Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Probably a Sasquatch wearing grizzly boots.

https://www.alamy.com/grizzly-bear-ursus...10538.html

(May 4, 2019 02:31 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]Probably a Sasquatch wearing grizzly boots.

https://www.alamy.com/grizzly-bear-ursus...10538.html

Repeating sequence of 4 prints? Yeah..that's a bear.

Abominable Snowman mystery continues: DNA analysis reveals that the Himalayan 'Yeti' is NOT a polar bear's ancient cousin

DNA test shows Yeti isn't a sub-species of polar bear thought to be extinct
Studies suggested Yeti may be hybrid of polar bear and brown bear
But new research shows hairs were likely from sub-species of brown bear
Experts added that the Yeti is unlikely to be a previously unknown primate
...
The analysis suggests that the Yeti is not a previously unseen primate, nor is it a polar or brown bear hybrid as previously thought, but instead a sub-species of the Himalayan bear.

I just wouldn't make the leap to thinking a mythical beast made these footprints. It also seems irresponsible from a journalism view, to report on these ''sightings'' as potentially fact. I'm a pretty open minded person when it comes to subjective evidence and reasoning, but the Big Foot tale has always made me cringe.

(May 4, 2019 02:54 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]

(May 4, 2019 02:31 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]Probably a Sasquatch wearing grizzly boots.

https://www.alamy.com/grizzly-bear-ursus...10538.html

Repeating sequence of 4 prints? Yeah..that's a bear.

Not denying those are grizzly prints. Photo caption says so.  My point is this: bear footprints to the untrained eye could be mistaken for that of an ape, only they’re much larger. These prints were 24” long according to stat sheet.

I found your ape: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016...pes-giant/

Quote:Not denying those are grizzly prints. Photo caption says so. My point is this: bear footprints to the untrained eye could be mistaken for that of an ape, only they’re much larger. These prints were 24” long according to stat sheet.

My point is that you can't confuse a four legged beast's prints with a biped's. The prints are different in their shape and frequency and positioning. A quadraped will exhibit a pattern of two right pawed prints on one side and two left pawed prints on the other. A biped will exihibit only one right footed print on one side and one left footed print on the other. People who track for a living know what I'm talking about. It's just common sense. It's entirely understandable that the Indian army soldiers would take these prints as that of a very large biped. And seeing as that is a pretty limited field, yeti seems to be a logical conclusion.