Looks like more 'cryptid evidence' is not really cryptid evidence. Maybe monks do lie
What the monks may have had was the hand of a wildman (feral man / outcast / outsider) and in their eyes (legends) a Yeti. This would explain the human DNA and help the monks keep their integrity.
There is a long time from the finding of the hand to the DNA results. In the story of this finger the Yeti finger had been swapped with a human finger on the original hand, maybe this happened again as it changed owners and was missing for years. Could the finger be contaminated and thus effect the result?
These can bring up slight questions of its authenticity, and for many will be why Yeti finger will keep on doing the rounds as 'evidence'.
This was a great story, unfortunately it was better before the DNA results came in.
Edited by Junior Chubb, 27 December 2011 - 11:48 PM.