The
Yeti Does Exist reply
Where you need to go, if you are interested in the Yeti
The argument that the yeti does not exist can still be defeated.
The argument that the yeti is just another myth like Bunyip, or the Loch Ness Monster, is not a big point. The fact is for all anybody knows they might have some truth about them, like there may have once been a big sturgeon in Loch Ness, and the Bunyip may be based on that cow sized marsupial from over 10,000 years ago, that grazed in Australia. The fact that local people give the Yeti some mythical characteristicts does not make it untrue. After all people across the world give creatures mythical characteristics and a creature as elusive as the yeti would be given even more mythical ones. In many myths people place human style personas on certain animals, and people including warriors often across history used to try and adopt these animals as their symbol, to try and claim they also has these traits. In example, some creatures are often said to be more lethal to humans than they actually are. Wolves, and Golden eagles, in Britain were said, to be threats to human life, at times, in some myths, which experts claim are not all that verifiable. Also I was reading that jungle quick sand which most people would think would kill somebody if you fell in, as of the modern version of folklore, films, finds it very hard to swallow people up in reality. Also look at the way that people even in the 19th Century at times, in normal folklore had a belief that elephants had graveyards of themselves behind waterfalls, purely as of a few pieces of fiction. If that sort of belief can spread in a literate society, then just think how every part of the world has myths about animals, so surely the fact locals give it supernatural characters, does not make the Yeti untrue, it just shows like other wildlife people believe in it, the fact there are myths about Cheetahs in some African cultures, and how some animals in some cultures are said to bring bad luck, does not make these creatures myths.
Also some say the Yeti is not true as there are so many kinds, of Yeti in the myths. Large, small, and quite a few other kinds. Maybe this is what has happened. I have looked at some books, and they say that people do not always recognise the wildlife on their doorstep, for instance there were times when some sherpas noticed tracks, and said, they could be the Yeti, when they were not as animal print experts knew they were not that species. So what I am saying is that maybe some people in the Tibetan highs, are not that familiar with local wildlife, as they are getting on with their lives, so when they see a Langur Monkey they think it is one kind of Yeti, and when they see another namely the Yeti they say ahh it's another Yeti, just part of the wildlife here in Tibet. As surely Langur Monkeys are not that common in every area of Tibet and Nepal, so not everybody would need to know what they were.
So what I am saying is that the most likely thing is that there is only 1 type of Yeti, as the possibility of there being 2 seems remote. The yeti is a orangutan in my view, that maybe has some brain ability using stone tools etc., like some other monkeys do. Sherpa Tenzing saw he saw a yeti so that it pretty good evidence. Although it has to be admitted that just as somebody is famous it does not mean they are telling the truth, or just as somebody has achieved something likewise, that can be proven by the way that many important people from politics to the media, are shown to be imperfect and even liars. So why should we pretend that Sherpa Tenzig could never lie. But still if you look at my theory, my theory is he is that giant orangutan, and if you look at his statement, it was at a time, when most believers in the yeti said he was a Neanderthal. But my theory says he is a orangutan, and surely his description is a bit like a orangutan. And his description would suit a orangutan that was used to living in the snow, less in the forests. I think he could not be a Neanderthal as I have seen that even early 20th Century experts on them, unknown to some films about them, said if you put a Neanderthal in a suit and asked him to walk down any street in the land, he would not look much different to anybody anywhere, apart from small differences, which would be not that well seen. Experts today are even more of that view, and even for Homo Erectus there is a view he would look very human, and possibly not need to be very hairy. With Erectus looking far more human than say Chimpanzee. While a orangutan would not look anything like a person. Any of the statement when experts of the 1950s, said it was near human, well experts are not perfect in every field, either we can claim, this is all lies, for some reason, or we can say maybe the experts were telling the truth, and that they even if they were experts, would not be able to be experts in Yetis as they had never seen one. So for all they know it could be near human, even if it was nearer to chimp, or gorilla. Especially with less scientific knowledge that was the case of then. Also look at Australia people did not even know it had a lake that size in it in the 1930s, look at all the animals, people have found recently. There was that deer found recently in Laos or Vietnam in the 1990s, that locals had a name for just like the yeti but that world science only recently found. There was that nocturnal cat only recently found in Borneo, the forest elephant was only recently realised to be different from other elephants in Africa, there was that species found in Australia, that was thought to be extinct found as it was run over, a small creature. how there In New Zealand a large Moa style bird bigger than a chicken was thought to be extinct but was found again in the late 20th Century on a island off New Zealand.
Yes Siberian Tigers are able to reported easily, but that is as they are so easy to find and live in lowlands allot of the time, and as they stalk so much land. Meanwhile Yetis live in isolated areas very high up, where people are less common. Also the reason why Tigers are spotted more easily is maybe as there were traditionally so many that they were able to be tracked by experts and experts were able to develop ways and means of realising where they would be and how to track them. While there are so few Yetis maybe they have less expertise at tracking them, so they are seen less, and there are less Yetis, even than dangerously near extinction populations of tigers, as they developed a niche in a area where having low populations was essential as there is so few resources.
Also there are those cases of the way some fishermen reported seeing Giant Squid but they were only recently confirmed. Plus some New Guinea people say they have seen very long Monitor Lizards and people believe this, so why not the Yeti too.
Now lets look at people, a form of hominid just like the Yeti could be. If people can hide for long, maybe the Yetis can. What about how the dead body of Mallery , it was not found through the 1920s after loads of searches, even though they knew what mountain he was on. It was a dead body, that was wrapped in clothes, so easily identifiable, and it took until 1999 to find this man. You may say, yes but it only took those guys a few hours to find him. But considering how many searches there were, and how much evidence they had of where he was, a few hours is a long, time, considering lots of places had been looked at and so much effort was put in. Also the case of a Langur Monkey body being found, but considering how many Langur Monkeys there must be up there, not so many that there is a infestation and they are seen by everybody, so to fit in with my theory that not all local people will recognise them, but so many that they are a regular appearance up there, only one body was not much. I mean people recorded it, so it must have been a rarity. So lets think if even a Langur Monkey is a rare body to find before it is eaten by Yetis and Vultures, how often would the rare yeti body be around the Himalayas. Also lots of people are not found, like that Japanese man, who was in that isle after World War Two, from then to the 1970s, without being reported much, and there was that robber (Boooooh) who went missing in the US in some highs, and there were those Million people found in the New Guinea Highlands in the 1930s.
There is all this evidence, and so the Yeti exists.
So I believe if it nocturnal then really it could very easily exist. It is said the Himalayas have not been totally explored yet, and also the forests are far more rarely entered by scientists to report on fauna. If it was a nocturnal creature, just think how rare it would be to see the creature.
The 3 main Yetis in legend are the mih-teh, a giant ape like creature with a sloping forehead. With short red hairs, robust face, and large teeth. A conical head. It is seen as dangerous. I say this is the yeti, a Orangutan giant in the Himalayas.
Then the dzu-teh, the largest of the species, but not as dangerous, it is omnivorous . the dzu teh is bipedal, and sometimes though goes by the way of a quadruped. It is shaggy, and feeds on cattle. I like many others say this is a bear, Messner, says when seeing a bear on 2 legs it looked just like the Yeti he claims to have seen.
Then there is the third kind the one metre high species that is mostly a forest creature, that is said to be nocturnal, whereas the others may be too, but are not explicitly said to be so. I say this is just the Langur Monkey.
Przhevalskiy
who is famous for discovering the Wild Horse of that name is said to have been
told in the 1870s, of the legend of a man beast in Mongols territories, I wonder
if the species was more common as many Sherpas say and used to venture out towards
here every so often.
And maybe the reason why the expeditions have not found
anything is maybe Slick was really on a recon mission to get the Dalai Lama out
of Tibet and the other ones, really did not believe so could not be expected to
find the Yeti.
The lands of the Yeti, are lands which cover a large area. The area includes Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, and Tibet. This article will tell of the wildlife that exists here. It will also mention the wildlife in areas where the Yeti is mentioned less often is more passing ways. The other areas are namely West Szechwan, Uighurstan, North West India, North Pakistan, Tajikistan, the Pamirs, Assam, and parts of Burma. There are other myths about there being almas in Mongolia, and parts of Western China, but that is getting to the level of too much. I suppose you could have a situation where the Yeti goes into all these areas far more rarely never to the more populous parts of the world as they are a species which can only have small numbers and have evolved to only go to the less populous areas. Maybe as they were just attacked thousands of years ago, by humans, and other kinds of giant orangutan, so evolved to just go around the mountains. Many species only appear in mountains, and maybe this species as it is so rare found it possible to just be up here, maybe finding the food up here, tastier, as if it found food from lowlands tasty then it would be more likely to be killed by humans, or larger giant orangutans of 100,000 years ago. Becoming a evolutionary advantage to not like the taste of lowland grub. But most likely they are just in the Himalayas. With any cases of them heading off from here being seen a rare and untrue and dying out as they are unsuited to those areas. If the animal was rare then aswell as now, as of the humans, and lowland orangutans pushing them out, then maybe the rare resources for their niche up in the highs of the Himalayas, would necessitate that they keep movement to areas where they die out to a minimum, but still could have the occasional wander to Pamir Mountains or Mongolia, where there are fewer people, in times of scarce resources then go back to their homeland where they are safer. Maybe even entering remoter parts of Western China, and Burma. But more likely these are just copycat myths, or of times, before they were killed off there, in a former greater homeland of Yetis, So now they are just in the Himalayas. The 18th Century Tibetan wildman sightings may indicate the species used to be more widespread across Asia, but was killed off like many wolves and bears by humans. I read that humans were at a altitude of 4000 metres at 9300 BC which means people arrived later at mountain level, by many years than even in the Americas, or Australia, or Europe. So that could have left more time for mountain oranmgutans to survive mechanisms, that make them survive past humans more than other giant orangutans.
Also as recently as 2006 some new populations of rhino were found, a dozen or so in some cases in Sabah by a check on the reducing population of Borneo. The less visited Himalayas would be possibly a site where the Yeti could be seen. Some people say when tribes people in Central Africa say that Rhinos and elephants are the mokele mbembe, that it is as they are just saying it looks like any big beast as they do not see it, so this means the myth is just based on these beasts. Well when people then say the only known sightings of some of these species are 100s of miles from these at times then this shows its all myths. Well maybe then the species are hippos and rhinos and elephants and in reality they are actually there, rising in the Congo River or somewhere, and scientists have not see them, as they are not as complete as they feel as they are not there all the time. So maybe the Yeti could exist too, and just be not seen that much.
In
2003 Siberian Scientists found a furry limb, of what look like it could be a hominid
leg, or arm, 3500 metres up in the Altay Mountains Permafrost, the picture
of it is here It
is said by some to be thousands of years old.
Yes it could be a fake, or a miss identification, but lets wonder, maybe it is
true.
In 2003 Bhutan on India's insistence, was forced to attack Assamese separatist rebels who wanted Assam to be independent of India, or something, that had camped out in their southern forests. Hundreds of people died in this flushing out campaign according to some estimates, with many 10s of thousands of locals evicted by Bhutan's government to help them do this, with less deaths. Some could infer from the attack that surely a Yeti would have been sited, but then again some could infer if a rebel army can live there, and be ignored for so long it was a decade or so by Bhutan without it getting to angry, until India got angry for it. As they would be less common than the rebel army, and be in the North and less populous areas, not needing to see people. The Book Bhutanese Tales of the Yeti, claims a search showed even Bhutan a small area of the Yetilands is large, and could hide a yeti. It is said like the other lands to be a beautiful country, that could hide yetis, so just think what Tibet could do.
China and many Yeti lands have similar meaning words for the Yeti and Yeren, maybe this could show the Yeti could exist. Maybe the explanation of how Yetis are not found in most of India is that they are only based in one forest in the Himalayas. They could have reduced in numbers, as of human attacks. Maybe naturally they were once a in very remote mountains but reduced while bears were of a more sturdy area able to cover more areas not as much of a niche. But maybe this niche for yetis maybe being giant orangutans and lack of people in the extreme highs of the Himalayas, saw bears not able to replace them in some Tibetan or Nepali or Bhutan forest. Maybe they only exist in a few now, where bears are unable to reach as of them, finding it easier to go to other places and it has some resource they do not like as much. Maybe Yetis are able to cope with vegetables more in the diet and just some essential meat. Like how Red Squirrels have gone extinct throughout much of Britain but survive against the Greys in some areas, possibly for environmental reasons. So maybe there are a few small cavern forests in the Himalayas where few people go and this is the Yeti base, but these creatures maybe hibernate so get seen even less often as of that, and maybe they usually just go out at night, and the reason they are not seen in North India etc. much is as they are based in a very small area, and the areas they cover are often far away from their base. Like West Nepal, or the more easterly areas. Maybe if they go further away they have less resources and bears defeat them in wants for food. So I would say Everest is maybe near their base, and then there are maybe more of a spread to North Bhutan and South Tibet and and North Sikkim, and parts of Nepal to the west more rarely. With them concentrated in a niche that bears can not beat maybe to do with the height of the area in a region close to Everest.
I was reading even parts of Northern California, and some swamps in other parts of the USA have not been totally surveyed. I also remember reading a book by a noted anthropologist who wondered allowed if some Neanderthals may be found in the future he wrote this book in the 1990s, in a isolated Ural Valley never gone into by humans before. Its even more so for the Himalayas.
I saw on TV that there are people in Chile, in the mountains who have not seen a Puma, even though they are among their most common in the world there, people find them, by knowing what they have done, and knowing what they hunt, they are solitary and in the far more open though gorge and cranny ridden Patagonian areas.
My theory is that Sikkim, and the area to Everest and the areas linking there and Tibet just over the border are the main areas where the Yeti lives as it is more suited to these areas, than say bears, and other species.
Last of all, here is the fact that shows the Himalayas could hide the Yeti.
So below is the link to the homepage
The official Homepage of the Abominable Snowman Internet Resource Study Group.
Reams of facts, views, history & fun on the elusive creature,
More Musings on whether the Yeti exists
The Entrance to the INTERNET SAFARI, with real animals, most of us had never seen before.
A Great index of Comedy & joke sites, 100s of jokes, are 1 click away,
Global Geography, sites like what are the 10 largest English speaking countries, 10 largest Celtic cities, biggest forests, volcanoes,
SOLAR SYSTEM RECORD BREAKERS, facts like the tallest mountain for the planets
Which are the 10 most powerful countries in 2008___
10 Biggest Banks Histories Famous Gates Famous Walls Quizzes Famous Roads Internet Sea Safari, The Most Powerful Countries Ever