YETI nother explanation?

Were the samples found by yeti hunters? Was there some reason that a disbeliever in Yetis would not have tested samples from an unknown animal?Finally, does anyone think the animal is a yeti?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Well, the test indicated that the animal was a bear which means it is not a Yeti. Yet the test was still conducted.A yeti is supposedly some kind of ape. Just being highly and rationally skeptical that there is some kind of snow ape living in the Himalayas does not make unreasonable to wonder just what kind of animal some sample does come from. If the sample was not found by someone hunting for yeti, that suggests that a belief in yeti's is not relevant to the finding of the sample. Further, there are plenty of reasons to test the fur of an unknown animal without wondering if it is a yeti. ISo yeah. The question is relevant.

I suppose I should simply state my point. Being open minded means simply not denying that there might be some unknown animal out there. One can be open minded in that way and still absolutely deny that there is an abominable snow man.In short being complete closed minded in the way you described in the OP, being close-minded skepticism (or narrow minded skepticism): disbelief in the concept of Yeti's to the extent where you are going to deny that anything is a Yeti, won't interfere with your classifying some unknown animal as a bear. In fact it might make such a classification more likely. The scientist need not have any idea or question about whether the animal was a yeti. All he needs to do is acknowledge that he does not know what it was. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.