Posted by CB on March 25, 2011 at 09:11:03
In Reply to: Re: Kahoutek and Yeti posted by long time exer on March 24, 2011 at 22:50:23:
A lot depends on how the investigative documentary goes about looking at the evidence. I can't remember the name of the show I watched on Big Foot, as I watch a lot of science/history/investigation type shows. In the documentary I saw (Something like, "In Search Of...") the results of the investigation were inconclusive. The most impressive segment showed forensic scientists and primatologists evaluating the plaster molds from various Yeti footprints. Some were debunked as fakes, while there was no good explanation for other prints beyond the supposition that it came from a unknown creature.
Like Alice Through-the-Looking-Glass, I like to live in a world where there's room for fantastic possibilities. If Yetis exist, the most plausible explanation is they are a lost branch of hominid evolution. As you've pointed out, there is a low probability for this explanation given the scant evidence.
But there are other possibilities: What if Yetis were Chewbacca-like extraterrestrials? What if they're not as primitive as we assume?
It gets even better when you start thinking about the implications of cosmological theories for possible shapes of the universe. If we humans can imagine and produce mathematical models for multiple, simultaneous universes--then who's to say multiple universes don't exist and intersect in ways we can only dimly grasp?
"Through the Wormhole" is one of the best series I've seen in ages: