tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/bigfoot-1605/articlesBigfoot – The Conversation2020-12-14T13:19:59Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1505182020-12-14T13:19:59Z2020-12-14T13:19:59ZMermaids aren’t real – but they’ve fascinated people around the world for ages<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373403/original/file-20201207-21-12cp4yd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C8%2C2690%2C1775&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Superstition or wishful thinking could trick you into thinking you saw one of these mythical creatures.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/MermaidParade/0154fe6abe4e4c2cae3ccf829c03c60d/">AP Photo/Eduardo Munoz Alvarez</a></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/curious-kids-us-74795">Curious Kids</a> is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to <a href="mailto:curiouskidsus@theconversation.com">CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Are mermaids real? – Verona, age 9, Owensboro, Kentucky</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Mermaids – underwater creatures that are half fish and half human – do not exist except in people’s imaginations. Scientists who study the ocean for the United States have investigated their possible existence and <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/mermaids.html">say no evidence of mermaids has ever been found</a>. </p>
<p>You might wonder why government scientists looked into this question. There are many stories about mermaids on TV, the internet and in magazines that pretend to be real science news. They try to fool people into believing mermaids are real, without any true evidence. This is called “cryptoscience” or “cryptozoology,” but it’s not real science. Don’t let intriguing stories deceive you about mermaids and other fun but made-up creatures, like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster. </p>
<p>But just because mermaids are not real does not mean they are not meaningful. Mermaids, or merfolk as they are sometimes called because not all of them are female, have a long history and are known all over the world – the same way dragons, fairies and unicorns are.</p>
<h2>More than one kind of mermaid</h2>
<p>Some of the earliest <a href="http://mermaidsofearth.com/on-the-origin-of-mermaids/">mermaid stories are part of ancient Greek mythology</a> from over 3,000 years ago. The Greeks imagined lots of creatures that were part human and part animal, like harpies (bird and human) and centaurs (horse and human). </p>
<p>Sometimes their mermaids were good, like the Greek goddess Atargatis, who protected humans, but others were dangerous, like the Sirens, who sang beautiful songs that made sailors crash their ships into rocks and sink. <a href="https://darkemeraldtales.wordpress.com/2018/04/03/merrow-seducers-of-the-irish-seas/">Irish mermaids, called “merrows</a>,” which date back 1,000 years, were also considered a sign of bad luck. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A bronze statue of a mermaid with two tails. She is holding a tail in each hand." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=697&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=876&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=876&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373414/original/file-20201207-17-13pdqdf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=876&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A two-tailed mermaid from Padua, Italy, made in the first half of the 16th century.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/mermaid-italian-padua-first-half-16th-century-italian-padua-news-photo/1277896003">Sepia Times/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mermaid bodies have been imagined differently in different places. There’s a legendary <a href="http://yokai.com/ningyo/">Japanese mermaid called a “ningyo</a>,” which is mostly a fish, but has a human face. Maybe you’ve seen the <a href="https://movies.disney.com/ponyo">animated film “Ponyo</a>,” about a goldfish with a little girl’s face? In Europe, there were mermaids called <a href="http://symboldictionary.net/?p=1153">“melusines” who had two fish tails</a>. </p>
<p>Stories about mermaids also varied depending on where and when they were told. Only some are about mermaids falling in love and wanting to be human, like Ariel and Ponyo. In the storybook “<a href="https://bookshop.org/books/mermaids-on-mars/9781614486701">Mermaids From Mars</a>,” for instance, mermaids have used up all the water on Mars and come to Earth to help people learn the lesson of water conservation. </p>
<p>In a lot of places, mermaids were used as symbols of power and wealth. For example, the city of Warsaw in Poland has a legend of a <a href="https://doi.org/10.21463/shima.12.2.13">mermaid who is considered to be the protector of the city</a>. There’s a huge statue of her there, and she is even featured on the city’s coat of arms. Many castles in Europe also have mermaid symbols to demonstrate royal power and wealth – <a href="https://www.dieriegersburg.at/geschichte/">even in countries with no oceans, like Austria</a>. </p>
<h2>Why mermaids?</h2>
<p>You may wonder how mermaids came to be. Why did so many people around the world imagine them throughout history? It’s an interesting question that probably has more than one answer.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Period drawing of a Viking wooden ship surrounded by evil looking mermaids." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373421/original/file-20201207-17-x1yjye.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Danish Viking ship under attack by mermaids, circa 1200.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/circa-1200-a-danish-viking-ship-beset-by-mermaids-news-photo/51241447">Photo by Library of Congress/Corbis/VCG via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Superstitious sailors, <a href="https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/10/12/mermaids/">including Christopher Columbus</a> and others, reported seeing mermaids on their travels, but scientists and historians think they probably saw real animals, like manatees or seals.</p>
<p>Throughout time, people have often created stories to help explain all kinds of things they couldn’t understand at the time. Stories also <a href="https://lithub.com/how-mermaid-stories-illustrate-complex-truths-about-being-human/">help people understand their own dreams, desires and fears</a>. </p>
<p>Whatever the reasons, people still clearly love mermaids. You can buy mermaid dolls, coloring books and costumes. You can find them on flags, coins and Starbucks coffee. At some aquariums and water parks, real people perform as mermaids and have to practice holding their breath and keeping their eyes open underwater for a long time. There’s even a brand of <a href="https://www.funslurp.com/mermaid-farts-cotton-candy">cotton candy called “Mermaid Farts,”</a> which is described as “sweet and fluffy!” </p>
<p>Even though mermaids are not really real, they can feed your imagination and creativity. Mermaids are also important because they are a shared idea that has linked people together around the world for a very long time.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to <a href="mailto:curiouskidsus@theconversation.com">CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com</a>. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.</em></p>
<p><em>And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150518/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Goggin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Mermaids are not real, but are meaningful to people around the world.Peter Goggin, Associate Professor of English, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1321582020-03-09T12:22:22Z2020-03-09T12:22:22ZHow technology can combat the rising tide of fake science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318753/original/file-20200304-66112-vybpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=63%2C13%2C1178%2C840&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A crop circle in Switzerland.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CropCircleW.jpg">Jabberocky/Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Science gets a lot of respect these days. Unfortunately, it’s also getting a lot of competition from misinformation. Seven in 10 Americans think the benefits from science outweigh the harms, and nine in 10 think science and technology will create <a href="https://nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/science-and-technology-public-attitudes-and-understanding/highlights">more opportunities for future generations</a>. Scientists have made dramatic progress in understanding the universe and the mechanisms of biology, and advances in computation benefit all fields of science. </p>
<p>On the other hand, Americans are surrounded by a rising tide of misinformation and fake science. Take climate change. Scientists are in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024">almost complete agreement that people are the primary cause of global warming</a>. Yet polls show that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02406-9">a third of the public disagrees</a> with this conclusion.</p>
<p>In my <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=OrRLRQ4AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">30 years of studying and promoting scientific literacy</a>, I’ve found that college educated adults have large holes in their basic science knowledge and they’re disconcertingly <a href="https://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/17315">susceptible to superstition and beliefs that aren’t based on any evidence</a>. One way to counter this is to make it easier for people to detect pseudoscience online. To this end, my lab at the University of Arizona has developed an artificial intelligence-based pseudoscience detector that we plan to freely release as a web browser extension and smart phone app.</p>
<h2>Americans’ predilection for fake science</h2>
<p>Americans are prone to superstition and paranormal beliefs. An annual survey done by sociologists at Chapman University finds that <a href="https://blogs.chapman.edu/wilkinson/2018/10/16/paranormal-america-2018/">more than half believe in spirits and the existence of ancient civilizations</a> like Atlantis, and more than a third think that aliens have visited the Earth in the past or are visiting now. Over 75% hold multiple paranormal beliefs. The survey shows that these numbers have increased in recent years.</p>
<p><iframe id="IbP7D" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/IbP7D/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Widespread belief in astrology is a pet peeve of my colleagues in astronomy. It’s long had a foothold in the popular culture through horoscopes in newspapers and magazines <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/01/the-new-age-of-astrology/550034/">but currently it’s booming</a>. Belief is strong even among the most educated. My surveys of college undergraduates show that three-quarters of them <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2010040">think that astrology is very or “sort of” scientific</a> and only half of science majors recognize it as not at all scientific.</p>
<p>Allan Mazur, a sociologist at Syracuse University, has delved into <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780203788967">the nature of irrational belief systems</a>, their cultural roots, and their political impact. Conspiracy theories are, by definition, resistant to evidence or data that might prove them false. Some are at least amusing. Adherents of the flat Earth theory turn back the clock on two millennia of scientific progress. <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/9/16424622/reddit-conspiracy-theories-memes-irony-flat-earth">Interest in this bizarre idea has surged in the past five years</a>, spurred by social media influencers and the echo chamber nature of web sites like Reddit. As with climate change denial, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47279253">many come to this belief through YouTube videos</a>.</p>
<p>However, the consequences of fake science are no laughing matter. In matters of health and climate change, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190161">misinformation can be a matter of life and death</a>. Over a 90-day period spanning December, January and February, people liked, shared and commented on posts from sites containing <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/article/coronavirus-misinformation-is-increasing-newsguard-finds/">false or misleading information about COVID-19</a> 142 times more than they did information from the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization. </p>
<p>Combating fake science is an urgent priority. In a world that’s increasingly dependent on science and technology, civic society can only function when the electorate is well informed. </p>
<p>Educators must roll up their sleeves and do a better job of teaching critical thinking to young people. However, the problem goes beyond the classroom. The internet is the <a href="https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report">first source of science information</a> for 80% of people ages 18 to 24. </p>
<p>One study found that a majority of a random sample of 200 YouTube videos on climate change <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00036">denied that humans were responsible or claimed that it was a conspiracy</a>. The videos peddling conspiracy theories got the most views. Another study found that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/21/climate-tweets-twitter-bots-analysis">a quarter of all tweets on climate were generated by bots</a> and they preferentially amplified messages from climate change deniers.</p>
<h2>Technology to the rescue?</h2>
<p>The recent success of machine learning and AI in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.00648">detecting fake news</a> points the way to detecting fake science online. The key is <a href="https://www.explainthatstuff.com/introduction-to-neural-networks.html">neural net</a> technology. Neural nets are loosely modeled on the human brain. They consist of many interconnected computer processors that identify meaningful patterns in data like words and images. Neural nets already permeate everyday life, particularly in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.02709">natural language processing</a> systems like Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s language translation capability.</p>
<p>At the University of Arizona, we have trained neural nets on handpicked popular articles about climate change and biological evolution, and the neural nets are 90% successful in distinguishing wheat from chaff. With a quick scan of a site, our neural net can tell if its content is scientifically sound or climate-denial junk. After more refinement and testing we hope to have neural nets that can work across all domains of science. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Neural net technology under development at the University of Arizona will flag science websites with a color code indicating their reliability (left). A smartphone app version will gamify the process of declaring science articles real or fake (right).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Chris Impey</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The goal is a web browser extension that would detect when the user is looking at science content and deduce whether or not it’s real or fake. If it’s misinformation, the tool will suggest a reliable web site on that topic. My colleagues and I also plan to gamify the interface with a smart phone app that will let people compete with their friends and relatives to detect fake science. Data from the best of these participants will be used to help train the neural net.</p>
<p>Sniffing out fake science should be easier than sniffing out fake news in general, because subjective opinion plays a minimal role in legitimate science, which is characterized by evidence, logic and verification. Experts can readily distinguish legitimate science from conspiracy theories and arguments motivated by ideology, which means machine learning systems can be trained to, as well. </p>
<p>“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” These words of <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2010/11/moynihan-letters-201011">Daniel Patrick Moynihan</a>, advisor to four presidents, could be the mantra for those trying to keep science from being drowned by misinformation.</p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/132158/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Impey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The internet has allowed pseudoscience to flourish. Artificial intelligence could help steer people away from the bad information.Chris Impey, University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy, University of ArizonaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/519472016-01-04T15:44:52Z2016-01-04T15:44:52ZFrom bosons to Bigfoot: six science mysteries that might be solved in 2016<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106820/original/image-20151221-27884-fglf2k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The ALICE detector at the Large Hadron Collider may help unravel some of nature's grestest mysteries.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/search/?l=commderiv&q=large%20hadron%20collider">John Vogel/wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>From the origin of life to the fate of the universe, there’s plenty scientists simply don’t know. But they are making progress. 2015 has been a great year for science: we’ve seen the agreement of climate deal, pictures of dwarf planets and evidence of flowing water on Mars. </p>
<p>So what will happen in 2016 – are there any major science mysteries that could be solved? We asked three experts to speculate.</p>
<h2>1. What’s beyond the ‘standard model’ of physics?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106821/original/image-20151221-27863-1roq594.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Will 2016 be the year the LHC revolutionised physics?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/11304375@N07/2046228644/in/photolist-47Psud-5m4QNL-4qZaVM-4roqPb-fZeRQ5-815XEw-812Vo6-812NhM-815Xib-5knZjk-815XQ1-815Xy7-815WVo-815WNo-812PAF-812P3F-A7Tuj-5s3JdT-815XqQ-815Y8E-812MD6-812Ptt-4ropM1-4rjnLp-815YfS-815X3C-815WGC-cQ9nbA-7sR4E3-4roK7u-79uqpn-7tENNr-7QhFHE-7Qem36-cEACZC-4riNjp-7QekVP-4roEYY-4rjL3n-4rnY69-7SLbxE-4rou9f-4roj81-7SGUrP-4rjHuR-7SLc4j-4rjyS2-4rokpE-cTtNYq-4roM77">Image editor/FLickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Large Hadron Collider has already ticked one thing off the list with the <a href="https://theconversation.com/could-the-higgs-nobel-be-the-end-of-particle-physics-18978">discovery of the Higgs Boson</a> in 2012. In 2015, the LHC began Run 2 after a couple of years of upgrades, now smashing protons together at almost double the previous energy. This month, the first experiments revealed a <a href="https://theconversation.com/large-hadron-collider-sees-tantalising-hints-of-a-new-particle-that-could-revolutionise-physics-52457">hint of a new particle</a>. </p>
<p>This could be the sign of “super symmetry”, a theory which proposes that there is a heavier super-partner for every particle in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-standard-model-of-particle-physics-2539">Standard Model</a> (our current best theory of the subatomic world). Super symmetry is important as it could explain many fundamental mysteries of physics, such as what “<a href="https://theconversation.com/from-machos-to-wimps-meet-the-top-five-candidates-for-dark-matter-51516">dark matter</a>” is or the way that the laws of physics appear fine tuned to produce the world around us. However, the new particle could also be a sign of hidden dimensions, a second Higgs boson or – before we get too excited – a false alarm. We will have to wait for more data in 2016 to know for sure.</p>
<h2>2. Can we create more elements?</h2>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106883/original/image-20151222-27858-14fev81.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A calcium ion and an americium atom about to collide.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununpentium#/media/File:DOE-2013194-SIMULATION_OF_AN_ACCELERATED_CALCIUM-43_ION_AND_AN_AMERICIUM-243_TARGET_ATOM_JUST_BEFORE_THEY_COLLIDE.jpg">Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Since the 1930s, scientists have been creating artificial elements by smashing particles together to create new atoms. We now know about 24 synthetic elements taking the periodic table up to the as-yet unnamed <a href="http://journals.aps.org/prc/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevC.74.044602">element 118</a>. With the recent <a href="http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.172501">synthesis of element 117</a> and the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/04/periodic-tables-seventh-row-finally-filled-as-four-new-elements-are-added">official recognition</a> of the four most recently discovered elements, the remaining gaps in the known periodic table have now been filled. </p>
<p>Scientists are continuing their attempts to extend the table further, trying to make <a href="http://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.79.024603">elements 120 and above</a>, though suggestions that element 122 has been discovered <a href="http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2008/May/02050802.asp">seem misplaced</a>. Most recent advances have used the neutron-rich isotope Calcium-48 as a “nuclear bullet” fired into another heavy nucleus to create the new element. <a href="http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1209/1209.0498.pdf">Further successes</a> may involve either using an even heavier atom as the bullet rather than a heavier target atom, though it may also depend on the availability of better nuclear accelerators. It is hoped that – unlike most synthetic elements, which decay rapidly – a group of new heavier elements may exist in an <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/superheavy-element-117-island-of-stability/">“island of stability”</a>.</p>
<h2>3. What is ‘dark matter’?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106823/original/image-20151221-27897-1idmdmp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">LUX detector: 4,850 ft underground inside a 70,000 gallon water tank shield.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Gigaparsec at English Wikipedia</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-search-for-dark-matter-and-dark-energy-just-got-interesting-46422">Dark matter</a> is the mysterious stuff that seems to be everywhere in the universe, and is five times more plentiful than the regular matter that makes up stars, planets and us. Even so, up to now we only have indirect evidence for dark matter through astronomical observations of the gravitational pull it has on stars and galaxies. Until we can make a more direct measurement of it, we won’t know for sure what it is and how it fits in with the standard model of particle physics. </p>
<p>Dedicated experiments such as the Large Underground Xenon experiment (<a href="http://luxdarkmatter.org/">LUX</a>) are reaching new levels of precision as they are trying to directly detect a <a href="https://theconversation.com/from-machos-to-wimps-meet-the-top-five-candidates-for-dark-matter-51516">dark matter candidate</a> known as the “weakly interacting massive particle” as it interacts with ordinary matter on Earth. So 2016 could be the year we finally see this mysterious stuff in the lab.</p>
<h2>4. Is there life on Mars (or any other planet)?</h2>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106884/original/image-20151222-27851-1am8h7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Will Enceladus prove home to life?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On Earth, wherever we find water – whether in the middle of a desert or in hydrothermal vents in the depths of the ocean – we find life. So, it follows that water on another planet means the potential for life there as well. Recent explorations of Mars have dramatically developed our understanding of the planet, showing that it had a <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-mostly-dry-planetary-neighbors-once-had-lots-of-water-what-does-that-imply-for-us-43817">watery past</a> and, more recently, that it has <a href="https://theconversation.com/nasa-streaks-of-salt-on-mars-mean-flowing-water-and-raise-new-hopes-of-finding-life-48182">flowing salty water</a>.</p>
<p>Alongside the continuing study of Mars, the <a href="https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu">Juno probe</a> will, in 2016, study how much water there is on Jupiter. Another of our best bets for finding life may be Enceladus (a moon of Saturn). It has an icy crust but was recently found to have geysers spouting <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34963515">water vapour</a>, making it one of the more likely places in the solar system (outside Earth) to contain life. </p>
<h2>5. Do gravitational waves exist?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106822/original/image-20151221-27887-1pxqzr4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Northern leg of LIGO interferometer.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Northern_leg_of_LIGO_interferometer_on_Hanford_Reservation.JPG">wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Just as Maxwell’s equations of electricity and magnetism predicted the existence of electromagnetic waves such as light, Einstein’s theory of general relativity predicts gravitational waves – which are ripples in the fabric of space-time. But even though Einstein’s theory celebrated its centenary in 2015, we have still <a href="https://theconversation.com/rippling-space-time-how-to-catch-einsteins-gravitational-waves-7058">never seen them</a>. This is mainly because they are so tiny: the <a href="https://ligo.caltech.edu/">Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO)</a> looks for these waves causing shifts 10,000 times smaller than a proton (which makes up the atomic nucleus together with neutrons) over a distance of four kilometres. </p>
<p>Like the LHC, the LIGO detector came back online in 2015 after a major upgrade, and within a week <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/has-giant-ligo-experiment-seen-gravitational-waves-1.18449">rumours were flying</a> about a discovery. No official word yet from LIGO themselves, but 2016 could be the year we find Einstein was right again. </p>
<h2>6. Is Bigfoot real?</h2>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106977/original/image-20151223-27880-yfb05k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Amur leopard.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/79923291@N00/8179980420/in/photolist-dsQxcb-dsQniM-pnnKrV-q1kSBs-q1yxWL-o6rMA6-7GKsjA-j4J5LT-fDgUTm-j1nsfd-i1kYJU-rojqLJ-rqATvv-hYSw8Y-4TRaQK-vFBpbS-bR4jhK-j2MgM7-gAuVYe-4iuCYG-i1Zo71-7aEQ4n-4KohVy-rCseU8-4it95T-4FjYuR-2MKYHC-4GXD85-6xB7Db-7HzFS8-i3MyeL-jdKc2x-dUkrK1-i2e3jN-4663Y2-3oD72Q-2JTihg-p2o7Yf-aHfCnc-dsQnpM-bF6QhG-pnn1uW-dsQxh3-dsQnna-q1XM91-7fvgBw-fey9n-9hPqyB-d3aozJ-aHfCft">John/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Advances in technology mean it is now possible to more carefully seek out rumoured or never-before-discovered animals. Trail cameras or camera “traps” are small cameras that are remotely triggered when an infrared beam is broken and can be left at a site for long periods of time without human involvement. They are increasingly being used in wildlife studies to monitor rare or elusive animals such as the Amur leopard (<em>Panthera pardus orientalis</em>) that was documented in China for the first time <a href="http://e360.yale.edu/feature/camera_traps_emerge_as_key_tool_in_wildlife_research/2469/">in 62 years</a>.</p>
<p>UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) or “drones” are also increasingly being used in wildlife studies to survey inaccessible areas from the sky. For example a Canadian study found that bears are now taking advantage of food sources such as geese and their eggs, possibly as a result of a <a href="http://en.ruvsa.com/news/strategy_policy/Canadian+Wildlife+Study/">changing Arctic climate</a>. These UAVs could be flown above a likely habitat of Bigfoot (or any suspected animal) in the hope that we would capture something on camera.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51947/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gavin Hesketh receives funding from The Royal Society and STFC</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Louise Gentle works for Nottingham Trent University. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Cotton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Our panel of experts speculate on which of science’s biggest questions could be answered in the coming months.Gavin Hesketh, Royal Society University Research Fellow and Lecturer in Particle Physics, UCLLouise Gentle, Senior Lecturer in Behavioural Ecology, Nottingham Trent UniversitySimon Cotton, Senior Lecturer in Chemistry, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/123322013-02-26T03:12:49Z2013-02-26T03:12:49ZCryptozoology? No need for an apology<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20624/original/pv49y98r-1361840283.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C283%2C1024%2C691&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Claims of mysterious creature sightings dominate cryptozoology – but where is the evidence?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Chi-Yun</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>All forms of science are reliant on facts, hard evidence and statistics to maintain relevance and credibility. But what of the legitimacy of the so-called “pseudosciences”?</p>
<p>A warning: I’m going to pick on <a href="http://animal.discovery.com/cryptozoology/">cryptozoology</a> here – the study of hidden, extinct or mythical creatures.</p>
<p>Creatures dear to the cryptozoologist’s heart include: the kraken, ogopogo, Nessie, the chupacabra, yowies, mermaids, orang pendek, and the coolest of them all, the <a href="http://www.virtuescience.com/mongolian-death-worm.html">Mongolian Death Worm</a>. If you’re interested in these and others, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptids">Wikipedia</a> will keep you busy for hours.</p>
<p>Despite the (lack of) plausibility, one of the main criticisms levelled at scientists is that we won’t investigate cryptozoologists’ claims. As Australian cryptozoologist <a href="http://www.mysteriousaustralia.com/">Rex Gilroy</a> said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Go and search for the evidence rather than be critical. I have struck a lot academic criticism over the years by people who stick to a textbook and who are glued to their office desk.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Why not go and search? </p>
<p>I can already hear the dull chanting of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRaXvPQ-ayk">Carl Sagan’s</a> “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. But this is <em>not</em> why we don’t investigate strange ideas.</p>
<h2>To publish or not to publish</h2>
<p>Scientists consider strange ideas all the time. Indeed, we make up most of them. If we lived by Sagan’s mantra, scientific inquiry would never happen.</p>
<p>The reason research is not done on extraordinary claims is quite simple: “<a href="https://theconversation.com/please-reject-me-a-survivors-guide-to-publish-or-perish-1278">publish or perish</a>”.</p>
<p>Let me explain.</p>
<p>If you want to be a professional scientist, you need to do science. This means formulating questions to answer, doing the research, and then, publishing the work.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20599/original/f9wfdb3d-1361795499.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Why do researchers publish their work?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alma Swan</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As you can imagine, doing research costs money. This means going on bended knee to those holding the purse strings. They evaluate your project and your ability - that is, your published research - to carry out the project.</p>
<p>It is basically a catch-22 situation. Without a good publishing history, you will likely not get funded. But you can’t do much research without the funding. And around we go.</p>
<p>Hence the phrase, publish or perish.</p>
<p>You would think then that making a big discovery would be great for a scientific career. It absolutely is!</p>
<p>No scientist, ever, would turn down discovering a new species, especially something such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-bigger-the-bigfoot-claim-the-bigger-the-need-for-evidence-12245">Bigfoot</a>. It would be an instant publication in a major journal, and research funding would flow like the Amazon River.</p>
<p>As such, scientists are not shying away from strange claims because they don’t want to make discoveries. They shy away because of the plausibility and probability of making the discovery.</p>
<p>Let’s take Bigfoot as an example.</p>
<p>Bigfoot, a 500-kilo bipedal primate standing 3.0 metres, is biologically possible. Other than the bipedal locomotion, a primate from South-eastern Asia, <a href="http://www.prehistoric-wildlife.com/species/g/gigantopithecus.html">gigantopithecus</a>, would have fit the bill - if it hadn’t gone extinct 100,000 years ago.</p>
<p>But given <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-biogeography-10696">biogeography</a> and population biology, such a species is not plausible.</p>
<p>Bigfoot’s biggest bunions are his biggest supporters, the Bigfoot hunters. Sightings of the creature have come from all over North America.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20598/original/3vc3tfc9-1361794207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=574&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bigfoot sightings in Northern America – seems like you can’t go outside without running into him.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mangani's Bigfoot Maps</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet any species with a huge distribution would consist of a large number of individuals, and therefore, we would have plenty of physical evidence.</p>
<p>Proponents justify this lack of evidence by claiming Bigfoot is low in numbers, and they bury their dead, and …</p>
<p>Whoa Nelly! You’re telling me in a country where there are <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/shooting-gun-laws-2012-12">88 guns for every 100 people</a> no one has shot and recovered the body. </p>
<p>Until 2009, there were no sightings of pygmy hippos in all of Australia, nevertheless a <a href="http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/11/16/101241_ntnews.html">NT hunter managed to shoot one</a>.</p>
<p>You can’t have it both ways. The Bigfoot population cannot stretch across North America enabling sightings every other Tuesday, <em>and</em> be in such low numbers that solid evidence never materialises.</p>
<p>In Bigfoot’s case, scientists don’t look because he is simply not plausible.</p>
<h2>Dealing with claims</h2>
<p>Not all claims are in this canoe though. If tomorrow’s newspaper headline was: “Panther found in Australia”, I wouldn’t be surprised.</p>
<p>Wildlife trafficking is one of the three largest crimes in the world and <a href="http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/man-arrested-with-endangered-baby-animals-in-suitcase">large cats are certainly on the price list</a>. If you do a search of “exotic” animals in Australia, you quickly realise Australia is not <a href="http://www.feral.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Incursions_2011.pdf">immune from the industry</a>.</p>
<p>Regardless of whether animals are being kept legally or illegally, escapes can and do happen. In 2008, a 1.5 metre <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/conservation/alligator-long-way-from-home/2008/12/30/1230399192287.html">alligator was found in Pambula</a>, on the south coast of New South Wales.</p>
<p>Though a big cat living in Australia is as plausible as a hippo or alligator, to commit research time and funding to finding it is too much of a gamble.</p>
<p>If one could be found, great! But what if nothing is found? Years could pass without finding a thing – and that translates to not publishing a thing.</p>
<p>And for a scientist, that’s game over.</p>
<p>Cryptozoologists shouldn’t be too concerned. Scientists are doing research all over Australia: if strange critters are out there, they will be <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/7366530/Frog-thought-to-have-been-extinct-for-30-years-discovered-in-Australia.html">detected incidentally</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_pFSFgPWnjE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The ‘rediscovered’ yellow-spotted bell frog in NSW.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At the end of the day, it’s encouraging that passionate, amateur zoologists are out looking for animals. I, for one, would rather they look for Bigfoot than sit at home watching Big Brother. And if they find solid evidence, a scientist will always be keen to have a look.</p>
<p>When it comes to scientists conducting research, it boils down to a simple calculation that everyone recognises:</p>
<p><em>What do we spend our finite resources on?</em></p>
<p>Odd animals may exist, but there are certainly many that need our attention now. And in the meantime, let’s see what else we come across. </p>
<p><strong>Further reading:</strong> <br><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-bigger-the-bigfoot-claim-the-bigger-the-need-for-evidence-12245">The bigger the Bigfoot claim, the bigger the need for evidence</a></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12332/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dustin Welbourne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>All forms of science are reliant on facts, hard evidence and statistics to maintain relevance and credibility. But what of the legitimacy of the so-called “pseudosciences”? A warning: I’m going to pick…Dustin Welbourne, PhD Candidate in Biogeography + Science Communicator, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/122452013-02-20T03:02:09Z2013-02-20T03:02:09ZThe bigger the Bigfoot claim, the bigger the need for evidence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20436/original/pg7brn4n-1361319785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">New claims for the existence of Bigfoot appear to have been greatly exaggerated.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">JD Hancock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Forget blurry pictures and casts of big foot-prints. A Texas veterinarian, Dr Melba Ketchum, and her collaborators have published an article, <a href="http://www.denovojournal.com/#!special-issue/crrc">in a peer-reviewed scientific journal</a>, <em>proving</em> the existence of Bigfoot.</p>
<p>It’s not the first peer-reviewed Bigfoot DNA paper. In 2004 an international team of geneticists, led by Michel Milinkovitch, <a href="http://www.lanevol.org/LANE/yeti_files/yeti_1st_April_MPE_2004.pdf">published an analysis</a> of “clearly identified … [yeti] hair”. They concluded the yeti, though genetically closer to ungulates, looks remarkably similar to primates.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=971&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=971&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20395/original/4h55ktgv-1361248855.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=971&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The yeti exhibits an amazing piece of convergent evolution.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Milinkovitch et al.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A similar tongue-in-cheek paper, authored by Dave Coltman and Corey Davis from the University of Alberta, <a href="http://bigfootforums.com/uploads/post-212-0-35172400-1329429980.ipb">was published in a 2006 issue of TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution</a>. And similar to the Milinkovitch paper the identification of the sample was not in question:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In July 2005, nine residents of Teslin, Yukon, witnessed through a kitchen window a large bipedal animal moving through the brush. The next morning, they collected a tuft of coarse, dark hair and also observed a footprint measuring 43 cm in length and 11.5 cm in width.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Coltman and Davis concluded that though Bigfoot, from eyewitness accounts, looked like <a href="http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTg0ODUzNDEyMF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjg4Mjk0MQ@@._V1_SY317_CR4,0,214,317_.jpg">Harry Henderson</a>, genetically it was more closely related to bison. Of course, there is another explanation – the eyewitness account could have been wrong.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=706&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=706&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20396/original/gn46874z-1361249387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=706&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The yeti might be closely related to a horse, but Bigfoot is more closely related to bison – go figure.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Trends in Ecology & Evolution</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The problem with Ketchum’s paper? It’s not tongue-in-cheek. The authors are claiming to have sequenced not one <a href="http://www.dnadiagnostics.com/press.html">but three Bigfoot genomes</a>, concluding Bigfoot is a human hybrid. They even include HD footage of a sleeping Bigfoot (see below):</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/khHSX3ZYaKI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Sleeping Beauty … or sleeping Bigfoot?</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As you might guess, I’m not convinced. Why?</p>
<p>With such a claim having gone through the peer-review process you would expect the paper to appear in Science or Nature.</p>
<p>When the remains of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saola">saola</a>, a large deer looking mammal, were discovered in the early 1990s it resulted in a paper in <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v363/n6428/abs/363443a0.html">Nature</a>. Similarly, when an African monkey (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipunji">kapunji</a>) representing the first new genus of primate to be discovered since 1923 was discovered in 2003, an article in <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/308/5725/1161">Science</a> was the result.</p>
<p>So where was Ketchum’s paper published? <a href="http://www.denovojournal.com/">“Denovo – Accelerating Science”</a>. You shouldn’t be ashamed if you haven’t heard of it; after all, it was only registered in early <a href="https://who.godaddy.com/whois.aspx?k=fKkxVX5oZjd0rhAH1xf5B/RAvIxuiBvmYx8OP/4+cE1hWmZAu8IGhJlmjYiioFfqFIctPRBmbAM=&domain=denovojournal.com&prog_id=GoDaddy">February 2013</a>, to none other than … Dr Melba Ketchum.</p>
<p>I guess there is nothing inherently wrong with someone publishing in a journal they own. Ketchum claims that she had to go down this route because of scientific bias. On her <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Dr-Melba-Ketchum/359075637446173?fref=ts">Facebook page Ketchum states</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Trying to publish has taken almost two years. It seems mainstream science just can’t seem to tolerate something controversial, especially from a group of primarily forensic scientists and not “famous academians” aligned with large universities … So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open-minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Science is done by humans, so obviously there is an element of politics and ego in the science world, but as Dr. Lee Smolin articulated so well in the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYeN66CSQhg">2011 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Science isn’t about what is true or what might be true, science is about what people with originally diverse viewpoints can be forced to believe by the weight of public evidence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And there is the problem in all this – the <a href="http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2013/02/what-do-geneticists-think-of-the-bigfoot-paper/">evidence does not look good</a>.</p>
<p>Still, every cloud, silver lining, and all that.</p>
<p>I recently read <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/10/30/3620927.htm">Paul Willis’ article defending pseudoscience</a> and couldn’t help but agree. I have always been interested in pseudoscience.</p>
<p>As a kid, I would consume books on unexplained mysteries. It didn’t matter what was in them. Bigfoot, aliens, ghosts, spontaneous human combustion – these were just mysteries waiting to be solved. </p>
<p>And this wasn’t to the exclusion of “real” science. “Unexplained mysteries” sat next to other books on space travel and dinosaurs. I even had a pictorial magazine on the female human anatomy (secretly stashed under my bed).</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/20440/original/zcxfcz3g-1361321204.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Infidelic</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But as a communicator and scientist, my interest in paranormal phenomena has changed. When I hear extraordinary stories now, rather than scoff or attempt to debunk them, they are invitations to start talking about science.</p>
<p>It’s like the Bat-Signal for me.</p>
<p>If you start talking to me about <a href="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsioo8V2sY1r05n56o1_500.gif">mermaids</a>, I will tell you a story about whale and seal evolution. You have a claim about strange things in the sky; I have a story on high-altitude jet streams. </p>
<p>Communicators and scientists shouldn’t shun those making incredible claims. For the most part, if someone is claiming to have seen some weird creature, it is because they have experienced something and are just curious. Curiosity is intellectual capital, so use it.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, some people making claims of the extraordinary are deliberately being flexible with the truth.</p>
<p>With the latest Bigfoot paper, I have no idea what the motivation was. But we do have a great example to show the public how not to publish supposedly paradigm-shattering science.</p>
<p>The old adage is as pertinent as ever: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12245/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dustin Welbourne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Forget blurry pictures and casts of big foot-prints. A Texas veterinarian, Dr Melba Ketchum, and her collaborators have published an article, in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, proving the existence…Dustin Welbourne, PhD Candidate in Biogeography + Science Communicator, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/37382011-10-07T00:21:18Z2011-10-07T00:21:18ZMedia puts its Bigfoot in it Yeti again: it’s abominable<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/4190/original/4365312135_15a6e8fcef_o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C57%2C811%2C681&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">When you hear the words "international team of scientists" run for the hills.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Itsy Bitsy Spider</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>What ever happened to quality science reporting in the mainstream media? Why do so many journalists seem to simply accept press releases as fact? Are qualifications no longer relevant when it comes to journalistic scrutiny of science? Perhaps there’s no longer any scrutiny? Let’s be clear: there is NO Yeti! </p>
<p>The people claiming there <em>is</em> such a creature have no idea about science or the evidence that would be needed to convince scientists that a Yeti, or Bigfoot, or Yowie, or what ever you call it, exists!</p>
<p>This week I learned from Sydney’s <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/on-a-hunt-for-the-yeti-international-team-of-scientists-looking-for-yeti-sightings/story-e6freuy9-1226158384023">Daily Telegraph</a>, the ABC, the UK’s <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2044813/Yeti-hunt-Russian-American-scientists-pool-Cold-War-evidence.html">Mail and Telegraph newspapers</a> and the <a href="http://http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/05/siberian-snowman_n_994268.html#s271066">Huffington Post</a> (no less) that a Russian scientist is to be supported in his Bigfoot-hunting efforts by an international team specialising in human evolution. </p>
<p>I checked my calendar to see if it was April 1, and not October 6, as I had (mistakenly) thought. No, October. This story must be real. Not again, I thought.</p>
<p>The 82-year-old Russian heading the project, <a href="http://hominology.narod.ru/eng.htm">Igor Burstev</a> – apparently “Dr” Burstev – has convinced himself, local authorities, and apparently plenty of journalists, that the Yeti is real. Burstev even claims the Yeti is a relic population of <a href="http://www.ecotao.com/holism/hu_neand.htm">Neandertals</a>. </p>
<p>And a number of sometimes quite respectable news outlets have been sucked in with this nonsense.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4188/original/1456974409_a46f3f5848_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tesium</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Who are these “international scientists” who are going to find the Yeti? We have been given no names, nor credentials, nor institutions they belong to. I suspect, like so many of the so-called <a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/clearing-up-the-climate-debate">climate-change deniers</a>, they are frauds.</p>
<h2>Why the long feet?</h2>
<p>Is there a chance the Yeti might exist? Yes, there’s a chance, just as with so many phenomena we scientists think about. It’s possible. From time to time, a new species of mammal, even primate, is described in some remote area largely unexplored by scientists.</p>
<p>But based on the evidence presented in favour of its existence, the Yeti looks like a very poor hoax to me. Why are there no proper photographs of this creature? Oh, of course – the people who have seen it were too scared to look away and pick up their cameras in case the Yeti disappeared from view. </p>
<p>All of the claimed photographs or video footage I have seen are completely bogus. I could do a better job myself with a gorilla costume from a party shop, a good camera, and photo-editing software.</p>
<figure><div style="text-align:center;">
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FWGYTHK3E30?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The infamous Patterson-Gimlin “Bigfoot” footage from 1967.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
</div></figure>
<p>Why do they always have ridiculously large footprints that look like some off-course camel train passed through snow-swept Siberia? </p>
<p>A few facts: the Neandertals, our closet evolutionary relative, with whom we shared <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/12/101222-new-human-species-dna-nature-science-evolution-fossil-finger/">an ancestor</a> 400-500,000 years ago, went extinct 25-30,000 years ago. </p>
<p>They had a body mass of around 75 kilograms (on average) and stood about 162 centimetres tall (on average). We can estimate these things with good accuracy from their bones.</p>
<p>I’m about 75 kilograms, but a lot taller than 162 centimetres. Yet my foot is size eight, about average for an Australian male.</p>
<p>Why the big foot? Lack of imagination by the hoaxers, I suppose. Or lack of knowledge of human anatomy and the human fossil record, more likely. </p>
<p>Oh, and guys, they had five toes like we do, not four, as seems mostly to be the case in your fake photos. Try referring to a good anatomy textbook for starters.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/4189/original/5258576295_9b5217b676_b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Frocoli</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Interbreeding </h2>
<p>When our ancestors left Africa, 60-70,000 years ago, they happily interbred with the Neandertals. In fact, all of us alive today whose ancestry is Asian, Aboriginal Australian, European, Pacific Islander or Native American, share DNA with them. Up to 6% of our DNA is in fact the result of our ancestors having <a href="http://theconversation.com/sex-with-our-evolutionary-cousins-whats-not-to-love-3465">shagged them</a>!</p>
<p>Far from being bushy-haired, large-toothed, stoop-shouldered, and rather large-footed like the Yeti, Neandertals looked an awful lot like us. Probably not very hairy; certainly with small canine teeth; and hell, they even had nice posture – not like some creature that has spent his working life hunched over a computer writing about hare-brained nonsense like the existence of mythical beings living today in Siberia …</p>
<p>So I ask, where’s the evidence for living Neandertals? If anyone has it, we’d really love to see it. Forget those broken bits of fossil bones and teeth we anthropologists have to work with to study our evolution. We could do real biology! With living creatures! </p>
<p>No-one should be excused from the normal rigorous processes such as <a href="http://theconversation.com/whos-your-expert-the-difference-between-peer-review-and-rhetoric-1550">peer review</a> scientists have to go through to get their research accepted. </p>
<p>Anyway, forget the hassles of convincing the real experts, go straight to the media – they’ll believe you!</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/3738/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Darren Curnoe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>What ever happened to quality science reporting in the mainstream media? Why do so many journalists seem to simply accept press releases as fact? Are qualifications no longer relevant when it comes to…Darren Curnoe, Human evolution specialist, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.