Scientists Find "95 Percent Proof Of The Existence Of Yeti"

[Omey]

Welcome to Siberia!!....Like a Snowcone?

Sorry..but whenever someone mentions the yeti i think of that scene

 

[Skizle]

I've got your 95% proof right here:

I call your claim bullshit because this vodka is not native to these lands where we are researching this beast.

 

[McMullen]

Who are these researchers, and why do they think footprints, probable dens, and "markers" constitute 95% proof after less than a week in the field?

I get the feeling that these people are as deserving of the title "researcher" as crystal healers are deserving of the title "doctor".

Even more suspicious is how quickly they went to the media, given how little work has been done.

These people are frauds. I'd wager money on it.

 

[Beautiful End]

You know what could be more interesting? If they found a werewolf. Then we could harness the were-gene (?) and be able to use it!

"Were" meaning "man", finding the "were" gene isn't that exciting, TBH.

Well player, sir or ma'am. I'm surprised I missed that since I already knew that. I have no excuse. Instead, I shall try to pretend it didn't happen by cheering for scientist to find...a vampire gene? Yeah, there we go.

 

[Dalek Caan]

Human Babies

Cookie for refrence

Red Dead Undead Nightmare?

OT: I'm not completely convinced until I actually see one. Preferably on the other side of the cage.

 

[Veldel]

Human Babies

Cookie for refrence

Red Dead Undead Nightmare?

OT: I'm not completely convinced until I actually see one. Preferably on the other side of the cage.

Well sir you have earned it and id advice getting some milk xD

Spoiler: Reward

 

[Random berk]

Until some poor bastard returns to his lab impaled through the stomach by a severed yeti arm, I'm not accepting any of this so called "proof." These guys call themselves researchers. Researchers in what? Where the hell did they get their degrees? Wen a scientist can be compared to the guys on that stupid Monster Hunter show, you know they're not doing their jobs right. I hate seeing programs, or videos, articles, any of these things, where they go out into the woods, throw a rock into the trees, and then freak out about how there's something moving nearby, then use the footage of this lunacy to try and convince people that there are monsters.

 

[Jonluw]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to review them aren't scientists.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

 

[Jonluw]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

Yes, and that kind of kind of bias doesn't belong in science.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

Yes, and that kind of kind of bias doesn't belong in science.

Which is why these people are "scientists" until proven otherwise.

 

[RJ Dalton]

Please don't call cryptozoologists scientists. I've seen the way these guys work; there's nothing about it that's really scientific.

 

[Jonluw]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

Yes, and that kind of kind of bias doesn't belong in science.

Which is why these people are "scientists" until proven otherwise.

I believe their very obvious confirmation bias clearly proves they aren't scientists.

You aren't a scientist until proven otherwise. It works the other way around.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

Yes, and that kind of kind of bias doesn't belong in science.

Which is why these people are "scientists" until proven otherwise.

I believe their very obvious confirmation bias clearly proves they aren't scientists.

You aren't a scientist until proven otherwise. It works the other way around.

I used quotation marks. Imagine me saying the word "scientist" in air quotes.

 

[GodofCider]

"This does not seem to be any more than what you hear about from weekend excursions in North America that go out, discovering some hair of undetermined origin, calling it 'Bigfoot hair,' then locating some broken branches and piled trees, saying it was made by Bigfoot, and finding footprints that look like Sasquatch tracks," Coleman told the Huffington Post."

This taken from the article presented here, and yet the title says: Scientists Find 95 percent proof of the existence of Yeti.

Really? I guess 'expanding the truth' of the article does acquire more viewers; can't say much for integrity though.

 

[Jonluw]

"Scientists"
Haha, how cute.

Anyone who publicizes their findings on the net within a week without allowing the scientific community to "proofread" them aren't scientists.

Or they are just coming in inherently biased toward wanting to prove the Yeti's existence.
I want to see this team's credentials.

Yes, and that kind of kind of bias doesn't belong in science.

Which is why these people are "scientists" until proven otherwise.

I believe their very obvious confirmation bias clearly proves they aren't scientists.

You aren't a scientist until proven otherwise. It works the other way around.

I used quotation marks. Imagine me saying the word "scientist" in air quotes.

Ah, okay.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

But...but I don't WANT them to find Bigfoot. A) We'll just drive them to extinction within a year of their "discovery", and B) they are more fun as myths.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I understand skepticism from a position of a lack of hard evidence, which, thankfully, seems to be the reason people usually refute the existence of such creatures.

What I don't understand is the mindset that it couldn't possibly exist because it's some sort of magical, mythical creature that can fly and shoot lighting from its hands. Would someone in this latter camp care to explain to me what is so extremely inconceivable about a large primate species living undiscovered in an incredibly remote part of the world? It wouldn't be the first time it's happened... [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Gorilla] Granted, that was 1902, but we're not talking about Cthulu here, we're talking about a possible ape or hominid species not terribly unlike others that we know exist. Why could that not, under any circumstances, exist?

And before you reply, please re-read my first paragraph to see what I'm not asking. I know I'm still going to get a dozen replies not answering my question, but I can't say I didn't try.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Until you've bagged it and tagged it, its still a no-go.

First we had the Kraken, now the Yeti! What's next, Godzilla?

Where is your avatar from?

It's Saya from Super Robot Taisen OG Saga: Endless Frontier. Alot of people have been asking that lately...