Are facts truly relevant when someone wishes to believe them?

So often people want to point to facts, some statistic, experiment, discovery etc. to say this happened, or is happening, etc. The facts that is presented seem to be relevant only of the person receiving the facts choose to believe it. Some scientist point instruments in the heavens and because certain events happen or can be estimated by mathematical calculation something like a black hole is said to be there. All that there is, is the figures, no visuals, no eye witness, just a crunch of number; but it is there. If those same scientist were at a retreat in the mountains where the locals say there is a yeti or sasquatch, and during the night thrashing is heard and upon looking from the deck the next morning large human-like footprints were in the snow with broken tree branches along its path, most of those scientist would reject that evidence, or those facts. What is the difference, because they choose not to believe in yetis and thus any evidence connected to them even if more solid than an invisible hole which only a number crunch say is out there? Doesn’t that make facts and numbers without something tangible to lay hands on just of the will of the receiver to believe it?