Oxford University to probe 'yeti' DNA

Oxford University to probe 'yeti' DNA

www.wired.co.uk

The Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project has been created to try and entice people and institutions with collections of cryptozoological material to submit it for analysis. Anyone with a sample of organic remains can submit details of where and when it was collected, among other data.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
gizmodo.com
www.wolfson.ox.ac.uk

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
The Legend of the Yeti
Yeti 'Nests' Found in Russia?
"Yeti hairs"Possible proof

The folks at Oxford have decided to put the the Yeti stories to the test. Anyone claiming to have evidence of Yeti's existence can submit their data. All they need to do is provide background data on the material they feel should be tested. The crew of scientists will slect the the most convincing stories and material and then they'll get the owners to submit the actual evidence for testing.

Will this resolve the story of the mythical beast? I doubt it. When they come away empty handed, the believers will cry foul, claiming the scientists didn't select the right evidence.

If, however, they come up with something truly mind blowing and they determine that, yes, there is a very real possibility that the famed Yeti lives (or lived), then we should expect to see the same thing done with bigfoot, chupacabra, nessie etc.

Perhaps this is the best way to settle the score over what exists and what doesn't.



www.wired.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

I find it slightly amusing that it was only after the ATS Live Radio show publicly arranged to have alleged big-foot evidence analyzed by a certified laboratory that Oxford academics (in the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project) finally took this step...

Just kidding of course... I'm sure they recognize the value in using the science of the day to actually study and report on what evidence there is....

From the Op's article....

"Mainstream science remains unconvinced by these reports both through lack of testable evidence and the scope for fraudulent claims. However, recent advances in the techniques of genetic analysis of organic remains provide a mechanism for genus and species identification that is unbiased, unambiguous and impervious to falsification. It is possible that a scientific examination of these neglected specimens could tell us more about how Neanderthals and other early hominids interacted and spread around the world."

Now, there is still the matter of possible "wild-man" clusters living in a feral form away from civilization; which could account for their wily and elusive nature... if they are humans.. they could easily seek to 'disguise' themselves to avoid contact.

Great news that they are going to report this barring "publication embargoes" that may exist....

PUBLICATION PHASE
Results from DNA analysis will be prepared for publication in a peer-reviewed science journal. No results will be released until any embargoes on publication have passed.

from: Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project

Anybody know of any "publication embargoes" that would make reporting their findings impossible?

reply to post by Crakeur


Ok..

I have to ask. From time to time over the past few decades now we have read stories of "Evidence" that has been tested that always [So it seemed] come back as inconclusive. so, when and where will all those previously examined samples be retested?

I appreciate this posting because I believe in the Big guy and would love to find another closer to human hominid out there be they in the Himalayas, Siberia, The outback of Australia or right here in the American Pacific Northwest.

Bookmarked

reply to post by Crakeur


Interesting...I guess we could be seeing more threads on ATS in the future such as this one:

"Yeti Finger" Mystery Solved


One concern though...Even if proof is delivered into the hands of the Oxford scientist, will they release the truth, or will they cover it up? Just like any other scientist, politician, or media personnel, they can be in league with powers to conceal the truth from the eyes of the public...We shall see what happens.

S & F

reply to post by SLAYER69


from what I've seen, the bulk of the "evidence" that comes back as inconclusive is labelled that by the holder of the evidence. The lab and science results come back with something like "it's human, with a deformity and some genetic anomoly, that is very rare and has been documented once before and can also be a result of too much...(insert chemical/mineral etc)" and the holder of the evidence says this is inconclusive because there's excessive levels of that chemical or mineral on pluto and the lab results don't state that the object is not an alien skull or hand or whatever and, therefore the results are inconclusive.

If someone walks in with his yeti foot, and they test it and determine it is a polar bear, you can be sure the owner of the foot will say "they never said it wasn't a yeti"

They're real. It's just this University's findings I wouldn't trust. I mean, if the Smithsonian can trash remains of Giants found for over a century, it won't take much for a university Asking for stuff to produce false positive results.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Incidentally, Giants = Yeti = "Wild men" = "Gods" of old prehistory. At least that's the theory. A once intelligent hominid species bombed back to barbarity, now living as "wild beasts" in tiny rural communities confined to caves.

reply to post by Crakeur


Fair enough...

Now, how will it be determined that all the above mentioned "Accepted Abnormalities" aren't just proof in itself of such a creature? Meaning,That THAT is the evidence? Just not accepted as such and has been rejected out of hand? If such a creature does exist and it's closer to modern man why wouldn't it have genetic similarities [Closer to human than Ape] therefore be subject to many similar [Rare or not] normal and previously known abnormalities?

reply to post by CaptainLJB


I believe they are real as well.
I'll also post a link to a thread I've done on the subject.
Many great member contributions and discussion.

Bigfoot/Sasquatch Fact or Fiction?

Hasn't there already been studies done of BF evidence that yielded an unknown primate source collected in North America and all science said was "we don't know what it is" but failed to validate eye witness sightings that number in the 1,000s?

It is odd how science won't acknowledge one thing but run its yap about what it "knows" is going on at the center of our galaxy, in other galaxies, and can't even predict the weather 4 months out.

Derek

reply to post by SLAYER69


Looks good.

I heard in passing on tv yesterday that some Finding Bigfoot group was coming to Oz to investigate our Yowie sightings.

When they are done testing Bigfoot samples may be they could test samples from our big cats that have been seen for over a 150 years here & in new Zealand and put that one to bed too.

Do these researchers really believe in Bigfoot?
Why start looking for evidence now?
Why is cryptozoology research important to these people?
Who Is funding their research?

I don't think these things are apes, but if that's what they are, they have to have some incredibly good senses of smell or hearing to have been so elusive for so long. I personally feel like these things are something manifested from the mind or they're something supernatural - maybe nephilim even.

Anyways... back to my premise.

If they're trying to find evidence to find a starting point for searching for and capturing one, what would they do with it if they did capture one? Nothing good I bet.

If you guys found one would you capture it and run tests on it?

Yeti, or Bigfoot ... is an example of "science" and "scientists" fabricating evidence to support their theories.

I saw here on ATS, a few days ago, a link to a TV show where a guy was argueing why Yeti or Bigfoot exists. His arguement, and his views of the subject, as it refers to early history. Was actually quite logical, and made sence ...primates and man coexisted, and man pushed the larger primates into the forrest where they do not make fossils anymore.

Basically quite logical, and most like quite correct.

However, he had the vision that "god created us", or a more recent version "the nephilim" or "aliens". Well, whatever ... here he's way beyond theory land ... he's out in la-la land.

Then he went on to say that Bigfoot, is proof of this theory. Because it shows that there are such creatures living in the forrest, and "of course" they are the primates, that we drove into the woods. Ok, here we come down to the fact, that we have peole who take "aliens" stories, and "bigfoot" stories, to prove their own agenda. Primarily religious people.

What I am getting at, is this ... it doesn't matter if it's called OXFORD. And whatever they come up with, is irrelevant as well. This is merely a proof, that colleges and Universes fund "crazy" stuff, that has no purpose. And in fact, I'd bet, that this is connected to somebody's thesis.

What I give the man correct in, is that there is no missing link, between man and primates. The reason, why there is none, is because mans ancestor lived in the forrests. Haven't you understood this, yet?

In ancient times, the primates were supreme over man ... thus man was in the forrests, and the primates were on the steps and savannahs. Man grew up, having to use his intellect to hunt and survive, while the primate grew up only needing his supreme strength, like most mammals. Thus man lived in the jungles, and was hunted ...

That is why you don't find fossils of primates after a certain era, and that is also why you don't find fossils of man or the missing link, prior to that era.

God, Aliens are not involved ... and the ancient big primates, are the ancestors of modern monkeys. Just like ancient dynosaurs are ancestors do modern lizards.

Times change ... and the REAL question you should be asking yourself, is what on earth did change so dramatically, that Dynosaurs "shrunk" to lizards, and huge primates, because small monkeys.

That is the true question, we should be asking ourselves ... and the answer is "earth changes" ... but that also means, that there is no "god" involved. at all.

reply to post by bjarneorn

Originally posted by bjarneorn
What I give the man correct in, is that there is no missing link, between man and primates. The reason, why there is none, is because mans ancestor lived in the forrests. Haven't you understood this, yet?

In ancient times, the primates were supreme over man ... thus man was in the forrests, and the primates were on the steps and savannahs. Man grew up, having to use his intellect to hunt and survive, while the primate grew up only needing his supreme strength, like most mammals. Thus man lived in the jungles, and was hunted ...

That is why you don't find fossils of primates after a certain era, and that is also why you don't find fossils of man or the missing link, prior to that era.

What would make a forest animal not leave fossils? That is your premise right?
Is it to be suggested that man ate or used the bones and that is why we cannot find them?

unless the OU gives believers the answers they want to hear , all work will be dismissed as ` cover up ` / suppression etc etc

Interesting that Oxford is doing this. I look forward to their findings. That said I wonder what the findings will be. Should they find human DNA I don't see how that would be conclusive that these creatures don't exist.

There are many examples in the fossile record of species divergance. Chimps and the human line for example share like 99% similar DNA. Should the Yeti be a divergant human species, wouldn't it then have human DNA? If it, as a species, diverged much more recently than chimps for example. Would it not then have DNA more close to human? Perhaps close enough to be almost identical.

Of coarse if the findings prove that the DNA are from a completely different species. Then my point is moot. Still I think that this, like the other studies that have been done, will be inconclusive.

Originally posted by Bleeeeep

If they're trying to find evidence to find a starting point for searching for and capturing one, what would they do with it if they did capture one? Nothing good I bet.

If you guys found one would you capture it and run tests on it?

edit on 23-5-2012 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)

Agreed, that if a specimen is found/caught, the work done on & the loss of the life the specimen knew would be horrific!

As for myself, I wouldn't capture one. I wouldn't even tell a soul about quality evidence of one.

As for their existence, why not? 1,000s of reports over the length of time with oral tradition, why not? The world is a wondrous place and science is about wonder, right?

Derek

reply to post by Viesczy


Science is about understanding the wonder. But I wouldn't shoot one of the big guys, either. They're probably far more human than ape, and maybe more human than the jerks who've destroyed my so-called life over the years.

Besides, with my luck, I'd probably only piss the big guy off and I'd end up with my arms torn out of their sockets (like upsetting a Wookiee).