Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Have Cryptozoology ever done anything useful?


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

Poll: Have Cryptozoology ever done anything useful? (59 member(s) have cast votes)

Are cryptozoologists relevent?

  1. Yes, very much so! (19 votes [32.20%])

    Percentage of vote: 32.20%

  2. Naaaw, they ain't done sh!t (22 votes [37.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.29%

  3. Without them we'd forget all those cryptids out there! (15 votes [25.42%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.42%

  4. A crypto-who?? (3 votes [5.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.08%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61    AbyssWalker

AbyssWalker

    I'm not a Mutant.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,730 posts
  • Joined:23 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Address Unknown

Posted 01 November 2012 - 02:37 PM

View PostXetan, on 15 October 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

You have to pay a ton of money to corrupt educational systems to receive a piece of paper saying you did the homework well enough to be considered a zoologist as far as their accountants are concerned.

Doing the research and doling out cash for a license are two different things.

That doesn't mean everyone who's ever got a piece of paper saying they're a "Zoologist" doesn't do any research. There will obviously be at least a few credible Zoologists coming out of the education system. Are you that untrusting? really?

I mean, it's better than some guy who watched Teen Wolf as a kid, grew up and joined a bunch of others who want to tell spooky stories out in the woods. How is he gonna know anything about habitats or food sources?


#62    AshenPhoenix

AshenPhoenix

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 76 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2012

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:04 PM

Let's go to good old Webster for some definitions.  Back to basics.

http://www.merriam-w...y/cryptozoology
: the study of and search for animals and especially legendary animals (as Sasquatch) usually in order to evaluate the possibility of their existence

FACT: The previously mentioned animals were 'Legendary' animals.  The locals had some pretty fantastic myths & legends about them  UNTIL scientists (zoologists) evaluated their existence & validated their existance but debunked their mythical attributes.


View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Unfortunately the basics are no help when defining cryptozoology, or cryptozoologists. The basic and expanded definitions are as vague and murky as the pseudoscience itself. It seems anything thing can be a cryptid, and anyone (whether they like it or not) can be or be labeled a cryptozoologist.
I agree, it is thrown around halfhazardly.  And because of that people focus on the fantastical/mythical/legend aspect of cryptozoology.  But that's only a piece of what it is.  Yes it does encompass myths & legends.  That's why most scientists & zoologist do not claim to be one.  They don't want the ridicule that is thrown on them by the scientific community.  HOWEVER mythical cryptids are often discovered and their fantastical myths debunked.  Zoologists discover what locals talked about for generations, find they don't have the fantastical mythical qualities the locals claimed they did & add the species to the books.  This is infact a practice of cryptozoology.  You are studying & showing the existence of a creature that was 'hidden' and not known to exist.  This simple act makes you a cryptozoologist by default regardless if you want to acknowledge you are one.

Let me use an example.  You can drink 1 beer a day, perform your work & function fine in society.  If you do so you can claim vehemently that you're 'not' a drinker (who wants that stigma?).  But you drink, therefore whether or not you want to admit it, you're a drinker.

You can study animals and find 'hidden' animals (either thought extinct or merely legend) and perform your job well as a zoologist.  You can claim vehemently that you're 'not' a cryptozoologist (who wants that stigma?).  But you have found hidden animal and shown it's possibility of existence, therefore whether or not you want to admit it, you're a cryptozoolgist.

View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

For example; the study of hidden animals. What exactly does "hidden" imply?  And I am stressing the word "imply" here. Real scientific and medical ologies are very specific in their definitions. As far as ologies go I would rank cryptozoology very low on the scale...maybe just slightly above scientology. After all both of them talk a lot of crap they cant backup, and both were just made up by guys trying to sell books.
I don't consider cryptozoology a real science either... it's a description of a certain kind of animal (extinct, mythic) or person (one who searches or discovers the extinct or mythic).  That's why I call it an adjective, a description even though Webster calls it a noun.


View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Cryptozoologists love to redefine already well defined and existing terms such as "species unknown to science", "extinct species", "introduced species", "invasive species", or "escaped exotic species" and turn them into cryptids so that they justify the existence of the "mythical species"...which is the real implied definition of "hidden/crypto" in cryptozoology. It's the mythological beasts that are cryptozoologies real bread and butter.
That's assuming all cryptozoologists are out to capture Bigfoot and make 10mill.  This is a matter of opinion and I respect your opinion though I don't agree with it.

View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Perhaps a more accurate nomenclature for cryptozoology would be "impossibiliszoology". The study of animals "not able to be possible".
What about physical biology in general is so impossible?  Deer being about to breath out of gills is a bit of a stretch but after studying the gilled antelope they found it was just nose flaps.  The creature did exist just not in the way locals described and it was believed.  It's not that some of these animals can't possibly exist.  It's that they can't possibly have the legendary traits people claim they do and in most cases it may simply be just a matter of misidentification or misunderstanding.



View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Why would someone who spent years studying, in a university to get a degree in zoology want to be called something as nonsensical as cryptozoologist?
Exactly!  That's my point.  There is so much stigma associated with cryptozoology that it's shunned by the scientific community.

View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

If I cut a sliver out of my toe does that make me an orthopedic surgeon at that point in time?
That's a bad analogy.  You don't need a degree or special training to be a cryptozoologist & cryptozoologists do not claim to be zoologists, you do need training & a degree to be an orthopedic.  A better analogy would be someone cutting off their own warts on their feet.  No special training, but performing a procedure with less finesse and skill but for an actual purpose.  Most cryptozoologists without scientific training or background in hunting are unlikely to be able to provide any proof other than stories so yet again, why C is stigmatized.


View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Funny you should mention a white man and cryptozoology in the same sentence. I have argued that cryptozoology is a western white mans concept. One that conventionally (like in the examples below) overlooks the fact that the native peoples (in almost every example you provided) not only knew about these animals, but provided the people you have labled "cryptozoologist" their first specimens. The rules change if the animal is the mythical type of cryptid such as bigfoot, or nessy, then cryptozoologist will use any and all ancient native lore and twist it into evidence to support their existence.
You're absolutely right!  Cryptids don't magically appear just because we're not noticing them.  They've always existed, we've just been ignorant to that fact because they've been 'hidden' from mainstream view.  Cryptozoology isn't about making animals 'magically appear'.  It's about finding the ones that mainstream science hasn't seen & accepted yet because all they've heard & seen are stories.  I don't think bigfoot or nessy are anything mythical.  I think they're either misidentifications or a pre-existing creature we've yet to discover.  I think they're flesh & blood with the same physical attributes animals & humans have.



View Postevancj, on 01 November 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Simple? Yes. True? No.

Truth is in the eye of the beholder.  I respect & appreciate your truth as it makes me look closer to my own.  :)


#63    AshenPhoenix

AshenPhoenix

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 76 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2012

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:12 PM

View PostSpace_Jockey, on 01 November 2012 - 05:27 AM, said:

I see you got the meaning of cryptozoology right, but a 'cryptozoologist' is different, it isn't what you're thinking.  No Zoologist would ever just call himself a 'Cryptozoologist' if he finds a new species. Where did you get that now?
Might want to reread that cowboy.  I basically said "No self respecting zoologist would call himself a cryptozoologist'.  :tu:

View PostSpace_Jockey, on 01 November 2012 - 05:27 AM, said:

There's a difference between a Zoologist and a horror movie buff who wants to be monster hunters.
Absolutely!  Just like there's a difference between a cryptozoologist and a horror movie buff who wants to be a monster hunter.


#64    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:48 PM

View PostNight Walker, on 01 November 2012 - 08:18 AM, said:

Zero is not an uncontrolled data set.

Your data set wasn't "zero", it was "all the people I read about on the UM headliners."

Posted Image


#65    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:53 PM

View PostSpace_Jockey, on 01 November 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

That doesn't mean everyone who's ever got a piece of paper saying they're a "Zoologist" doesn't do any research. There will obviously be at least a few credible Zoologists coming out of the education system. Are you that untrusting? really?

I mean, it's better than some guy who watched Teen Wolf as a kid, grew up and joined a bunch of others who want to tell spooky stories out in the woods. How is he gonna know anything about habitats or food sources?

Reading more into it than I said. I never said they were incompetent because they came out of a failed system (although a number of them are, they tend not to make the news), my point was that knowledge does not come exclusively from the failed system. People who acquire their knowledge through self-study are not recognized by the failed system, because it's failed.

There are a million and five books about habitats and food sources for every classified species known to man. I'm sure anyone can read those without having gone to college. If not, I suppose I should just burn all my books now, since I'm apparently not allowed to touch them. I guess I'll have to cancel my internet subscription as well. And never go to the library. And heaven forbid I watch Animal Planet!

Posted Image


#66    Myles

Myles

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,502 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:24 PM

View PostAshenPhoenix, on 01 November 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

Absolutely!  Just like there's a difference between a cryptozoologist and a horror movie buff who wants to be a monster hunter.

I very small difference.


#67    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,371 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:17 AM

View PostXetan, on 01 November 2012 - 04:48 PM, said:

Your data set wasn't "zero", it was "all the people I read about on the UM headliners."

No, I actually go out to look for local cryptids. Do you? Please, sir, show me the man-monkey...

If your definition definition of cryptozoology is sufficiently broad enough to include discoveries by scientists/naturalists/others who are just doing what they are supposed to do and do not consider themselves to be cryptozoologists (other than in a tongue-in-cheek manner - which says much about the nature of cryptozoology) then, of course, cryptozoology has proven results. Every new discovery is of a cryptid and proof for Bigfoot, Mokele Mbembe (I wonder whatever happened to that recent "expedition"?), and the Loch Ness Monster is just around the corner. Go, cryptozoology! Woo-hoo!

If, however, you actually delineate science from pseudoscience or go out "into the field" and compare the methods and results of those scientists/naturalists/non-cryptozoologists with those of the cryptozoologists you will notice that there is only a superficial similarity. Illusion and the showmanship that goes along with it are important parts of cryptozoology.

Illusion - 1. a. An erroneous perception of reality; b. An erroneous concept or belief.
2. The condition of being deceived by a false perception or belief.
3. Something, such as a fantastic plan or desire, that causes an erroneous belief or perception.
(Source)

What cryptozoology actually is is vastly different from what it purports to be. Illusion. Comparing it to real discoveries is simply obfuscation and therefore part of the illusion. This is why we discuss it here in a paranormal/mystery forum and not in a wildlife/naturalist forum. Spend some time with your local cryptozoologist/monster-hunter and see for yourself. Cryptozoology is incompatible with science/naturalism but on a par with ghost hunting (just not as popular yet)...

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#68    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:19 AM

You've totally missed my point on what cryptozoology is.

Cryptozoology isn't a thing. It's a slur. Like "******" but full of science.

Posted Image


#69    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,371 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:31 AM

View PostXetan, on 02 November 2012 - 03:19 AM, said:

You've totally missed my point on what cryptozoology is.

Cryptozoology isn't a thing. It's a slur. Like "******" but full of science.

It is a thing because people do it. And it is a slur because cryptozoology merely apes science/naturalism. Therefore it is very much like BS with science-like stuff thrown in for good measure.

Still, I encourage you (and everyone else regardless of their position) to go out and see for themselves...

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#70    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 02 November 2012 - 01:58 PM

View PostNight Walker, on 02 November 2012 - 03:31 AM, said:

It is a thing because people do it.

No, nobody does cryptozoology. There are really good zoologists, really bad zoologists, and people who combine aspects of mythology, zoology, biology, and a million other ologies. But there is no cryptozoology. It's not a thing, it's not a practice. It's a slur that has been popularized and sensationalized, but it's still just nothing.

I can call myself a hideoneurohibuscanologist, but that isn't a thing. Cryptozoology is not a thing. Anybody can claim to be a cryptozoologist, but that doesn't make it a thing.

Posted Image


#71    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,371 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

View PostXetan, on 02 November 2012 - 01:58 PM, said:

No, nobody does cryptozoology. There are really good zoologists, really bad zoologists, and people who combine aspects of mythology, zoology, biology, and a million other ologies. But there is no cryptozoology. It's not a thing, it's not a practice. It's a slur that has been popularized and sensationalized, but it's still just nothing.

I can call myself a hideoneurohibuscanologist, but that isn't a thing. Cryptozoology is not a thing. Anybody can claim to be a cryptozoologist, but that doesn't make it a thing.

I disagree. People do practice, discuss, and write about cryptozoology. It is a virtual sub-culture. There was even a scholarly group - the International Society of Cryptozoology - founded in 1982 which also published a journal with the goal of serving "as a focal point for the investigation, analysis, publication, and discussion of all matters related to animals of unexpected form or size, or unexpected occurrence in time or space." The journal ceased publication in 1996 and the ISC shut down 2 years later because of financial difficulties [source].

Cryptozoology is a hobby whereby people spend time, gain pleasure from, and pour money into while some are even able to profit from it (much like any hobby, really). As it is largely practiced today it may not be particularly valid scientifically and it may not be about what it purports to be about but it is, at the very least, a socially recogognised construct and, therefore, a thing.

Things that don't exist are still things and that is kinda the whole point of cryptozoology...

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#72    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 03 November 2012 - 05:21 AM

View PostNight Walker, on 02 November 2012 - 09:17 PM, said:

whole point of cryptozoology...

No, no. Even in cryptozoological circles the point of cryptozoology isn't "The Study of Things That Don't Exist", it's "The Study of Hidden Things."

Posted Image


#73    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,371 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 03 November 2012 - 07:00 AM

View PostXetan, on 03 November 2012 - 05:21 AM, said:

No, no. Even in cryptozoological circles the point of cryptozoology isn't "The Study of Things That Don't Exist", it's "The Study of Hidden Things."

The trouble is that cryptozoology, as it is practiced, is not what is purports to be (How is that for "hidden"?). In that respect, I think the former definition is far more accurate than the latter...

Edited by Night Walker, 03 November 2012 - 07:06 AM.

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#74    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,371 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:07 AM

View PostAshenPhoenix, on 01 November 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

Let's go to good old Webster for some definitions.  Back to basics.

http://www.merriam-w...y/cryptozoology
: the study of and search for animals and especially legendary animals (as Sasquatch) usually in order to evaluate the possibility of their existence

FACT: The previously mentioned animals were 'Legendary' animals.  The locals had some pretty fantastic myths & legends about them  UNTIL scientists (zoologists) evaluated their existence & validated their existance but debunked their mythical attributes.

I also question the validity of the above "FACT" as well: The examples quoted were never "legendary animals". They are real animals about which legends, myths, and tales have been told. it is a subtle yet important distinction. The Gilled Antelope, Okapi, Platypus, Giant Squid, and Komodo Dragon, therefore, are no more "legendary animals" than the countless dogs, horses, cats, crows, mice, cows, monkeys, wolves, kangaroos, etc that have had similar legends/myths/tales that have been told (and continue to be told) about them.

"Legendary animals" (like Sasquatch and the Loch Ness Monster) exist solely within our legends/myths/stories and within the fringe of human experience. This does not lessen their impact and importance upon the groups which relate such stories - it strengthens it thereby strengthening the bonds within the group. We shouldn't forget that we humans are a complicated lot - our legends/myths/tales have meaning and significance far beyond their strictly literal interpretations...

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#75    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 03 November 2012 - 05:47 PM

View PostNight Walker, on 03 November 2012 - 07:00 AM, said:

The trouble is that cryptozoology, as it is practiced, is not what is purports to be (How is that for "hidden"?). In that respect, I think the former definition is far more accurate than the latter...

Then you think wrong.

Posted Image

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users