' Mythical Yeti Could Be Descended From Ancient Polar Bear '

[Guest DWA]

^^^I think Sykes's response to the 'polar bear' finding says it:

 

Now somebody needs to get out there, and find the bear.  (And record everything else encountered, as well, I'd humbly add.)

 

We'll never know how many scientists have seen an animal they could not classify while looking for something else.  I'd like them to start doing something about that.

Edited October 25, 2013 by DWA

[Guest]

I am not sure that it has been accepted that way by so many. Mulder and DWA seem to be strongly arguing the opposite.   And for those that are taking it as support to the idea that yeti is, in fact after all, a type of bear it may be a less bitter pill to swallow since it is not home turf. They can allow for misidentification to be at the root of the yeti myth while denying any connection to the North American Bigfoot. If the results of part two are not favorable for Bigfoot, we'll gauge their reaction then. 

 

I'm making the assertion (entirely correct) that the finding of "ancient polar bear" does nothing to advance or disprove Yeti.

 

An obligate (or possible bi-modal) biped (as the descriptions of Yeti describe) could not test out 100% match to a full quadruped, which all bears are.  Their internal structures are different, so their genes must be different.

 

at worst, Sykes as found that these ancient bears still exist.  Which is an interesting finding in and of itself.  Such a finding however does NOT prove or disprove anything about Yeti (or Bigfoot either for that matter).

[Guest DWA]

^^^Right.  Sober science restricts itself to the samples tested and doesn't go off the deep end to assert things the samples don't support.

[dmaker]

That's true, we still have the NA results coming. My Sloth Bear theory still has a chance.

I could be wrong here, but aren't sloth like really slow? I do agree they are creepy looking and their faces can be fairly human like. I find it hard to imagine a sloth chasing down a deer or tossing pigs around.  

 

And for those that are Patty fans, which I believe you are Rock, does Patty look like a sloth-bear hybrid? Let me correct that: what you would imagine a sloth-bear hybrid to look like?

 

I do like your theory though. From a laypersons view point it does provide support for the human like facial features found in encounter reports.

 

Slothfoot has my vote!

 

" An obligate (or possible bi-modal) biped (as the descriptions of Yeti describe) could not test out 100% match to a full quadruped, which all bears are.  Their internal structures are different, so their genes must be different."  Mulder

 

Yes, but we know that bears do on occasion walk on two feet. In a short observation it is quite plausible that someone observed one of these bears doing just that and assumed the creature was bipedal. 

 

 

Or maybe in terms you seem fond of:

 

Yeti as bear: + 1 million

Yeti as primate: 0

 

"at worst, Sykes as found that these ancient bears still exist. "  Mulder

 

What do you mean, at worst? What is bad about that finding? It seems incredibly exciting for zoologists. Oh, or did you mean, at worst for cryptozoologists...? I see...

Edited October 25, 2013 by dmaker

[Guest Llawgoch]

The sloth bear is a type of bear.  Nothing to do with hybrids.

[Guest]

An obligate (or possible bi-modal) biped (as the descriptions of Yeti describe) could not test out 100% match to a full quadruped, which all bears are.  Their internal structures are different, so their genes must be different." Mulder

Yes, but we know that bears do on occasion walk on two feet. In a short observation it is quite plausible that someone observed one of these bears doing just that and assumed the creature was bipedal.

 

Way to ignore my point, dmaker. Bears can walk on two feet in an awkward and shufflingfashion and for short distances, but they do not have the bone and joint structure of an obligate (or evenn-bimodal, but primarily bipedal) biped.

Therefore their GENES are different, an would not match precisely with those of a bear, which these samples did.

 

 

Or maybe in terms you seem fond of:

 

Yeti as bear: + 1 million

Yeti as primate: 0

 

 

Again, no, because there is no showing that the tested hairs did indeed come from a Yeti.

 

"

[Guest crabshack]

Anyone know how long these are?

 

I see no sign of a double step.

 

 

 

[dmaker]

Mulder, I did not ignore your point. I am simply saying that perhaps a yeti is not a bipedal animal, but is in fact a bear. Just because people reported a bipedal animal does not mean they cannot be mistaken. 

 

But,  way to ignore MY point.

[southernyahoo]

 

We'll never know how many scientists have seen an animal they could not classify while looking for something else.  I'd like them to start doing something about that.

It happens, but it sometimes takes more than the specimen to know you have a new species. We live in the DNA age, and it must agree with your perception of whats on the table. Logicly, Bf's DNA has to be different somewhere to account for their appearance, so it should tell the story with or without the body.

Just imagine that we and bigfoot are the same genus and being studied by aliens, but they can't tell us apart like we can.

How would they know unless they used a more multidisciplined approach?

It would play out like this discovery of multiple species of bats.

 http://phys.org/news/2012-09-dna-sonar-discovery-species-horseshoe.html

[Rockape]

I could be wrong here, but aren't sloth like really slow? I do agree they are creepy looking and their faces can be fairly human like. I find it hard to imagine a sloth chasing down a deer or tossing pigs around.  

 

 

I'm referreing to a Sloth Bear, which is a species of bear. Google it. (I'll save you the trouble.)

 

 

 

A species of Sun Bear could be possible also. They're even stranger looking.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And for those that are Patty fans, which I believe you are Rock, does Patty look like a sloth-bear hybrid? Let me correct that: what you would imagine a sloth-bear hybrid to look like?

 

 

It doesn't have to be a hybrid, I didn't say anything about a hybrid, just an unknown sub-genus of a current know bear.

 

And I have already explained why any bear would not explain sightings such as Patty. You can look in my post here, you don't have to google it.

Edited October 25, 2013 by Rockape

[dmaker]

I had never heard of a sloth bear, so my mind just assumed a hybrid. My mistake.   That sun bear is cool looking. Creepy face. Cool name too. I want one.

[Guest Stan Norton]

I'm referreing to a Sloth Bear, which is a species of bear. Google it. (I'll save you the trouble.)

800px-Sloth_Bear_Washington_DC.JPG

A species of Sun Bear could be possible also. They're even stranger looking.

398px-Sitting_sun_bear.jpg

It doesn't have to be a hybrid, I didn't say anything about a hybrid, just an unknown sub-genus of a current know bear.

And I have already explained why any bear would not explain sightings such as Patty. You can look in my post here, you don't have to google it.

I remember reading a book many years ago written by a chap who held a motley collection of animals at his country house estate sometime in the 50s. One of his favourites was a sun bear which he had raised from a cub. One day he took his usual rounds through the estate when he saw the bear running towards him, ostensibly for a play. His description that followed was gripping as he realised that on this day his beloved pet bear was on his case. He just made it through a lockable gate in time.

Creepy creatures, bears!

Edited October 25, 2013 by Stan Norton

[Guest]

Ummmm....so no one else even pondered that all this is leading to squatch/yeti may have a bear in its ancestory?

 

Does anyone else know whether species have ALWAYS been unable to mate? I'm no expert but I seem to remember something about the cell linings in our reproductive cells won't allow it? Is this something that evolved over time....say 12 to 15 thousand years ago?

[GuyInIndiana]

Ummmm....so no one else even pondered that all this is leading to squatch/yeti may have a bear in its ancestory?

 

No. Mostly because it's the least likely explanation.

[Guest]

No. Mostly because it's the least likely explanation.

Sometimes the least likely unfortunately, is the answer.