Wikapedia "A statement, hypothesis, or theory has falsifiability (or is said to be falsifiable) if one can conceive an empirical observation or experiment which could refute it, that is, show it to be false. For example, the claim "all swans are white" is falsifiable since it could be refuted by observing a single swan that is not white. The concept is also known by the terms refutable and refutability.
The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper, in his exposition of scientific epistemology. He saw falsifiability as the criterion for demarcating the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscBFientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.[1] [2]
Popper excluded refutation by logical argument because he considers consistency a prerequisite so necessary that without it it is useless to add falsification as a further condition.[3]"
Claim of that specific test sample is falsified because it is bear. The false premise was that the sample was a BF. It has no bearing on other samples tested from a different origin. If a DNA sample was collected, that proposed it to be BF, and a DNA test validated the theory, the theory would be validated. Falsifiability can work both ways, not just to deny something. As a matter of fact saying that bigfoot does not exist is the junk science equivalent of saying all swans are white. It only takes a black swan or one BF to make the theory all swans are white or "BF does not exist" false.
You deny that the woods are full of hair and scat from all kinds of animals?