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.


- - - - -

Science and Cryptozoology


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 25 February 2013 - 09:15 PM

Science and cryptozoology
Will they become better friends?

It may sound crazy, but…
Do any of you think that science will become more tolerant? Or, at least be taught that way. Where it becomes politically correct to be more accepting of fringe claims dealing with cryptozoology?

I saw where a current (within the last 10 years) popular school biology textbook by a well-known textbook publisher, was criticized by a scientist for having a page devoted to Chinese herbal medicine.

It is not uncommon for grade school through high school textbooks to contain their share of mistakes, very outdated information, etc.

Also, kids (and teachers) now get their information from anyone who wants to answer a science question on the internet or write up an encyclopedia article.

And “a la Ketchum”, students/teachers may soon be reading “peer-reviewed” “science journal submissions” on not just the existence of a cryptid, but “DNA evidence” as to a cryptid’s genetic information.

It stands to reason that your average 13-year-old and his junior high teacher may not be familiar with the backstory of some of these hoaxers.

Is reality television (Finding Bigfoot, etc) and Internet crypto sites doing the teaching?

Is science being diluted and polluted? What is next?

Where do you see future generations raised on "If you believe it or research it you can find a wealth of info to support it"

Edited by QuiteContrary, 25 February 2013 - 09:17 PM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#2    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 25 February 2013 - 09:29 PM

Science is becoming more open to the idea of cryptids, I have noticed more scientist seem to be getting involved in looking for certain things. No zombies or Vampire Hunters just yet.

There was a time if you approached any college or university and said you wanted to do a documentary on a cryptid, let's say a Bigfoot, unless they were going to be on the side against they wouldn't talk to you. That's changed a great deal in the last ten years from what I've noticed.

Although, in fairness, if government funding for Bigfoot research becomes available they will be after the critter in droves.


#3    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:33 AM

Science is open to anything, but if the evidence isn't there, it's simply not there.

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#4    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:46 AM

Personally, I can't think of any evidence that would establish proof of existence short of a body or skeleton, or a body part, say hands or feet. Which is why if I happened across one I'd have means of removing the head, hands and feet and take then with me and mark the location of the rest of the body. Assuming the Bigfoot Body Recovery Team didn't start parachuting in on me of course.

.....or those pesky porcupines didn't start chewing everything up.

Edited by keninsc, 26 February 2013 - 01:47 AM.


#5    evancj

evancj

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,778 posts
  • Joined:07 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, UT

Posted 27 February 2013 - 01:22 AM

Here's the problem; the scientific method is a disciplined way of studying the laws of the natural world, like biology, chemistry, geology, and physics. Cryptids don't adhere to the natural laws of any of these disciplines. Also there is no method, or discipline in cryptozoology, they just make crap up as they go along, and present it as fact to compensate for the lack of credible evidence (pseudoscience).


#6    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:15 AM

I know I've said this before but I always get the biggest kick out of these good old boys on Utube and Facebook who do a video and then they screw it all up by starting off with a video introduction that goes something like, "Hi! I'm John Q Public and I'm a Cryptozoologist.". And I swear I just burst out laughing at times because from their tonal inflections I seriously doubt they could spell "Cryptozoology", let alone gain a degree from an accredited college or university in such a field.........assuming such a field existed. However, they toss that out to try and give themselves some sort of air legitimacy......like they wear lab coats or something like that while wandering around in the woods. And, I might add, they are dressed in a manner that is a cross between Grizzly Adams and a Neo-Nazi, just back from a Klan meeting. Oye? But by Heaven, they want to be taken seriously so...........they suddenly are a Holy ordained Cryptozoologist and thus must be taken seriously, after all they are making a video and posting it on utube......and you aren't.

Much like the guys back in the days of my misspent youth I used to smoke pot with, now they're all high muckity-mucks in they're local churches or local politics and they'll say things like, "I did, as a young person, do some things I am not proud of now and yes, I did experiment with illegal drugs." Then me being me, spoke up and said, "....and were we wearing lab coats during this experimentation?"

Since this isn't a real scientific discipline, there is no criteria for calling yourself a Cryptozoologist  I can call myself one, you can call yourself one. My six month old grand daughter is one or rather will be one once she gets the hang of walking upright. I think she must get that down first before she can take on the mantle of such a title, one must have standards you know.


#7    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 27 February 2013 - 06:51 AM

I certainly see a difference. But it's where we are going that I wonder if a distinction will become blurred (diluted and polluted, as I said in my OP).
Not by science, necessarily, but by how it is approached in schools and just by the public.

Kind of an "It's All Good" philosophy.

Where blindly and blanketly exercising tolerance and an open mind will be the motto du jour.

Anyway, I see a great divide approaching, due mainly to the Internet (where everyone is an expert) and television (where everything is real) and tolerance (where everything has equal merit) and open-mindedness (where absolutes are bad) and fame (where everyone has something to show or sell).

Does no one else see us heading in that direction? I see a trend of being less considerate of scientific "common sense" or "laws" or "knowledge".

Or maybe the Internet and X# TV channels in every country make something old just more obvious?

Imagination, experimentation, exploration, observation and flexibility, etc etc in science is what keeps science advancing, yes. but that is not what I am talking about.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 27 February 2013 - 06:53 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#8    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 27 February 2013 - 08:15 AM

I'd have to disagree, I think we're already there. It's not approaching so much as we're in it now and I see it only getting worse.

Case in point, Bigfoot. Mainstream science is getting on board with efforts to search for the creature.....yes, assuming there is one, but the point is they are beginning to search now. By the same token, we have people who've been looking for the damned thing since they first saw the PG film, thing is none of them are "scientist" they're just people......uhm.....sort of like me, who've been looking intensely for many years and some have been more successful than others, which is no real surprise. Skills vary, methods vary, there is no set pattern to have a successful hunt for a Bigfoot. Deer? Well, you can just about learn as much from the web as you can in the field because we know a great deal about Deer behavior. Feeding habits, rutting, mating season, we know how male deer react to other deer during those times of the year. There are videos, how to manuals, hell you just have to ride down a road here in South Carolina and you have to be careful not to run over one. Bigfoot? Well, now there's a different kettle of fish.

We have the BFRO who drop these little pearls on us each week.......sometimes several at once. They tell us things like Bigfoots like to hang out around grave yards.....ok, what's that all about? They are supposed to be shy, timid creatures that hide/run like mad from the humans and yet there are accounts of Bigfoots being very aggressive, throwing rocks, ripping up trees, tearing down branches and generally raising hell. Then you have some people who claim the darn things are like pets that come up to the houses of people they know and get stuff like candy and garlic from them. Again, to repeat myself, what's that all about? Then they aren't supposed to use game trails, but they get seen walking along highways. They're rarely seen in groups but as solitary creatures, but they supposedly live in family groups as well. They don't hang around adults so much but often come around where they hear children's voices.

My point in all this is science......that is real science, is relatively new to the whole Bigfoot thing, but they are starting to look more closely at things and not reject them out of hand as they once did. Now consider this, the new guys on the block are going to want to find out what they can about these damned old Bigfoots that various groups and individuals have learned or imagined or made up. Not everyone is going to be open to sharing what they consider to be their hard earned knowledge with a bunch of guys that are very likely going to be taking away their livelihood. I'm think right off about one Rick Dyer, who's now claiming he's sold out 20 spots on one of his "expeditions" at $500 bucks a head to twenty people. He's not going to be alone in that either the "Finding Bigfoot" crew pretty much all do the same thing......I don't know if Renae does or not since she's the token skeptic in the bunch but I do know the rest do either on their own or via the BFRO. So, while a lot of the "crypto-types" talk about being buds with science they are inherently at odds with scientist and while one might need the other in the short term they both sort of need each other and have other agendas at the same time. It's sort of like trying to dance with a partner and you both want to lead......it just don't work.

Now, social media and it's influence. This can bring a lot of people together, much like in here. We have two basic groups, believers and non-believers, and both sides have a lot of variations within them. Me? Hell, I got one leg in both sides because I'm open to the possibility that there could be a Bigfoot, but I've never seen one or found any footprints. While I do possess better than average woodsman skills and I do keep an eye peeled for fakes, liars, hoaxers and I'm skeptical and that puts me at odds with the believer side and my own openness to the possibility makes me the ahole of the non-believers group at times. Truth is I think more people in here are a little like me whether they want to believe it or not, but we need labels put on things. Liberal, conservative, gay, straight, male, female, black, white, left, right, up, down when in fact nothing is ever that clear cut......fifty shades of grey on a global scale because this is a public forum on the World Wide Web.

So the divide isn't coming.....it's already here. The question is how large will the divide become?


#9    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:00 PM

I have no idea what I meant when I posted "I see a great divide coming". I actually see a weakening, a muddying of true science increasing. But not on the part of science, yet.

After all, the best lies have a grain or two of truth in them.

I see your point too, keninsc. Heck we see it with all the believer Ketchum haters. And not the ones who call her research bullox, but the ones who hate/are jealou that an outsider, a nobody scientist, may the one one to "prove" the creature...at least according to her.

But I believe mainstream science, even if it somehow gets involved, will still keep its dignity and standards.
It is everyone else, the pseudo-scientists and those who would believe them and even educators to an extent, that will increase and spread The Word. Making mainstream science more of the enemy/evil than it is already portrayed by some and tolerance of anything and everything the favorable viewpoint.

Because through TV and the Internet and other means (bigfoot conferences with scientists/pseudo-scientists as speakers), crypto-science can appear to  be very good/official at "proving"  a cryptid and may even become better: Ketchum's DNA study and science journal for starters. All of which to many of us it may be all or mostly bunk, but I see it as gaining a formidable foothold with ______________ younger generations?

Edited by QuiteContrary, 27 February 2013 - 12:08 PM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#10    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 28 February 2013 - 04:29 AM

Please understand, I get what you're saying completely and have seen the same things. I think we're seeing a different cause for the same malady and that's just the differences between two people. You say potato and I say potatoe.

What I'd love to see is someone with money get into it. They could afford to keep it quiet, no need to do all the voodoo the others do for money. They could have proper equipment.....by the way, more doesn't always mean better, but things like FLIR night vision mounted on a stealthy helicopter, one like the police use when they chase bad guys. You could tie it into a high powered telescopic camera and have a ground crew follow along if they spotted something to check out. If you have the backing of some super rich billionaire who has an interest in the subject then you might have several helos up at once with separate ground crews. You could cover a lot of ground quickly and thoroughly.

However, if you talked about it in the press then what's going to happen is you'll get all the hoaxers and the curious who just want to tag along unofficially.


#11    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 28 February 2013 - 06:36 AM

I don't believe in a novel hominin roaming NA, but if I had to surmise, for me, as I've always said,
it seems these habituation sites are the answer for mainstream science contact.
Whether searching via high tech in these high activity areas or sitting still and observing.
(or serving them off decorative dinnerware)

Edited by QuiteContrary, 28 February 2013 - 06:37 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#12    flareobox

flareobox

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 25 posts
  • Joined:24 Nov 2012

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:03 AM

I honestly hope so. Then my friends can stop bothering me about Cryptozoology. Maybe one day they can live in harmony.


#13    Tia

Tia

    The Naughty Angel.

  • Member
  • 6,280 posts
  • Joined:25 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Efate

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:18 AM

I believe it will take either a live or dead specimen before science will really become involved and money backs up researchers, at least here in Australia.

2 of my children have used the 'yowie' before at school.

One did a speech on it which was well received after numerous speeches of wallabies and possums and my other had to do a project on our local suburb including wildlife and she included a couple of lines on the mysterious 'yowie'. I think both ended it light heartily though by stating if your out bushing walking alone and you hear a sick snap be careful as you never know what's behind you. :yes:

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Gandhi.
HEY I WON!

#14    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:56 AM

I'd like to see, idk, someone like Bill Nye call up Ms. Ketchum and say something like:

"Hey, Mel, I've been listening to you on the radio and I'd love an invite to this habituation site you speak of. After all, you've repeatedly said your only goal has been to prove these creatures are real.
So, how about it? Oh, and I have a... ummm...*whispers* camera, but we won't tell the bigfoots, okay?"

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#15    pantodragon

pantodragon

    Remote Viewer

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 551 posts
  • Joined:28 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:On vacation in Beetleguese

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:39 PM

In response to the OP, yes I do think science is becoming more "tolerant", but this is a trick of the light.  What is actually happening is that the Empire of Science is attempting to extend its borders.  Look out side cryptozoology.  Look at sports.  Look at dancing.  Look at poetry.  You find science is becoming a major player in each of these fileds and is moving to dominate them.  So cryptozoology is not alone, it's just another small state that science intends to add to its empire!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users