Sykes’ Yeti DNA Study Paper Released

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on July 2nd, 2014

Last night at 7 PM Eastern, Dr. Bryan Sykes’ Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Yeti/Almasty Hair DNA paper was released from embargo.

It immediately starting receiving mainstream media coverage:

Bigfoot and Sasquatch hairs no match for DNA analysis – Toronto Sun

Since rejecting a claim without examining the evidence is unscientific, said geneticist Bryan Sykes of Oxford University, he and colleagues decided to investigate. “I don’t think cryptozoology has been served particularly well by the scientific community,” Sykes said.

He teamed with Oxford University and the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne, Switzerland, to solicit hair samples “attributed to one of these creatures by the donor,” he said.

Was It a Yeti? Bigfoot? Hair DNA Reveals Monsters’ True Identity – NBC News

DNA readings from dozens of hair samples linked to sightings of Bigfoot, Yeti and other legendary monsters show that the hairs came instead from run-of-the-mill animals such as bears and cows — but the researcher behind the project says Bigfoot hunters needn’t give up hope just yet.

“I don’t think this finishes the Bigfoot myth at all,” Oxford geneticist Bryan Sykes told NBC News. “What it does do is show that there is a way for Bigfoot enthusiasts to go back out into the forest and get the real thing.”

‘Bigfoot’ Samples Actually From Bears, Wolves And Furry Creatures – Huffington Post

“I thought there was about a 5 percent chance of finding a sample from a Neanderthal or (a Yeti),” said Bryan Sykes of Oxford University, who led the research, the first peer-reviewed study of Bigfoot, Yeti and other “anomalous primates.” The study was published online Wednesday in the journal, Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Sykes and colleagues tested 36 hair samples from Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Russia and the U.S. using DNA sequencing and all of them matched DNA from known animals. Most were from bears, but there were also hairs from a Malaysian tapir, horses, porcupine, deer, sheep, and a human.

While Sykes said they didn’t find any proof of Bigfoot-related creatures, he acknowledged their paper doesn’t prove they don’t exist.

Bigfoot claims stepped on by new hair analysis – USA Today

The shy and secretive creature known as Bigfoot has eluded us once more. DNA tests of 30 hair samples attributed to Bigfoot, yetis and other storied beings showed the hair actually came from bears, horses, even a porcupine – but not from any ape-like animals new to science.

The most startling revelation came instead from a pair of supposed yeti samples collected in the Himalayas. The DNA in both hairs matched genetic material from a polar bear bone discovered in 2004 in the high Arctic as part of a separate effort. The bone was dated to more than 100,000 years ago. Perhaps, say the scientists behind the new study, one form of the “yeti” is actually a new species of bear, or an unknown mixture of polar bear and brown bear. Either way, the researchers say they found no trace of a new primate.

“I cannot say that the sasquatch or related animal does not exist,” says study co-author Michel Sartori, an entomologist at the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne, Switzerland. “But at the moment I have no evidence of the existence of these creatures.”

Purchase Short-Term Access to the paper here. $29.95 for 30 days.


Sykes’ book, The Yeti Enigma: A DNA Dectective Story, is available for pre-order on

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

8 Responses to “Sykes’ Yeti DNA Study Paper Released”

  1. dconstrukt responds:

    awesome read.

    think it gives field researchers hope…. they can send in samples and see for real what they really are…. without any doubts or anything.

    everyone involved is important… from the people out in the field… to the person doing the tests in the lab.

    i’m hopeful if this process continues, we’ll find some additional answers…. would love to know WTF is in that PG film… something i’ve wondered since I was a kid.

  2. jayman responds:

    Most, if not all of these hair samples could simply have been compared to a database of known mammal hairs based on microscopy. Bear, wolf, cow, deer, etc. are all distinct from primate hair. Why spend thousands of dollars a sample to run a DNA test when you know the answer?

  3. ozestrange responds:

    Cricket sounds ?
    Come on..this is another nail..that coffin has virtually no wood left from nails..but the gang just remain silent…
    I know..the stock answer “sasquatch and yeti are really good at hiding”.. 🙂
    Yet blurry trash video attracts comments here..and this study..nothing.
    The majority of believers have no interest in science..and zero ethics obviously.
    Where are all the “gee..thats a really amazing result..I might have to re-evaluate my ideas”.
    Put your head in the sand and blather on about Ketchum..or something else ridiculous.
    Beyond usual..

  4. cryptokellie responds:

    No surprise here.

  5. Goodfoot responds:

    Not a chance will I purchase this paper. If Science wants a captured or dead Bigfoot for their lazy-ass “proof”, let them go pound sand.

    They’re despicable reactionaries, and not scientists. What good are they to the science of Bigfoot? “Bring us a dead specimen of an Altai warrior, and we’ll take twenty years deciding if he’s real or not.”

    That’s not science; it’s MUGWUMPERY.

    “Do our job for us, and get back to us in thirty years.”

  6. Old Philosopher responds:

    Besides proving that none of the 36 samples came from an unknown primate, the study proved one other thing.
    Researchers, and casual field collectors should be more familiar with the natural history and fauna in their areas. A tuft of hair is not all that suspicious. But a few strands of hair, 7″-10″ long found 6′-10′ up on a tree could be worth collecting. Bears leave hair on trees they’ve climbed all the time. But the belly hair of a bear is not all that long, for instance.

  7. dconstrukt responds:

    IMO a lot of this stuff comes down to BIAS… and understanding how the mind works.

    when you go out looking for bigfoots… you have bias.

    when you hear or see something you can’t make out or understand, your bias in this situation leads you to say… (drumroll please…) IT’S A BIGFOOT!

    This is the way the mind works.

    Not saying bigfoots are real or not. (personally, I still wanna know WTF is in that PG film, and what is making all those footprints).

    I think its a great study… proves how off base many of the samples were… and maybe forces people to re-evaluate their methods and thinking.

  8. Dufusyte responds:

    Wasn’t Oxford the same place that carbon dated the Shroud of Turin as medieval? The Brits are up to something, but using science to reveal truth is not it. Not sure why they want to discredit the anomalous. They want the common folk to believe the boring Lie, while the illuminated few have stuffed Sasquatches hanging on their clandestine walls.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.