The Oxford Mail reported recently that scientists at Oxford Brookes University have a conducted microscopic analysis of the "yeti hairs" about which I wrote here. The Brookes researchers used high-power microscopes to examine the hair cuticle patterns, which differ from species to species. The sample was compared to hair from that of primates, bears, dogs, yaks and humans. From the article:
"Dr Anna Nekaris, of the university's anthropology department, said: 'It's exciting to be asked to take part in this research. We put the hairs in clear nail varnish because that helps us to see them more clearly under the microscope.'"
The article goes onto quote various scientists involved in the tests saying what an interesting find this would be if it turned out this hair didn't match that of any known animal. However, the article fails to affirmatively say whether or not these hairs are indeed from an unknown species.
What will be truly interesting is the DNA test to be performed on the hair. While looking at the hair through a microscope can only rule out the species against which the sample was tested, a DNA analysis will be able to compare any DNA present in the hair to a much larger variety of animals. Of course, there is no guarantee that the sample contains any viable sample of DNA. Also, the researchers must be careful not to confuse any trace DNA from the multiple times the hairs have been handled with DNA actually belonging to the hair.
So, the tale of the Indian yeti hairs continues. Like I mentioned in my previous post about this subject, I'm glad these hairs are being seriously studied. While I doubt the hairs are from a previously undiscovered large, bipedal primate, the discovery of a new species of macaque in the mountains of India just four years ago shows there are still great unknowns in the remote regions of the world.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Tests on Alleged "Yeti Hair" Have Begun
Labels:
bigfoot,
cryptozoology,
India,
yeti
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You said the Delk track was not dated. Evolutionists do not date fossils, only radioactive rock near the fossil. However, radioactive rock has been found to be unreliable. Recent rock that is known to be hundreds of less years old has been dated at millions of years. Carbon 14 is more reliable but it only dates things that are only thousands of years old. Scientists have recently used Carbon 14, and have found they date fossils as thousands of years old. And colligen has been found in dinosaur bones that could only be thousands of years old. Here are the results of scientific research into dating dinosaur bones. For details see: Biblical Science News.
Post a Comment