himalyas are remote and not overpopulated with humans but they are very inhospitable in those areas that dont have people in them. for large apes to live there requires FOOD for long frozen months. it requires shelter. how are these animals supposed to be surviving in areas where people have a tough time surviving? why wouldnt they live as close to the inhabitable areas of nepal as is possible, like ever other animal does? and if they did, wouldnt they bump up against humans far more often no matter how shy they are? wouldnt there be yeti remains found fairly often?

i am sure that there are animals yet to be discovered

i have severe doubts that those discoveries will include yetis, bigfoots or the loch ness monster.

animals dont exist singly. they have mommies and daddies eh? they have to have a big enough gene pool to have gotten this far and to continue their species.

in places like the remote jungles of africa there may be some overlooked large ape species that has been mistaken for chimps or gorillas in the past. being unclassified is not the same as being unknown--the locals know they exist. (the assertion of nutcase fundamentalist anti-evolution activists claiming that dinosaurs exist in the jungles of the congo are not included in this scenariao)

but to suppose that there is some kind of giant fish/reptile in a lake in scotland that exists all by itself is silly. where did it come from? where is its mommy? why havent there been giant fish/reptile corpses washed up on the shore from time to time? creatures dont exist singly. even if nessie is the last of his species there should be the remains of those that came before him.

the same with the yeti. the wilds of the himalyas are remote and not overpopulated with humans but they are very inhospitable in those areas that dont have people in them. for large apes to live there requires FOOD for long frozen months. it requires shelter. how are these animals supposed to be surviving in areas where people have a tough time surviving? why wouldnt they live as close to the inhabitable areas of nepal as is possible, like ever other animal does? and if they did, wouldnt they bump up against humans far more often no matter how shy they are? wouldnt there be yeti remains found fairly often?

You know, people made the exact same argument against the giant squid. Go have a talk with it and ask it why it exists.

i am sure that there are animals yet to be discovered

i have severe doubts that those discoveries will include yetis, bigfoots or the loch ness monster.

animals dont exist singly. they have mommies and daddies eh? they have to have a big enough gene pool to have gotten this far and to continue their species.

in places like the remote jungles of africa there may be some overlooked large ape species that has been mistaken for chimps or gorillas in the past. being unclassified is not the same as being unknown--the locals know they exist. (the assertion of nutcase fundamentalist anti-evolution activists claiming that dinosaurs exist in the jungles of the congo are not included in this scenariao)

but to suppose that there is some kind of giant fish/reptile in a lake in scotland that exists all by itself is silly. where did it come from? where is its mommy? why havent there been giant fish/reptile corpses washed up on the shore from time to time? creatures dont exist singly. even if nessie is the last of his species there should be the remains of those that came before him.

the same with the yeti. the wilds of the himalyas are remote and not overpopulated with humans but they are very inhospitable in those areas that dont have people in them. for large apes to live there requires FOOD for long frozen months. it requires shelter. how are these animals supposed to be surviving in areas where people have a tough time surviving? why wouldnt they live as close to the inhabitable areas of nepal as is possible, like ever other animal does? and if they did, wouldnt they bump up against humans far more often no matter how shy they are? wouldnt there be yeti remains found fairly often?

Many big animals live in that area:

A few tigers, several species of apes, red pandas, deer, yak, snow panthers and wolves.

Yep.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/22/hoax-the-lost-amazonian-t_n_108541.html

Personally, I was quite saddened to learn it was.

Now I am sad too. I thought this was an unknow tribe and now I learn that it was all a hoax.

I wonder what Yeti tastes like...

Like Bigfoot meat

You know, people made the exact same argument against the giant squid. Go have a talk with it and ask it why it exists.


The thing with the giant squid is that it lives in an area that was never ever visited by human beings untill very recently, the deep, deep ocean. It typically doesnt go into shallower waters for us to see. The Yeti however would live in an area visited by humans quite often.

The thing with the giant squid is that it lives in an area that was never ever visited by human beings untill very recently by human being the deep, deep ocean, and it typically doesnt go into shallower waters for us to see. The Yeti however would live in an area visited by humans quite often.

Enormous parts of the Himalaya are not or at least very difficult accessible for humans...

The local people do believe in the Yeti.

It's an excellent area to hide an unknow animal.

The thing with the giant squid is that it lives in an area that was never ever visited by human beings untill very recently by human being the deep, deep ocean, and it typically doesnt go into shallower waters for us to see. The Yeti however would live in an area visited by humans quite often.

Giant squid are also known to surface to attack whales. That habit brings them up into areas where humans enter quite often, and have entered quite often for quite a long time. In fact, there's some theory that the tales about giant squid attacking ships are actually true in some cases, mostly as a case of the ship suffering from the squid thinking it's a whale. But, for the most part, we know that giant squid actively dodge humans.

Like Bigfoot meat

Tastes like pudding. :D

You know, people made the exact same argument against the giant squid. Go have a talk with it and ask it why it exists.
what gavin113 said.

there is a world of difference between supposing that there are undiscovered creatures in the unvisited depths of the oceans and supposing that there is a man sized ape living in the cascade mountains (where at least the climate could support such a creature)

Enormous parts of the Himalaya are not or at least very difficult accessible for humans...

The local people do believe in the Yeti.

It's an excellent area to hide an unknow animal.
no its not.

how is an APE supposed to survive in the cold and ice? what is it going to eat?

what gavin113 said.

there is a world of difference between supposing that there are undiscovered creatures in the unvisited depths of the oceans and supposing that there is a man sized ape living in the cascade mountains (where at least the climate could support such a creature)

Read what Hairless Kitten said.

no its not.

how is an APE supposed to survive in the cold and ice? what is it going to eat?

How about what he said in the post before?

Many big animals live in that area:

A few tigers, several species of apes, red pandas, deer, yak, snow panthers and wolves.

no its not.

how is an APE supposed to survive in the cold and ice? what is it going to eat?

In fact several well know apes do live in that area, so...

Rhesus macaques are just one example. Langurs another.

what gavin113 said.

there is a world of difference between supposing that there are undiscovered creatures in the unvisited depths of the oceans and supposing that there is a man sized ape living in the cascade mountains (where at least the climate could support such a creature)

It is far-fetched, but not impossible Ash.

In fact several well know apes do live in that area, so...

Rhesus macaques are just one example.
rhesus macaques live in the high himalayas where yetis are supposed to live?

It is far-fetched, but not impossible Ash.
its close enough to impossible to not be bothered worrying about.

its close enough to impossible to not be bothered worrying about.

So was the giant squid.

In fact several well know apes do live in that area, so...

Rhesus macaques are just one example.

And those maybe survive by using hot springs for heat, which is something I've neard many monkeys do in parts of Japan and China.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4200000/newsid_4205800/4205865.stm

So was the giant squid.

No it wan't.

rhesus macaques live in the high himalayas where yetis are supposed to live?

Who is saying that Yeti are living in the High Himalayas? Just passing by, is not having a life their.

Most animals do cross mountains so...

Langurs can have a life at 3500 m, I do not know about the other apes.

its close enough to impossible to not be bothered worrying about.

But who's worried about the Yeti? I'm not. It would be quite the discovery if the creature actually exists and sustainable proof can be produced. But I maintain my stance. Until I see evidence, the existence of the Yeti and Nessie will be just a possibilty, not a reality.

So was the giant squid.
you really are obsessed with the giant squid.

the cases are not similar enough for the squid to be a good argument for the yeti (or other mysterious species)

And those maybe survive by using hot springs for heat, which is something I've neard many monkeys do in parts of Japan and China.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4200000/newsid_4205800/4205865.stm

They do not need it to survive. Several groups of macaques do not have hot springs, others didn’t discover the advantages yet.

The monkeys in Japan are doing it for 40 years now.

Cool.

Let's Capture, Study, Dissect and Profit off of it.

They do not need it to survive. Several groups of macaques do not have hot springs, others didn’t discover the advantages yet.

The monkeys in Japan are doing it for 40 years now.

Which is why I wrote the word maybe.

Who is saying that Yeti are living in the High Himalayas? Just passing by, is not having a life their.

Most animals do cross mountains so...

Langurs can have a life at 3500 m, I do not know about the other apes.
ohhhh so you are thinking that the yeti live in the lowlands and migrate from north to south passing through the himalays?

no.

just no.

But who's worried about the Yeti? I'm not. It would be quite the discovery if the creature actually exists and sustainable proof can be produced. But I maintain my stance. Until I see evidence, the existence of the Yeti and Nessie will be just a possibilty, not a reality.
yeah but its not very possible.

more likely that the existence of god, less likely than another #1 hit by madonna.

Which is why I wrote the word maybe.

sorry :)

No it wan't.

Yes, it was. The primary challenge, and one we still haven't solved, is a combination of food and oxygen. What do they eat to maintain a body of that size? We have some theories about what it is, but the amounts necessary to maintain an animal of that size still pretty much have (IIRC) an unknown source. And the oxygen itself becomes troublesome when you get into the lower depths of the ocean, where these creatures live. That's another one we haven't entirely solved.

The final objection is that a creature of that size would be detected easily by sonar. The problem is, they're not. Finding a live one is incredibly difficult, despite the fact that it logically shouldn't be.

Personally I do not believe in Bigfoot or nessie. They were made up for the merchandise. :D

ohhhh so you are thinking that the yeti live in the lowlands and migrate from north to south passing through the himalays?

no.

just no.

They could. But they could also survive in the High Himalaya as well. Several big cats, deer and other animals are doing it.

ohhhh so you are thinking that the yeti live in the lowlands and migrate from north to south passing through the himalays?

no.

just no.

It is weird indeed. One would think with this assertion that the Yeti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeti) is a pack animal and it migrates according to the seasons. But according to the legend, the Yeti is a solitary creature. Right?

you really are obsessed with the giant squid.

the cases are not similar enough for the squid to be a good argument for the yeti (or other mysterious species)

The cases are similar enough because we're talking about animals that live primarily in areas humans couldn't reach and still rare actually go and which have mysteries as to why we can only detect signs of them in most cases. Direct sightings of giant squid are actually as rare as Bigfoot, and oftentimes rarer.

There are some well know monkees living in snow areas, by instance the Japanese macaque.

Which the yeti might be related to. There were a couple of teeth found in China in the 1920's and assigned to genus Gigantopithecus, which was initially claimed as a human ancestor (of course, since every ape-like thing is always claimed to be a hominid for the press) but on better analysis was thought more likely to be a giant macaque.

No it wan't.
Yes, actually, the "kraken" (as the Vikings called the giant squid) was considered purely legendary until one attacked and nearly sank HMS Daedalus in 1848 (it was an oceanographic vessel trying to plumb the Atlantic depths when it hooked a giant squid by mistake).