Olivier Decobert, French cryptozoologist

Thank you Michael, i read it but i don't know what to think about Shipton's print. I read once an article (Sunday Times Magazine, December 1989) which described Shipton as a joker. Maybe it was a fake. Remember that there is only one photo showing one print ... Why didn't Shipton take other closed pictures ?

My best regards.


Michael Trachtengerts:


two more pictures with this track are known and available in the Web. One of them shows the same place with a boot of the climber instead of the ice-axe. It does not give additional information, except for confidence, that Shipton and Ward were simultaneously at the track. A leg with the boot was in such position, that the same person could not get the snapshot which we see.

If the trace is forged, it is a result of a plot by the two. Whether it is possible to say about Ward, that he is a joker too?

The second snapshot was received from higher point (or the first was cropped from it) and in addition to the known track shows a part of the previous one.

I attached it in image Sh_yeti1.jpg.

Though this track in the bottom right corner is cut off by border of the image and only partly have shown, it is clear, that its dark part represents a track of an other leg of the same heavy hominoid, who made the next full track. And this one was also overlapped by track of the smaller hominoid that followed the big one behind. It crushed the forward part of the bottom track.

The top track on this print is not lay within the contour of the bottom one as on the next one, and is moved far forward. Details of this pair of traces are shown unclear, so I omitted it from my article. I marked the indistinct contours by a dashed line. The general contour of the left leg of the smaller hominoid as a whole corresponds with the right one though some differences are visible.

Lines of the bottom track may be vaguely guessed under it, and I have marked the possible contour by a dashed line too. (image Sh_yeti2.jpg).

Please note small distance between two pairs of these tracks instead of 75 cm said by Shipton. It is possible to suppose that hominoids moved here very cautiously as in dangerous place. But it is impossible to conclude anything from the photo.

My opinion remains unchanged. There are no real reasons to suspect Shipton and Ward in making a fake in this case. What is represented in their pictures is logically consistent. It is simply impossible to prepare artificially the picture we see with all details during a route at heights more than 5 km. Let us leave the charges against Shipton to conscience of the journalists.

As to other pictures they probably do not exist at all. In fact the climbers are usually aimed to tops of mountains and often see in tracks of hominoids only hindrance for themselves.



Olivier Decobert

Thanks for the new picture. Now that i can see a second print (or "double" print), i find your analysis more and more interesting. Yes, you could be right, and i think that you should put this new picture in your article. It's a better argument than only one print.