Ok, I have sensationalised the topic but he certainly says there is evidence worthy of investigation. He cites footprints found at altitudes higher than people are likely to go purely for the purposes of creating a hoax.
Personally, I think it is unlikely. Very elaborate hoaxes have been perpetrated before and compelling evidence has been shown t be rubbish. But I don't know the size of the unexplored area in the Himalayas or the amount of documented, verified evidence.
I think what he was getting at is, where the loch ness monster is impossiblem there is literally no real proof either way with Yeti type creatures.
Yes, that is the impression I got. He was comparing the Loch Ness Monster (for which we would expect to see some real evidence, given its accessible location, size of the loch and kind of animal we are looking for) with the Yeti (with a vastly more remote location, large unexplored area and much smaller proposed animal).
They don't have to be white hairy man like beasts, but something could exist that we dont know of up there of considerable size in order to leave the evidence such as seeming footprints etc.
Fair point, we could be talking about something like a new species of bear.
Originally posted by Palynka There can be tourism gains by planting evidence and getting the media to talk about it. Didn't the Yeti hairs of some months ago turned out to be goat hairs or something like that?
yep, no DNA evidence has ever been proven to come from some unidentified life form around there yet, or in the US for Bigfoot or Susquatch, and the rest. Nobody has real evidence, there was one video footage taken a few years back showing some bipedal individual walking across a field but it was too far away to figure if it was just a 7 foot tall dude in a monkey suit or not, chances are pretty good that's exactly what it was.