US Scientists Invited To Russian Yeti Hunt

First time accepted submitter Lindan9 writes "After an apparent increase of yeti sightings in the Kemerovo and Altai region of Siberia, a group of scientists from around the world are meeting to examine evidence possibly proving yeti existence. The scientists suspect there is a population of several dozen living in the area. The team hopes to spot a yeti or still living neanderthal man during their search of the area's mountains." I hope they find two pristine horns faster than I did.

Comments

Yeti Hunt?

[SniperJoe]

Did anyone else think that it was going to involve a bunch of Russians sitting around in camouflage with vodka and firearms?

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

That's ridiculous. These men are scientists!

They'll be drinking vodka from test-tubes and beakers, obviously.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[Nidi62]

Did anyone else think that it was going to involve a bunch of Russians sitting around in camouflage with vodka and firearms?

That's called the Russian military

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[Abstrackt]

Real scientists drink from a Klein bottle.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Yeah, those are expensive. I try to drink only beverages that don't make me violent in klein bottles.

http://www.kleinbottle.com/

They're $35 for the cheapest, and sometimes have a long lead time. For vodka, I'll stick to what ever is clean.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[gilleain]

Real scientists drink from a Klein bottle.

Poured into cross-cap cups?

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[shutdown -p now]

Russian scientists don't drink vodka. Why bother when you can have 99% ethyl alcohol?

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[geekoid]

If drinking makes you violent, stop.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[geekoid]

Real scientist aren't so pretensions they need to carry unnecessary equipment just to try and show how smart they are.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

I was trying to find a funny way to say I wasn't kind to delicate glass objects. But yeah, if you are violent drunk don't drink and/or hunt yetis.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[phrostie]

that or they make documentary/horror movie of it.

the BriarYeti Project

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[PPH]

Except that it will be the USA buying the vodka and supplies. And the Americans will end up in the woods with the canvas bag and flashlight.

In Soviet Russia, snipe hunts you!

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[m2shariy]

Nobody drinks 99% ethyl alcohol. There is cheap 95% alcohol for that. And to get it to 99% it is usually rectified with benzene - nobody likes the taste of it.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[billstewart]

We did snipe hunts in college. It really surprised me that some of my fellow students might not have known that snipe hunts were fake, though it was less surprising that some of them didn't know that snipe throw water balloons. (It may be that the "hunters" did know that the whole process was a game, and assumed that everybody knew that and thought it was an excuse to run around the woods at night and drink beer, which it mostly was, and that playing the "hunters" might get them first crack at the beer.)

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[shutdown -p now]

I asked my mom, and she confirmed that what they normally drank was indeed 96.6% alcohol.

Well, as you can see, I'm no scientist :(

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[SQLGuru]

We just called it "WAR" or "Ghost in the Graveyard" and didn't bother trying to trick anyone.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[lolcutusofbong]

I was camping way out in the middle of nowhere with a big group, and one of the older guys warned me to watch out for left-handed smoke snatchers when I was using the latrine. I just looked him square in the eye and asked, "That's like a snipe hunt, isn't it?" He seemed genuinely surprised I hadn't fallen for it.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[rgbatduke]

With a mobius twist of lime, no doubt.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[sFurbo]

Not anymore (in Denmark, at least). They use some kind of membrane technique, I hear. Some of my fellow chemistry students analysed the absolute ethanol with GC-MS to make sure, no benzene present. And this was 10 years ago. However, absolute is more expensive, and there really is no reason to use it.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[NoImNotNineVolt]

Spiritus is 99% alcohol and is used to make nalewka, an often-fruity beverage popular in Poland. People do drink 99% alcohol. They just don't drink it straight.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[cellocgw]

We did snipe hunts in college. It really surprised me that some of my fellow students might not have known that snipe hunts were fake,
And yet...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snipe

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[CSMoran]

Nope. What you get as "spirytus" in Poland is 96% (or sometimes 95%) alcohol, or everclear. The beverage which you're referring to ("nalewka") is simply "fruit liquor". Yes, it's made by putting fruit (such as blackberry, for instance) into everclear (with some sugar), but the resulting potency is about 40-50% (since the fruit is mostly water). This is almost universally drunk straight, since it's just fruity vodka.

Re:Yeti Hunt?

[billstewart]

Snipe are real; snipe hunts are fake.

I did get sent out for a left-handed smoke shifter once as a Boy Scout; it was obvious that that was a fake errand, so the way to respond to it was to come up with some credible object to bring back; I think we ended up bending up some sheet metal in a left-hand curve.

They should find Sasquatch first

[Anonymous Coward]

Looking for an elusive animal in domestic territory is hard enough; now they want to look for it in a foreign territory? They really should find Sasquatch first, then look for the Yeti. Who knows? Maybe Sasquatch will tell us how to find Yeti.

Re:They should find Sasquatch first

[Tr3vin]

I'm not sure about that area of Siberia, but the more sparse the vegetation the better. Sasquatch is typically reported in fairly dense forests, while the Yeti is seen in more mountainous areas. This would make using thermal imaging for locating it much easier.

Pristine Horns are from WoW

[Anonymous Coward]

>two pristine horns

For anyone who missed the joke, this is a reference to a particularly obnoxious quest from World of Warcraft where the required items have a very low drop rate - meaning the player has to slaughter a preposterous number of yetis in order to complete it.

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[wierd_w]

Woodfire? How totally unsustainable!

My non-grid computer is a 200$ netbook powered directly to the power port (screw that wasteful wallwart!) Using ceramic encased thermocouples, driven in the back yard with my post driver!

My computer will still be up and running long after you have deforested your environment, you polluting imperialist!

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[Terrasque]

In unrelated news, the skinners in the area report a 5000% income increase during the same period.

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[pjt33]

But when you've got a readership the size of /. even low per-person probability events can have significant probability of occurring. I've briefly played other CRPGs, but if people frequently talk about WoW quest rewards on places like /. it must go straight over my head because I don't recall noticing it.

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[billstewart]

Nah, he showed up today :-) It seemed likely that it was some kind of gamer reference, but normally Yetis aren't portrayed as something that would have horns - they're usually humanoid or ape-like. So maybe a yeti pelt would protect you against frost damage, or maybe eating a yeti corpse would get the gods angry at you for being a cannibal (if you're playing Nethack as some kind of human.)

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[spazzmo]

I don't play wow, have no intention of playing wow, and no interest in learning anything about it either. People who chortle up their sleeves because someone doesn't know some lame thing they know, are themselves lame.

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[tehcyder]

heh if they didnt get the wow reference, they probably dont get 'low drop rate' either. or what a quest is. or what a joke is. or a reference, or read english.

actually the target market for your clarification are people who do not have electricity.

But they probably still know that you begin a sentence with a capital letter, you utter fucktard.

Re:Pristine Horns are from WoW

[tehcyder]

I don't play wow, have no intention of playing wow, but I know everything there is to know about wow by benefit of having a device with an internet connection. Most people who have a touch of interest in games, image boards, discussion forums, or who read slashdot regularly should be able to spot a wow reference a mile away by now.

So your claim is that you know everything there is to know about everything by virtue of having an internet connection, and so everyone else should too?

I'm sure I have played many games that I could drop references to that you have never even heard of.

Nyeti

[Lucas123]

I see crazy knows no borders.

Re:Nyeti

[Anonymous Coward]

My own little bunny rabbit! I will name him George, and I will hug him, and pet him, and squeeze him.

Waste of time

[plsenjy]

Instead of paying a group of scientists to run around out there, why don't they equip a drone with an infrared camera to do a swath of the area and locate and photograph anything with a heat signature about the size of a deer or larger? Sure, you'll get a lot of deer, but you're more likely to sight the yeti this way than not.

Re:Waste of time

[AwesomeMcgee]

[...] you're more likely to sight the yeti this way than not.

Actually you're more likely not to sight the yeti this way, because there is no yeti. At least their way the scientists can drink vodka and have a story that might get them some tail in the future (so long as they leave out the part about the yeti and focus on the snow capped mountains).

Re:Waste of time

[Riceballsan]

You mean more likely to site the yeti this way then any other method. "More likely to site the yeti this way then not" implies a high probability of it existing. To me a rise in sitings without a rise in photographic evidence in this day and age, is a tale tell sign it is unlikely to be real. Your average 10 year old has a 3 megapixel camera on their celphone. So if the yeti, bigfoot, the lochness monster etc... exist and are being sited more often by people now then they used to be, why don't we have any non-blurry pictures of them.

Re:Waste of time

[WastedMeat]

Not that such a thing exists, but if it did, infrared may not be the way to go. If something has adapted to live in Siberia, it will be well insulated which means that the temperature of the outermost layers of skin and/or fur will remain close to ambient temperatures. Polar bears, for example, are not effectively detected on infrared cameras.

Re:Waste of time

[DarkTempes]

I love you. If only there were more people like you.

Re:Waste of time

[nelk]

...So if the yeti, bigfoot, the lochness monster etc... exist and are being sited more often by people now then they used to be, why don't we have any non-blurry pictures of them.

"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. There's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. Run, he's fuzzy, get out of here." - Mitch Hedberg

Re:Waste of time

[tftp]

On top of that, there are trees in Siberia. More than one. Probably more than one billion. Most are tall fir and pine trees. There is no chance of seeing anything through the foliage.

Re:Waste of time

[jamesh]

Not that such a thing exists, but if it did, infrared may not be the way to go. If something has adapted to live in Siberia, it will be well insulated which means that the temperature of the outermost layers of skin and/or fur will remain close to ambient temperatures. Polar bears, for example, are not effectively detected on infrared cameras.

So what? All they have to do is send the drones in and look for places without a heat signature? :)

Re:Waste of time

[Fned]

Your average 10 year old has a 3 megapixel camera on their celphone.

You'd think we'd have a lot more pictures of muggers, but when presented with an unexpected, apparently dangerous situation, most people don't go for their camera.

That's why, for example, when there's, say, a fight on a city bus, where there have to be at least twenty cellphone cameras, you get, maybe, one actual video. Sometimes.

Re:Waste of time

[brokeninside]

Does your average ten year old with a three megapixel camera live in the US or in a remote region of Russia?

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[tmosley]

Yeah! Everyone knows there is no such thing as the lowland gorilla!

Oh wait, you mean the locals were right?

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[Genda]

I know what you mean... this is simply abominable!

now everyone has a pocket video camera ...

[peter303]

You'd think you'd see more evidence of mystery items like UFOs, ghosts and Yetis. Phones have been a real boon for photographing tornados and crimes.

Re:now everyone has a pocket video camera ...

[jdastrup]

I only have a 3G3. If I had my 4S I would have been able to snap the picture faster before it ran away.

The picture is fake

[jdastrup]

Did you see the measuring tape in the picture in TFA? 10 inches does not make a foot! If the measuring tape is wrong....

Re:The picture is fake

[jdastrup]

Sarcasm, perhaps?

Re:The picture is fake

[kenrblan]

That is a metric measuring tape. You are looking at centimeters marked in increments of 10, also known as decimeters.

Re:The picture is fake

[jdastrup]

Modded up for failing to understand a joke and then correct it? That's cool.

Re:The picture is fake

[mr1911]

A simple rounding error when converting from Library of Congresses.

Re:The picture is fake

[PPH]

Surveyors tapes are marked in feet and tenths of a foot.

I doubt its metric (decimeters/centimeters). That would be a pretty small foot.

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[Xaedalus]

And you are in dire need of a diarhetic. Dude... chill. It's just a story, it's not like I'm banging your woman.

many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

Many people think the search for cryptids is a waste of time, and not an area where any serious discoveries could be made, due to the large number of very unscientific crackpots.

The alarming number of such crackpots claiming to be cryptozoologists casts a very thick layer of tarnish on the more sincere and truly scientific in that speciality, but the assertion that nothing good can come from those few, due to the noise in the channel from the many, is not a sound assertion, and is a guilt by association rhetorical fallcy.

Other people will assert that any large macrofauna like "sasquatch", or "yeti" would surely have been discovered by now, but that is also an erroneous assertion. (Not that far removed from the false assertions made by several prominent politicians concerning the closure of patent offices during the 1900s, basing such rhetoric on the assertion that "everything worthy of a patent has already been invented." History clearly shows this is not the case.)

If these are *real* scientists looking for evidence of a cryptid, then I wish them well, and hope they find something. The methods they report in their field journals will surely be useful, even with a null result.

If however, this is just a bunch of poorly trained "enthusiasts" claiming to be crytpozoologists, but lacking any measure of proper scientific method, then this expidition is a colossal waste, and I hope they get frostbite of the penis for wasting resources and time.

Sorry.. I felt I needed to clarify that issue.

Re:many people think this is madness

[geekoid]

If you are a cryptozoologists, you are a crackpot.

Seriously, you are. We have a branch of science about animals and discovering species. They do actual scientist.
Since there is no proof of Yeti, or bigfoot, or lochness monster.

They might as well be looking for Frankenstein's monster.

When a person is so attached to an idea, that they wont let it go even with continuous lack of evidence,, they invent there or science; which would be fine if they applied the scientific method, and proper research, but they don't. anything like looks like maybe it s afoot print, is taken as 'proof'. Stick stacked up are taken as proof. Weird sounds at night are taken as proof. ON and ON.

You can't ahve a tribe and not have poop, food remains, and hair.

They aren't practicing science.

Re:many people think this is madness

[gilleain]

I've been having fun recently reading the wikipedia talk pages on disputed topics. One of these was about whether parapsychology should be a subclass of psychology or fruitloopery. Sorry, that last word should have been "fringe science".

However, I kind of take the point that the study of nonsense like ghosts can still be scientific, in a way. Well, for a while at least. Certainly a subject like cryptozoology that at least gets some results is surely a science.

(oh, and you could tone down the language just a little - I mean, I don't mind swearing, but fucking hell!)

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

Untrue.

Real cryptozoologists research things like Orang Pendek.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orang_Pendek

This is a cryptid, since has not yet been officially "discovered", but is widely reported, leaves footprints and nests, and has a sensible basis for existence.

Crackpots look for magical creatures.

Scientists look for mundane creatures.

Re:many people think this is madness

[sdguero]

Wikipedia begs to differ:
"Cryptozoology is not a recognized branch of zoology or a discipline of science." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptozoological

Cryptozoologists are not scientists (there is no such thing as a cryptozoology degree). They are ALL crackpots.

Re:many people think this is madness

[sdguero]

It hasn't been discovered because it doesn't exist. The wiki article you linked talks about, at length, how nobody has ever gotten anything beyond some footprint castings and hair samples that were inconclusive. Thanks for the link though. Crackpots are fun to laugh at...

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

Now that I can relate to, but that is also linguistic pedantry.

The fundemental logic still does not hold:

All cryptozologists study cryptids.
All cryptozologists are crackpots.
Therefor anyone who studies cryptids is a crackpot.

The logic is clearly faulted, when we substitute a few terms.

All snails are gastropods.
All snails have shells.
Therefor all gastropods have shells.

This is patently untrue, as there are many species of gastropod that do not have shells. (Slugs for instance.)

All you have managed to assert is that a legitimate researcher interested in cryptids cannot be a cryptozoologist.
There is not causal link to crackpottery evidenced.

The reason I used the term "cryptozoologist", is because it literally means "a person who studies hidden\unknown animals."

This is why I pointed out that the term has been malapropriated by crackpots, to disambiguate the term.

As examples of "former" cryptids discovered through such work, you have the lowland gorilla, and the orangutan.

So, I don't see how the point I made previously is invalidated by your statement.

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

Amusingly, people said the exact same things about the lowland gorilla and the orangutan, back when they were cryptids.

There are quite a few cryptids that turned out to be real that established zoologists insisted were not real, just as you asserted about Orang Pendek.

The difference between a cryptid and a known species is that somebody managed to snag a living sample of the latter. Unless people actually look for those animals, that is very unlikely to happen.

As such, people who genuinely look for such animals to further scientific knowledge and to abolish ignorance are indeed scientists, if they follow the scientific method to do so.

Blandly asserting a negative without evidence is contrary to the scientific method, and therefor not science: In order to conduct science, one must be actively observing, and making testable hypotheses based on those observations; a bland assertion accomplishes neigther.

Re:many people think this is madness

[dadelbunts]

Because no large mammals have been found recently correct?

Re:many people think this is madness

[sdguero]

I think my logic was more like:
Until 1983 the words "cryptid" and "cryptozoologist" did not exist, and I'm pretty sure lowland gorillas and orangutans were well known by the western scientific community before that.
Some people who refer to themselves as "cryptozoologists" think they are scientists.
The only scientists who changed their field to "cryptozoology" lost any respect they held previously in the scientific community.

You can play word games all you want but that won't make the lochness monster or a yeti show up in your front yard. By trying to make soft science sound like real science, you only serve to confuse the public and obfuscate stuff that, you know, really matters.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Morty]

If however, this is just a bunch of poorly trained "enthusiasts" claiming to be crytpozoologists, but lacking any measure of proper scientific method, then this expidition is a colossal waste, and I hope they get frostbite of the penis for wasting resources and time.

Even if they're just enthusiasts, they don't necessarily need to follow the scientific method to produce value. They can prove their claims conclusively by capturing one live specimen and bringing it back to civilization.

It won't happen, but it's possible.

Re:many people think this is madness

[sdguero]

Ugh. Dude, I'm not gonna argue with you about the existence of Bigfoot. If you wanna believe, go ahead and believe.

Just try not to make yourself sound like a scientist because that tarnishes the real science going on things like dark energy and curing cancer. Bigfoot people provide ammo to creationists. And that is lame.

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

Example species: "Giant Squid"

Reported well before 1600 by japanese fishermen, with eyewitness accounts of them attacking fishing boats.

Western science, for hundreds of years, insisted such a fanciful creature not only didn't exist, but also couldn't exist.

The terms you cite were created in 1983, as you state. However, the Giant Squid was not a scientifically proven species until the 1990s, a full decade later.

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

I believe I already pointed out that scientists look for mundane things. "Bigfoot", the cultural and mythical creature is not a mundane creature.

A hypothetical large ape meeting the physical description of "bigfoot" is a mundane creature. You can conduct experiments and create hypotheses of the latter. That makes it the pervue of science, even if you don't like it.

Scientists also research how having to pee effects judgement. An ignobel was awarded on that very topic. Simply because something is silly, does not make it stop being science.

Re:many people think this is madness

[sdguero]

Western science, for hundreds of years, insisted such a fanciful creature not only didn't exist, but also couldn't exist.

Citation?
As I recall, biologists weren't sure whether or not to classify Giant Squid as a new species or jsut write them off as just larger versions of already classified species up until the 1990s. It wasn't a matter of biologists saying "There's no, nor could there ever be, such thing as a squid over 10 feet long!" Rather, it was some scientists doubting if the deep ocean in today's world could provide enough food for creatures to grow that large. And do you really think that giant squid attacked Japanese fishing boats? Seriously?

This is a really good example of what I'm talking about in my previous post. You are obfuscating real science (should these rarely occurring larger than normal squid that live in deeper water be classified as a new species?) with mythology (ZOMG, we finally found the giant squid that were fighting whales and attacking ships 500 years ago!). By continuing down this path, you only serve to confuse people (yourself included) and obfuscate the real science.

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

The arguments against existence were:

It lives very deep in the ocean, where no sunlight reaches. This is presumed to have little if any nutritional sources, so a squid that size, living that deep, annot exist. It would starve to death.

This was before the invention of reliable submersables that could go that deep, which discovered a wide abundance of chemotrophic lifeforms near deep ocean hotspots.

Then, as you pointed out:

Ok, so maybe a squid could still eat and live that deep, but how do we know that this isn't just a very large version, or even if squid even CAN get that big? We are talking 100 meters long here.

Serendipidy provided the solution, by the capture of such a squid in a japanese fisherman's deep ocean drag net. Genetic testing showed it was indeed a previously unkmown species.

We only know this now, because happenstance managed to get one snared in a fishing net, while nobody was actively looking.

As for them attacking fishing boats- many animals tend to react negatively to being ensnared. A tiny traditional wooden fishing boat lacks the necessary displacement to pull one in. Should one have been so ensnared, what do you think would have happened?

We now know that giant squid mostly eat fish and some whales when they get large enough, and know that they are mostly docile creatures. I would chalk up the "attacks fishing boats" part of the story as being observer bias, as the observers in question were japanese fishermen, using nets and ensnaring such creatures.

When the only times you observe something is during exceptional circumstances, you report that it appears under such circumstances. This does not mean that the reported circumstances are common, or characteristic of what you are observing.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Fned]

Just try not to make yourself sound like a scientist because that tarnishes the real science going on things like dark energy...

I don't have a comment, here, I just want to enshrine this awesome bit of shining wisdom for future generations to behold.

As a warning.

Re:many people think this is madness

[DZign]

It was not only squids but other deep-see fish that were discovered when submarines could dive deeper and deeper.

I remember reading as a kid some old books/magazines from the 1960ies about the amazing discoveries of weird deep-see fish that were done as submarines started to explore the deep see. They discovered fish living at debts that were not thought to be able to exist..there wasn't any mythological about them, no information or stories that they existed.. scientists up to then believed the bottom of the ocean was just dead as there was no light and pressure was too high. So they were amazed to discover some fish had adapted and could live in thi environment.

Re:many people think this is madness

[drinkypoo]

It lives very deep in the ocean, where no sunlight reaches. This is presumed to have little if any nutritional sources, so a squid that size, living that deep, annot exist. It would starve to death.

This was before the invention of reliable submersables that could go that deep, which discovered a wide abundance of chemotrophic lifeforms near deep ocean hotspots.

But you illustrate the point perfectly, when you make declarative statements about something you know nothing about, in this case because no one had any direct experience, then you are just a stupid asshole.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Attila Dimedici]

If you are a cryptozoologists, you are a crackpot.

I used to fully agree with that statement. However, I occasionally watch the show "MonsterQuest" (usually to see where the logic flaw is). They have had numerous people on who identify themselves as "cryptosoologists". The overwhelming majority are crackpots. They have had one or two who appear to be scientists who specialize in examining the specimens that various "monster hunters" have found and identifying what they come from. While they appear to accept that undiscovered fauna may exist, they, also, appear to expect that things discovered as "evidence" of them can be identified as being related to a known creature until such a time as they come across something that cannot be. So far, I have only seen one of these guys fail to indentify something as belonging to a known creature once, and in that case, all he was willing to say for the evidence was that it did not "clearly" come from a known creature, but he thought up multiple, improbable, but possible, explanations for it that did not require the existence of a "cryptid".
These apparently serious scientists who identify themselves as "cryptozoologists" seem to be taking the position that if no serious scientist is willing to take those who think they have evidence of a "cryptid" seriously, lots of easily explainable evidence will be glommed on by the crackpots.
On the other hand, there is always a possibility that the "MonsterQuest" producers are encouraging these guys to come across that way so that the show will be taken more seriously and either these guys are not as much serious scientists as they appear, or, they don't really identify themselves as "cryptozoologists" but let "MonsterQuest" identify them that way for entertainment value.

Re:many people think this is madness

[tehcyder]

Crackpots are fun to laugh at...

You won't be saying that when science finally accepts the truth of...The Time Cube!

Re:many people think this is madness

[tehcyder]

Blandly asserting a negative without evidence is contrary to the scientific method, and therefor not science:

I would refer you to the retort given to religious believers by atheists. It is for you to prove it, not us to disprove it.

Re:many people think this is madness

[tehcyder]

So the Cryptozoologists looking for ABCs (Austalaian Big Cats) are crackpots, despite the evidence something a lot bigger than a house cat is out there

No you are the idiot. Cryptids clearly do exist and there's discoveries to be made

I think the key word in your post is "evidence". The whole point about things like yetis is that there is no real evidence at all.

Re:many people think this is madness

[tehcyder]

. And do you really think that giant squid attacked Japanese fishing boats? Seriously?

Well, Godzilla attacked Tokyo, so I don't see why it's that hard to believe.

Re:many people think this is madness

[LongearedBat]

Since there is no proof of Yeti, or bigfoot, or lochness monster. They might as well be looking for Frankenstein's monster.

"No proof" is not the same as "proof against".

Sure, "no proof" means that it's very unlikely. But to think that something does not exist just because there's no proof, is an assumption. Science is all about trying to reduce blind assumptions through research. (And I agree with GP that I really hope these are serious scientists and not the usual crackpots.)

Personally I don't think they will find anything, but I'd be really excited if they did. Besides, it seems that there is some evidence (real or not, I guess we'll see).

Re:many people think this is madness

[dasunt]

If you are a cryptozoologists, you are a crackpot.

Seriously, you are. We have a branch of science about animals and discovering species. They do actual scientist. Since there is no proof of Yeti, or bigfoot, or lochness monster.

With Nessie, the lake in question could not support a breeding population, as far as I could tell. With Bigfoot, due to the area it is supposed to live in, I find it amazing that none have been captured by a cell phone or hit by a car. But yetis, from what I know, are different in their supposed range and isolation.

While I doubt the existence of yetis, has anyone done any work on the reported range of the creature and checked to see if the existence is even possible? Are reports of the creature widespread across cultures, yet include common attributes? Is the population that could bear witness commonly equipped with equipment that could record an image of the creature? Or is it not unusual that there is a lack of photographic and video evidence?

It seems to me that science is about being able to explain why we believe or disbelieve in something. If we can't, then we're not engaging in science, and our thinking is about as sloppy as those "crackpots" that are chasing the Loch Ness Monster.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Syberz]

No, THIS. IS. RUSSIA!!
*kick*

Re:many people think this is madness

[wierd_w]

However, with religious groups they make assertions without any form of evidence. (Or at least any that is not distinguishable from random or natural mundane occurances.)

Thus they are making an outstanding claim, and need outstanding evidence.

Scientifically motivated cryptozoologists are not making such outstanding claims. (Despite the noise from the crackpots, they do not assert that bigfoot can become invisible, for instance.) They instead propose the possible existence of a mundane creature that could meet the physical description of such. To this end, they collect data as best they can. Eg, photographing grass nests, broken limbs, piles of leaves, tufts of hait caught in branches, and casts of footprints.

Unlike the religious argumenter, who can only rely on circular logic and assertions (god is infallable, because the bible says so\the bible is totally accurate because it came from god), the scientist studying cryptids collects and evaluated physical pieces of evidence.

The argument really then becomes one of how much evidence, and of what kinds are necessary to have the existence of a creature validated. (This is due to clever hoaxes like piltdown man and friends, and is perfectly reasonable. However, total dismissal of all collected data due to not meeting those requirements would be like shutting down the LHC because you didn't find the higgs straight away. Instead, the correct opinion to hold is more in line with "it hasn't been found, but there is some evidence to suggest it will be if we keep looking." Much like the data collected for null results at cern are useful in unexpected ways, a thurough investigation, conducted seriously while looking for a cryptid could reveal something previously unknown about the area, even if said cryptid is not found. This is why that kind of expedition is not a total waste.)

This is radically different from the religious debate, which does not present evidence, because the divine is axiomatically unknowable, and never leaves any.

This is a case of apples vs oranges. The only similarities are that they are round, and are fruit.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Agent0013]

Just try not to make yourself sound like a scientist because that tarnishes the real science going on things like dark energy and curing cancer. Bigfoot people provide ammo to creationists. And that is lame.

I'm not so sure that talking about dark energy makes you sound much better than a cryptozoologist.

Re:many people think this is madness

[Coren22]

The search for what causes the effect called "dark energy" is very much an important field of science. But, it is no less important than trying to figure out what it is that people are seeing that looks like a 6 foot tall shaggy man that is called Yeti or Sasquatch.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Every Yeti story needs a sonnet!

[bmo]

How can the purple yeti be so red,
Or chestnuts, like a widgeon, calmly groan?
No sheep is quite as crooked as a bed,
Though chickens ever try to hide a bone.
I grieve that greasy turnips slowly march:
Indeed, inflated is the icy pig:
For as the alligator strikes the larch,
So sighs the grazing goldfish for a wig.
Oh, has the pilchard argued with a top?
Say never that the parsnip is too weird!
I tell thee that a wolf-man will not hop
And no man ever praised the convex beard.
Effulgent is the day when bishops turn:
So let not then the doctor wake the urn!

- Prof. Jonathan R. Partington's computer.

--
BMO

Yetis Huh?

[Mech610]

On this episode of Destination Truth...

Re:Yetis Huh?

[An ominous Cow art]

Better yet, this show starring Leonard Nimoy. I remember watching the Bigfoot episode on TV when I was young.

Seems doubtful

[Belial6]

It seems doubtful that there is undiscovered fauna the size of a man, although not impossible. That being said, the impact of discovering a tribe of Neanderthals still alive would produce profound effects on society. Would they have 'Human' rights? Can they breed with humans? How would you feel about your sister dating one? What is the status of a human/neanderthal hybrid child? Depending on their intelligence level, it would be one step shy of meeting sentient aliens.

Re:Seems doubtful

[tmosley]

A new species of monkey was recently discovered in Papua New Guinea, along with a new species of large cat, IIRC. There are certainly strange things to be discovered out there.

I don't see a tribe of Neanderthals being among them, though. There is little reason for a hominid to live in such a harsh climate, and they would have interacted and, as we have found out recently, interbred with humans until they were fully hybridized.

If there is a Yeti, the likelihood of it being a hominid is close to zero. Much more likely is that it is a new species of ape or even bear.

Re:Seems doubtful

[Belial6]

Whether they interbred with humans until they were fully hybridized or not depends on how remote their habitat is, and how shy they are of other hominids. If they are isolated enough to not have been discovered, then it would not be unthinkable that they would not have interbred. I see no interbreeding reason that an ape that has not had contact with humans would be any more likely than a hominid that has not had contacts with humans.

Of course, it would be almost as much fun if it was a post homo sapiens hominid. Would we call it a new species, or would we insist that it was a tribe of mutant homo sapiens?

Re:Seems doubtful

[bill_mcgonigle]

Unless you're a negroid African, you probably have neanderthal DNA in you (remember to tell the white supremacists they're all half-breeds).

And, what happens if Global Warming turns out to be good for the Yeti population?

Re:Seems doubtful

[Belial6]

That doesn't answer the questions. There would likely be a far cry between a hominid that was 1/100000th neanderthal, and one that is 100% or even 50% neanderthal.

Re:Seems doubtful

[bill_mcgonigle]

Modern non-African humans are up to 4% Neanderthal (by DNA). So, that would be five generations in breeding terms (1/32nd). That used to be the threshold for being sold as a slave in Louisiana (1/32nd black).

I would hope we would not treat them any different than an Amazon tribe.

Re:Seems doubtful

[R3d M3rcury]

I believe these questions were already answered in that TV Show, Cavemen.

Of course, nobody watched it so we still don't know the answers.

Re:Seems doubtful

[geckoFeet]

There was a large species of peccary discovered a few years ago in Brazil, probably (there's not quite enough data on it). Formal descriptions was published in 2007. It weighs some 50 kg, so the size of a man, if the man is very small. Teh Wiki has teh details. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Peccary.

As for interbreeding with them, well, if you have a frank talk with a farmer, you will learn about different local customs.

Re:Seems doubtful

[Belial6]

What about modern African humans? Neanderthal are a completely different species.

Re:Seems doubtful

[bill_mcgonigle]

What about modern African humans?

The negroid type seems to be all homo sapien. The Arab and Caucasian Africans have neanderthal DNA.

Neanderthal are a completely different species.

were.

From The Article...

[RavenousBlack]

"When Homo sapiens started populating the world, it viciously exterminated its closest relative in the hominid family, Homo neanderthalensis..." If by viciously exterminated you mean viciously had sex with.

Re:From The Article...

[Taty'sEyes]

How do you know it was "vicious" sex? Maybe they really loved each other?

Re:From The Article...

[tmosley]

Hey, if you can't get them out, breed them out! That's how the Longshanks tribe rolls.

Re:Tragic

[TheRaven64]

Well, I assumed it was a reference to Nethack, and I'm slightly sad that it was WoW...

Putin

[Anonymous Coward]

They should send Putin. Putin could catch a yeti with his shirt off.

Re:Putin

[ukemike]

They should send Putin. Putin could catch a yeti with his shirt off.

why would we care if the yeti is wearing a shirt?

Re:Putin

[T.E.D.]

...but in a totally non-gay way of course.

Re:Putin

[bostongraf]

I would DEFINITELY care if a yeti was wearing a shirt!

That would mean that not only do Yeti exist, but that they potentially have an entire manufacturing/industrial/economic system that we can corrupt and destroy for our own profits!

Guilt free, even!

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[mr1911]

Your user fees have been refunded. Go hang out on Facebook.

Wow, that's a pretty loose

[geekoid]

definition of 'scientist'.

Poop and hair. where is the poop and hair?

Re:Wow, that's a pretty loose

[internerdj]

There have been a couple of scientists that I've called poop and hair, but I've never felt the need to generalize that to a definition of the entire group.

Re:Wow, that's a pretty loose

[Fned]

Rotting away in the deep forest, where not one single person has ever put any effort in looking for it that lasted longer than a weekend. Except, debatably, this one time in 1967.

Remember that scene from "Project Grizzly", where they got on horseback and spent days and days wandering around bear territory but didn't manage to actually find a bear?

Re:Wow, that's a pretty loose

[mugnyte]

definition of 'scientist'.

Poop and hair. where is the poop and hair?

i say the same thing to my dog when he looks guilty.

Re:Wow, that's a pretty loose

[mugnyte]

Poop and hair. where is the poop and hair?

I say the same thing to my dog when he looks guilty.

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[gilleain]

Is this pseudoscientific tripe what this website has been reduced to? I'm speaking as a molecular biologist here; please bring some sort of journalistic integrity back to this site! This is fucking ridiculous.

Speaking as a molecular biologist? Wot.

If you were a zoologist - perhaps even a cryptozoologist - this might make sense. Yes it is very doubtful that some human (-like?) species is still alive - but then again, there was Homo floresiensis which may have been alive as little as 12,000 years ago. It's not impossible that some tiny population has hung on in the very large wild areas of Siberia.

Bunch of crackpots

[mike449]

I did a quick search on this "conference" and I can tell right away this is a typical pseudoscience gathering.
The organizer, Igor Burtsev, holds a degree in a different area (history) and everything he published about yeti so far was sensationalist drivel, not scientific research.
Oh, it is on Fox News website? Must be fair and balanced then. Sorry.

Re:Bunch of crackpots

[Coren22]

You are commenting on how Fox (is not) fair and balanced? You sound like the Democrats in congress...none of the news outlets are fair and balanced...

Except BBC :)

Re:Tragic

[geekoid]

Nethack: A crappy game used to determine elitism where none exists.

When they're done...

[Infiniti2000]

When they're done in Siberia, those scientist should go for a dip in Loch Ness.

I am sure this is just a publicity stunt...

[thanq]

... and they will have a chance to witness Vladimir Putin slay the beast with his own bare hands wearing nothing but military trousers.

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[SimonTheSoundMan]

Welcome to idle. You must be new here AC.

Are We There Yeti?

[oakwine]

The name of the WoW quest for the two pristine horns is "Are We There Yeti?" The original quest was meant to be a grind fest and was. Then you had to be world traveler to frighten all the targets with the mechanical yeti. But with the revision of the quests in the low game in the Cataclysm patch, heck I just stealthed into the depts of the yeti cave with my Druid and quickly had the two horns. I think the only person I had to frighten with the mechanical yeti was right there in WinterSpring. This made me feel pretty stud, so I set out to find the hunter quests and the Boss Dragon, FinkWing or whatever his name is, appeared and blasted me with fire and killed me! I got an achievement for this honor. As for the russians, good luck to them. Maybe they find no yeti but find a lochness monster or a Gobi Death Worm. Or clever Russian peasants are stimulating the tourist trade.

Amazon

[Silpher]

They still find tribes in the deep forests of the amazon. Guess it's not a rediculous assumption after all.

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[billstewart]

Pseudoscientific tripe is what you use when you're trying to find the perfect recipe for menudo.

Igor Burtsev has already found Yeti

[Time_Ngler]

The lead scientist has already found Yeti. They live on Carter Farm in Tennessee. See his published article:

http://alamas.ru/eng/publicat/Burtsev2.htm

Jonny Quest already found them

[schwit1]

Monsters in the Monestary. The yeti cry was scary.

Homo Neanderthalensis

[chris_mahan]

Wouldn't evidence of Neanderthals completely invalidate the claims of Creationism?

Re:Homo Neanderthalensis

[Culture20]

Wouldn't evidence of Neanderthals completely invalidate the claims of Creationism?

Not if they're Nephilim.

Re:Homo Neanderthalensis

[Coren22]

Interesting stuff, I had no idea that there were giants in the bible.

In Other News...

[TheGoodNamesWereGone]

...In other news, scientists have devised perpetual motion, faster-than-light travel, and figured out how to avoid death and taxes!

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[Genda]

Ah, you cook boy bands too?!! How special for you!

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[electron sponge]

I'm speaking as a molecular biologist here

So unless they're looking for something on the molecular level you can either shut the fuck up or giggle like the rest of us. Your credentials are irrelevant, you puffed up buffoon.

Open letter to Slashdot posters

[mph_sd]

Crap, ok, sorry to rant on you Slashdot, but could you stop using the word "then" when you mean "than"? It really really makes you look illiterate. Even if English is not your first language it is not a difficult rule. If I have a large quantity of "A" compared with "B", I have more A *than* B. If B follows temporally after A, we say the sequence of events is "A *then* B". Sorry Slashdot, I know we have a thing about Grammar Nazis, it's just that this drives me nuts sometimes...

From someone born in Kemerovo, Russia - welcome :)

[arkamax]

I hope they enjoy themselves, it's a fun place to be in, and that's from someone who spent 27 years in Kemerovo before moving to Houston, TX. Just make sure they gear up for like -40F, as that's what weather is like there in recent couple years. And no, we don't have bears running around and drinking 96% alcohol from a ice bottle while knocking people with balalaikas :)

Re:Come on Slashdot!

[tehcyder]

It's not impossible that some tiny population has hung on in the very large wild areas of Siberia.

It's not impossible that some tiny proportion of supermodels are in fact alien spies sent to destroy humanity, who can only be uncovered by having sex with them and noticing the peculiar colour they turn when they orgasm.

Oddly, my research application to selflessly study this phenomenon has not yet been approved by any government..

Results of the last expedition

[Dunbal]

"We find that we can only spot the Yeti after ingesting at least 2 litres of vodka, therefore somehow this creature must be attracted to the liquid."

Best way to draw him out

[GameboyRMH]

Pull off a sick ski run and he'll show up to ruin your day. Then make sure you ski Faster.