Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
pokingjoker

Other cryptids out there....proof?

43 posts in this topic

So the ever famous Bigfoot is perhaps without doubt the number one believed in cryptid. What other creatures do you all think exist and please show supporting evidence as to why or i suppose why not.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you should do a search of this particular forum. I think you'll find that just about any cryptid you can name has been covered ad nauseum in these hallowed archives...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most everything here is discussed, some more than others, but that's more about which ones we have an affinty for.....me? Hell, I want to find Bigfoot shoot him dead and haul his smelly ass out to a real scientific institution where real science can be done on the carcass. DNA......full autopsy........right down to what he was getting ready to drop as a pile on his next number two.

Anything else is just fill time for me.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand i can wade thru all the diff posts in this section and ive read a many of them, but alot of people come and go, I am just trying to get the group going as a whole and see who thinks what if i may.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

List me as believing zero "cryptids" as being real. I'll just keep it at that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wel it depends, the Pygmy Elephant has been called a cryptid, and it is not catalogued, but that's more like Zoology I would have thought. Many threads have tried to determine what is the difference between Cryptozooloy and Zoology, but I do not think there is an actual distinction. Unless of course we are talking about Bigfoot, Nessie and Dragons. But that's not really a study of hidden animals but a study of mythical animals.

But Al Gore knows about manbearpig, and heck, he nearly became President.

Nice usage of an appeal to authority there or what :w00t:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love cryptozoology, just the mystery of not knowing what lurks around the corner is exciting I personally you love if the Tasmanian Tiger was still about, very doubtful but a man can dream, I believe in Bigfoot 100%, so of the cryptids coming out of Africa is intriguing do to all the unexplored forest as well as Asia, and South America hell even North America there's so much space for unknown creatures to hide especially if it's an intelligent spieces like a primate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I don't believe in any cryptids. But there's something so fascinating and mysterious about them that I can't stop reading about them and researching them.

I really don't know why I'm like this, but I don't complain. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important thing you or anyone here needs to keep in mind is that Cryptology is not a real scientific discipline. Any good old boy who's wandering around in the woods can call himself a cryptozoologist, You don't need a college degree, you don't ever have had to set foot on a college campus, hell, you don't have to have graduated high school to call yourself by this title. I always get a huge kick out of someone trying to make themselves sound like they're some kind of authority on it by invoking the term. The fact is at best it's a pseudoscience, and to be honest.......at least in my opinion it's so much hooey, just straight up BS.

Zoology on the other hand is a real scientific discipline.......you can get a real degree from a real college.......it usually requires at least a master's degree.......that means more college after you finish college and the really good ones have PhD's..........and no, that doesn't stand for "post hole diggers".

P101 is right in that too many time we get into the mental m********ion of what is and isn't a crypto.....whatever, and the thread usually deteriorates into a metaphysical circle jerk, which I really have little use for however, I do jump in periodically just for giggles. So, I'm just as guilty as everyone else when it comes to putting a few spuge stains on the inside of the old cranium.

So, pokingjoker, if you want to know where the board is I'll make it simple for you. This board is largely skeptical mainly due to lies, misrepresentations, blind belief in something without solid proof, acceptance of something as solid proof which which is little more than wishful thinking distorting logic and reason. And that doesn't even touch on deliberate charlatans, hoaxers, fakes and bald-faced liars that get into this for either monetary gain or just for the cheap thrill of doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love cryptozoology, just the mystery of not knowing what lurks around the corner is exciting I personally you love if the Tasmanian Tiger was still about, very doubtful but a man can dream, I believe in Bigfoot 100%, so of the cryptids coming out of Africa is intriguing do to all the unexplored forest as well as Asia, and South America hell even North America there's so much space for unknown creatures to hide especially if it's an intelligent spieces like a primate

This is I think the value of Cryptozoology. In a search for pretend animals, people learn about real animals. Fess up, who knew discovery dates of the Gorilla before studying the Patterson film? Who knew that sleeper sharks decomposed jaw first? Who knew that we were writing about Giant Squid back in the 1800's when people thought we only just found them? Who knew the Megaladon was a shallow water shark? Who knew what a Saola was before visiting these boards?

Just as long as we learn, it's all good. But that is the stipulation, learning. Or it's not all good.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most everything here is discussed, some more than others, but that's more about which ones we have an affinty for.....me? Hell, I want to find Bigfoot shoot him dead and haul his smelly ass out to a real scientific institution where real science can be done on the carcass. DNA......full autopsy........right down to what he was getting ready to drop as a pile on his next number two.

Anything else is just fill time for me.

You want to just shoot Bigfoot, no questions asked apart from what's discovered in the morgue? What a shame, you may miss so much more about him. Nice:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most everything here is discussed, some more than others, but that's more about which ones we have an affinty for.....me? Hell, I want to find Bigfoot shoot him dead and haul his smelly ass out to a real scientific institution where real science can be done on the carcass. DNA......full autopsy........right down to what he was getting ready to drop as a pile on his next number two.

Anything else is just fill time for me.

I cant understand why you would want to shoot anything unusual or that you cant comprehend.Dont go into the forest buddy,because one day Bigfoot might just bite yo' ass.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wel it depends, the Pygmy Elephant has been called a cryptid, and it is not catalogued, but that's more like Zoology I would have thought. Many threads have tried to determine what is the difference between Cryptozooloy and Zoology, but I do not think there is an actual distinction. Unless of course we are talking about Bigfoot, Nessie and Dragons. But that's not really a study of hidden animals but a study of mythical animals.

This is I think the value of Cryptozoology. In a search for pretend animals, people learn about real animals. Fess up, who knew discovery dates of the Gorilla before studying the Patterson film? Who knew that sleeper sharks decomposed jaw first? Who knew that we were writing about Giant Squid back in the 1800's when people thought we only just found them? Who knew the Megaladon was a shallow water shark? Who knew what a Saola was before visiting these boards?

Just as long as we learn, it's all good. But that is the stipulation, learning. Or it's not all good.

Defining "cryptozoology" is certainly problematic. The science definition being "the scientific investigation of animals whose existence or identity has yet to be confirmed by science" largely excludes the monster hunting side of Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster yet the popular definition - "the study of hidden animals" - Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster are the big ticket definers of what is cryptozoology. The broader definition, with it's tawdry association with showmen, cranks, and fakers, hinders the appeal of "cryptozoology" to science while the science definition excludes much of what cryptozoology actually is at ground level.

I think that much of the definition problem stems from the actual beginnings of "cryptozoology" and it's two key founders: Bernard Heuvelmans and Ivan Sanderson.

Heuvelmans argued that cryptozoology should be undertaken with scientific rigor, but with an open-minded, interdisciplinary approach. He also stressed that attention should be given to local, urban and folkloric sources regarding such creatures, arguing that while often layered in unlikely and fantastic elements, folktales can have small grains of truth and important information regarding undiscovered organisms.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Cryptozoology

Whereas Sanderson paid special attention to the evidence for lake monsters, sea serpents, Mokèlé-mbèmbé, giant penguins, Yeti, and Sasquatch.

http://en.wikipedia....an_T._Sanderson

From it's very beginnings, "cryptozoology" was divided and inadequately defined.

The late 60s and 70s experienced the rise of sensational cryptozoology via the big ticket items - Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster. This newfound interest was then met by an attempt to legitimise "cryptozoology" via the establishment of the International Society of Cryptozoology (ISC) which published it journal Cryptozoology from 1982-1996. Monster claims declined significantly in this era. However, by 1998 the ISC was defunct and social communication via the internet was exploding as were monster claims. This time, the monster hunters became organised largely facilitated by the new horizons offered by the internet and groups like the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) have sprung up wherever monster claims were coming from (everywhere!).

The popular appeal for the monster hunting type of "cryptozoology" has once again conflated enough to warrant the publication of a new science publication - The Journal of Cryptozoology. I have the first issue on order but have yet to receive it. Will monster claims once again go on the decline with the intervention of science "cryptozoology" or does the popular appeal of monster hunting "cryptozoology" ensure the monsters will live on? Perhaps we are about to be witness to the clash of the "cryptozoologies" - Science v Monster Hunting. The line dividing the two sides is not so clear cut within "cryptozoology" (see Meldrum's upcoming version of Finding Bigfoot) so any stoush would inevitably get messy. Or will "cryptozoology" evolve into something else entirely?

Interesting times we live in...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the ever famous Bigfoot is perhaps without doubt the number one believed in cryptid. What other creatures do you all think exist and please show supporting evidence as to why or i suppose why not.....

On these forums you will find someone somewhere who believes in everything, from the ahool to the yowie, hell there's someone who believes in a giant, aquaic, land dwelling, flying, meat eating hyrax terrorising pretty much the entire of planet earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to just shoot Bigfoot, no questions asked apart from what's discovered in the morgue? What a shame, you may miss so much more about him. Nice:)

I cant understand why you would want to shoot anything unusual or that you cant comprehend.Dont go into the forest buddy,because one day Bigfoot might just bite yo' ass.

Ok, I have explained myself on this point a number of times and quite frankly see no reason to even consider doing it again since you guys don't seem to be able to get it, or even retain it. My reasons are well reasoned, insightful, logical, stand up to the scrutiny of others, and are so simple even a child can understand them. However, they have gone so far over both your heads that it didn't even mess your hair as it went over. The sad truth is even if I took the time and stated my reasons again it would be a terrible waste of time because you guys aren't going to get it. You'll simple cry about some misbegotten idea that all life is sacred or fail to retain the conversation because you have no means of counter arguing your own position, bringing us back to where we are right now.

Hey, search the web and post blob-squatch photos all you want and demand everyone to stop what they are doing to explain and help you understand that you don't have a clue. Get in off line, and out into the woods, read up on how we've treated new species from day one on our planet and when you finally "get it", then you will see the position I have is truly the only real option that actually makes any kind of sense.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have explained myself on this point a number of times and quite frankly see no reason to even consider doing it again since you guys don't seem to be able to get it, or even retain it. My reasons are well reasoned, insightful, logical, stand up to the scrutiny of others, and are so simple even a child can understand them. However, they have gone so far over both your heads that it didn't even mess your hair as it went over. The sad truth is even if I took the time and stated my reasons again it would be a terrible waste of time because you guys aren't going to get it. You'll simple cry about some misbegotten idea that all life is sacred or fail to retain the conversation because you have no means of counter arguing your own position, bringing us back to where we are right now.

Hey, search the web and post blob-squatch photos all you want and demand everyone to stop what they are doing to explain and help you understand that you don't have a clue. Get in off line, and out into the woods, read up on how we've treated new species from day one on our planet and when you finally "get it", then you will see the position I have is truly the only real option that actually makes any kind of sense.

Thanks for showing your true colours to us all. Don't worry, I personally won't refer to anything you say here again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....promises, promises.......

:hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Defining "cryptozoology" is certainly problematic. The science definition being "the scientific investigation of animals whose existence or identity has yet to be confirmed by science" largely excludes the monster hunting side of Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster yet the popular definition - "the study of hidden animals" - Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster are the big ticket definers of what is cryptozoology. The broader definition, with it's tawdry association with showmen, cranks, and fakers, hinders the appeal of "cryptozoology" to science while the science definition excludes much of what cryptozoology actually is at ground level.

I think that much of the definition problem stems from the actual beginnings of "cryptozoology" and it's two key founders: Bernard Heuvelmans and Ivan Sanderson.

Heuvelmans argued that cryptozoology should be undertaken with scientific rigor, but with an open-minded, interdisciplinary approach. He also stressed that attention should be given to local, urban and folkloric sources regarding such creatures, arguing that while often layered in unlikely and fantastic elements, folktales can have small grains of truth and important information regarding undiscovered organisms.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Cryptozoology

Whereas Sanderson paid special attention to the evidence for lake monsters, sea serpents, Mokèlé-mbèmbé, giant penguins, Yeti, and Sasquatch.

http://en.wikipedia....an_T._Sanderson

From it's very beginnings, "cryptozoology" was divided and inadequately defined.

The late 60s and 70s experienced the rise of sensational cryptozoology via the big ticket items - Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster. This newfound interest was then met by an attempt to legitimise "cryptozoology" via the establishment of the International Society of Cryptozoology (ISC) which published it journal Cryptozoology from 1982-1996. Monster claims declined significantly in this era. However, by 1998 the ISC was defunct and social communication via the internet was exploding as were monster claims. This time, the monster hunters became organised largely facilitated by the new horizons offered by the internet and groups like the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) have sprung up wherever monster claims were coming from (everywhere!).

The popular appeal for the monster hunting type of "cryptozoology" has once again conflated enough to warrant the publication of a new science publication - The Journal of Cryptozoology. I have the first issue on order but have yet to receive it. Will monster claims once again go on the decline with the intervention of science "cryptozoology" or does the popular appeal of monster hunting "cryptozoology" ensure the monsters will live on? Perhaps we are about to be witness to the clash of the "cryptozoologies" - Science v Monster Hunting. The line dividing the two sides is not so clear cut within "cryptozoology" (see Meldrum's upcoming version of Finding Bigfoot) so any stoush would inevitably get messy. Or will "cryptozoology" evolve into something else entirely?

Interesting times we live in...

I couldn't have said this better myself NW, :tu: and everyone knows I have tried...repeatedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have explained myself on this point a number of times and quite frankly see no reason to even consider doing it again since you guys don't seem to be able to get it, or even retain it. My reasons are well reasoned, insightful, logical, stand up to the scrutiny of others, and are so simple even a child can understand them. However, they have gone so far over both your heads that it didn't even mess your hair as it went over. The sad truth is even if I took the time and stated my reasons again it would be a terrible waste of time because you guys aren't going to get it. You'll simple cry about some misbegotten idea that all life is sacred or fail to retain the conversation because you have no means of counter arguing your own position, bringing us back to where we are right now.

Hey, search the web and post blob-squatch photos all you want and demand everyone to stop what they are doing to explain and help you understand that you don't have a clue. Get in off line, and out into the woods, read up on how we've treated new species from day one on our planet and when you finally "get it", then you will see the position I have is truly the only real option that actually makes any kind of sense.

Hey man I didnt say I believed / or didnt believe in Bigfoot,what I said was why do you want to go and shoot things/creatures who have done you no harm. Its you who doesnt "Get It".Ignorance is bliss I guess.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is what make any of you think bigfoot can be killed? it hasn't happened yet so odds are it never will. It's common knowledge that bigfoot is immortal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey man I didnt say I believed / or didnt believe in Bigfoot,what I said was why do you want to go and shoot things/creatures who have done you no harm. Its you who doesnt "Get It".Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Thank you for confirming what I said about it going completely over your head. Now please get over your indignation and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is what make any of you think bigfoot can be killed? it hasn't happened yet so odds are it never will. It's common knowledge that bigfoot is immortal.

Well, if they are indeed immortal then I'm going to probably have to deal with a seriously p***ed off Bigfoot because if I ever get a clear shot at one I'm taking it. Then the mystery can be handed off to real science to fill in all the blanks with something other than speculation and wishful thinking.

However, I'm not as young as I was back in the day so escape and evasion after the round hits home is not likely. Of course, then everyone will wonder what happened to me and I'll either be a meal for a group of Bigfoot or their biotch and sex toy. The good news is I will have the choice of using a round on myself.......I'd rather be Bigfoot's poo than Bigfoot's toy. Just a personal preference.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is what make any of you think bigfoot can be killed?

If it comes to pass they are confirmed to be a real flesh and blood creature, then you know the answer.

It's common knowledge that bigfoot is immortal.

I call bs. It is however common knowledge that bigfoot is one of santa's giant elves, related to the tooth fairy by marriage.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

But Al Gore knows about manbearpig, and heck, he nearly became President.

I thought Al was a cryptid himself, the Portly Carbonized Tree Stump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if they are indeed immortal then I'm going to probably have to deal with a seriously p***ed off Bigfoot because if I ever get a clear shot at one I'm taking it. Then the mystery can be handed off to real science to fill in all the blanks with something other than speculation and wishful thinking.

However, I'm not as young as I was back in the day so escape and evasion after the round hits home is not likely. Of course, then everyone will wonder what happened to me and I'll either be a meal for a group of Bigfoot or their biotch and sex toy. The good news is I will have the choice of using a round on myself.......I'd rather be Bigfoot's poo than Bigfoot's toy. Just a personal preference.

Don't worry, it's also common knowledge that bigfoot cant kill people. Sex slave? I think your safe, your far to ugly for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.