Cryptozoology

[Cainkane1]

There's a lady down the road who's convinced there's some kind of large cat/beastie that's been killing local cats. There's no shortage of rabbits for the beastie to eat (I once saw a fox look confused over where to begin). It's just the space issue. Where does the BRitish Big Cat stand in the ranks of cryptozoology?

Your country does have large cats. Probably escaped Pumas from the USA. They turned black from inbreeding. They do indeed kill and eat small animals including sheep. I saw one on TV once.

 

[Cainkane1]

"It took just over 24 hours--And that was just from the flies alone"

Gross exageration or downright lie. Firstly maggot would explain only disappearance of the soft tissue. From a forensic site : "In warm weather, conducive to fly growth, maggots can consume 60 per cent of a human body in less than a week. ". And that is in the GOOD condition. Guess how long it takes in spring/autumn or even worst, winter. Also guess what the maggot do to the 10 or 20% of non soft tissue / bones : nothing.

ETA: I see this was corrected by many people anyway, never mind ignore me.

I used to live in a really rural part of georgia and I used to see remains of animals fairly often. Dog skeletons and such. Georgia has raccoons and possums and masggots and flies too but they usually leave something like a skull behind at least. If large creatures like a bigfoot really existed they would leave something behind when they died.

I was watching a program on cryptozoology once when a short tale about the grass man came on. Lots of people saw this creature when it suddenly stopped appearing. One day some hikers came upon a completely intact primate skull. It was examined and fund to be the skull of a babboon that had apparently escaped from somewhere. The skull was completely bare of flesh and its my guess youd see something like that if bigfoot existed.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I used to live in a really rural part of georgia and I used to see remains of animals fairly often. Dog skeletons and such. Georgia has raccoons and possums and masggots and flies too but they usually leave something like a skull behind at least. If large creatures like a bigfoot really existed they would leave something behind when they died.

I was watching a program on cryptozoology once when a short tale about the grass man came on. Lots of people saw this creature when it suddenly stopped appearing. One day some hikers came upon a completely intact primate skull. It was examined and fund to be the skull of a babboon that had apparently escaped from somewhere. The skull was completely bare of flesh and its my guess youd see something like that if bigfoot existed.

Without turning this into a bigfoot thread, my understanding is that they are assumed to collect and dispose of their remains. You're not likely to find too many human corpses lying around for the same reason.

 

[William Parcher]

...you cited the Wampus Cat as pure fiction folk tale. How do you know that the legend isn't based on some real animal? Bigfooters consistently argue that the various Native American wildman legends are based on the real creature we call Bigfoot. If Bigfoot is not a folktale - then why can't the Wampus Cat be not a folktale?

...at least where I grew up, the Wampus Cat was known to be a creation like a snipe hunt or Santa Claus. That's why I separated it into the folk tale category.

I don't know much about the Wampus Cat other than I've seen it on folktale and cryptid lists. Here is Wikipedia, FWIW. There seems to be two realms of WCs.

The Wampus cat is a fearsome critters variously described as a large sort of water panther with glowing eyes that stalks its prey at night. The wampus cat is often compared to the Ewah of Cherokee mythology that was a woman who disguised herself in the skin of a mountain lion to spy on the men of the tribe as they sat around the campfire and told sacred stories on a hunting trip. When the woman was discovered, the tribe's medicine man punished her by transforming her into a half-woman, half-cat, who supposedly still haunts the forests of East Tennessee.

Another legend of the Wampus cat comes from the eastern part of Alabama. Supposedly, a secret program was carried out by the government in the 1940s to create an agile, fierce message carrier to be used on the European front during World War II, much like passenger pigeons were used in World War I. This program was based near Cheaha Mountain in the Talladega Forest, an area that was and remains very sparsely settled. The creature was part Mountain Lion and part Gray Wolf. However, several male and female specimens of the newly created species escaped, and were never captured. Sightings of these hybrid creatures have been reported in the area ever since, with (supposed) sightings occurring as far south as the Everglades and as far north as the Great Smoky Mountains. They have also been blamed for breaking into chicken coops, mauling livestock, and even stalking humans. Several instances have been recorded of actual attacks, but most are believed to have been mountain lion attacks.

Maybe the WC isn't folktale and is instead "folk knowledge" which you explained as seeing something genuine but calling it something else. I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this other than that I'm trying to justify the argument that Bigfoot is folklore and a folktale.

Wampus Cat caught on video. Well, it sure does look like a fox with a fur issue. I've seen footage of guys in furry suits that were labeled "Bigfoot". Isn't it the same thing? Same thing being... there is no Wampus Cat nor Bigfoot... so folks have to create their own.

This is the only known video of the legendary Wampas Cat. This video was taken in central North Carolina. Few people have ever even seen a Wampas Cat. Some stories say it is a huge monstrous creature. But it is believed to be a mix between a raccoon, possum, a fox, and a normal house cat.

 

[Drewbot]

This website claims there is a feral population of Jaguarundi in Florida

http://www.wildcatconservation.org/Jaguarundi.html

Actual population numbers are not known. A feral population of escaped pets is said to have been established in Florida, where they were introduced in the 1940's. Hunting is prohibited over much of their range with Brazil, Nicaragua, Ecuador, El Salvador and Guyana the exceptions. CITES has placed the species overall on Appendix II, with the North and Central American populations on Appendix I.

Florida fish and wildlife has this to say about the Jaguarundi

Jaguarundi Herpailurus yagouaroundi 1934 Not reported breeding Unknown

http://myfwc.com/WILDLIFEHABITATS/Nonnative_Mammals_index.htm

 

[William Parcher]

Where is the evidence for jaguarundi in Florida?

Roadkill?
Photos or film?
Shot or trapped?
Finding bodies or parts?
Etc?

What is there besides stories?

 

[William Parcher]

Florida fish and wildlife has this to say about the Jaguarundi

http://myfwc.com/WILDLIFEHABITATS/Nonnative_Mammals_index.htm

The state basically says we got nothing but anecdote. They could say that about the Skunk Ape.

Species Account: This small cat is a native of Texas to South America. No specimen has been found in Florida, and the evidence for its presence consists of scattered eyewitness accounts which are suspect, given the jaguarundi's similarity to domestic cats. There have also been some sightings of this animal reported in coastal Alabama. The absence of road-killed specimens in Florida argues strongly against the presence of anything more than isolated escapees. The Jaguarundi has been on the United States Endangered Species List since 1976.

At least we have a photo of the skunk ape.

 

[Bitter Monk]

At least we have a photo of the skunk ape.

Touche'. Not too many have seen the rarely seen third photo from that series.

 

[William Parcher]

I've referenced this paper before and I guess it would be suitable again at this point.


Using Anecdotal Occurrence Data for Rare or Elusive Species: The Illusion of Reality and a Call for Evidentiary Standards

We present three examples of biological misunderstandings, all of them with significant conservation implications, that resulted from the acceptance of anecdotal observations as empirical evidence. To avoid such errors, we recommend that a priori standards constrain the acceptance of occurrence data, with more stringent standards applied to the data for rare species. Because data standards are likely to be taxon specific, professional societies should develop specific evidentiary standards to use when assessing occurrence data for their taxa of interest.

Anecdotal data are considered notoriously unreliable by most scientists, and many disciplines have endeavored to limit or eliminate their influence. However, anecdotal information continues to influence our political and legal systems as well as the public’s understanding of the natural world.

 

[Marduk]

I've referenced this paper before and I guess it would be suitable again at this point.


Using Anecdotal Occurrence Data for Rare or Elusive Species: The Illusion of Reality and a Call for Evidentiary Standards

sounds to me like another call for science to lower its standards of evidence
no deal, doesn't work like that
WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeee

 

[William Parcher]

Marduk, you made a joke right?

The paper is a call for elevating scientific standards. Eyewitness reports are not enough to establish the presence of rare or elusive species.

With each passing year, it seems as though the Ivory Billed Woodpecker really is extinct. That the witnesses were wrong even though they were professionals. It was all based on eyeballing and a short blurry video that is worse than the worst Bigfoot video. It seems to be true as we have no good evidence that the woodpecker is out there, or even was out there when the claim was made a few years ago. If true, the US government got fooled in a big and expensive way. Of course the citizens pay for everything anyway.

Is there any lesson to be learned? Maybe not. Because (as with Bigfoot) now there is no way to prove that the bird really was extinct and that it was observer error. It's like the existence claim must stand as accurate until further notice. But what is the further notice if a negative (nonexistence) cannot be proved? Money is still being spent on the search to confirm the rediscovery. Dang!

 

[Dragoonster]

The Animal Planet show "River Monsters" might be a positive case for using anecdotal evidence. It features a guy who travels the world seeking huge (and sometimes rare) fish to catch. Often he inquires about areas from the locals. Also often their stories about the fish seem hyperbolic, and he rarely catches anything as large as some of their claims. But at least on a cursory look their tales might help him scout locations for likely presences of the fish. I'd reckon it's the same for naturalists.

To sum, I don't find anything wrong with using anecdotal evidence to look for better evidence. It shouldn't be used just by itself, but as a guide of where/what to look for it's probably useful.

 

[Dragoonster]

Marduk, you made a joke right?

The paper is a call for elevating scientific standards. Eyewitness reports are not enough to establish the presence of rare or elusive species.

With each passing year, it seems as though the Ivory Billed Woodpecker really is extinct. That the witnesses were wrong even though they were professionals. It was all based on eyeballing and a short blurry video that is worse than the worst Bigfoot video. It seems to be true as we have no good evidence that the woodpecker is out there, or even was out there when the claim was made a few years ago. If true, the US government got fooled in a big and expensive way. Of course the citizens pay for everything anyway.

Is there any lesson to be learned? Maybe not. Because (as with Bigfoot) now there is no way to prove that the bird really was extinct and that it was observer error. It's like the existence claim must stand as accurate until further notice. But what is the further notice if a negative (nonexistence) cannot be proved? Money is still being spent on the search to confirm the rediscovery. Dang!

On the other hand, if an IBW specimen had actually been found and taken, would that anecdotal evidence be elevated as confirming that the IBW was likely found in situ and not planted as a hoax? Would it be seen in a more scientific light? It seems that the same sort of evidence is labelled crypto woo when the species aren't found, but if they're found the same evidence is suddenly scientific. With that sort of process crypotzoology can never win, because as soon as a crypto species is confirmed as existing, it ceases to become a crypto species.

Would finding an IBW be a win for cryptozoology? Would finding a jagaurundi be a win for it? If not it would seem a strange coincidence if crypto people believed these species existed, and they turned out to actually exist. Perhaps the crypto people throw a big enough net that at least some baseless predictions turn out to be true, but I imagine there are some normal people who think the IBW exists but aren't into bigfoot or anything.

 

[William Parcher]

On the other hand, if an IBW specimen had actually been found and taken, would that anecdotal evidence be elevated as confirming that the IBW was likely found in situ and not planted as a hoax? Would it be seen in a more scientific light?

I think that a very comprehensive set of tests would be performed (then replicated and peer reviewed) to determine various facts about the specimen. Tests that would determine if the specimen was from a time period when the bird was last confirmed to exist. Are you talking about an entire carcass, or a feather, or what?

It seems that the same sort of evidence is labelled crypto woo when the species aren't found, but if they're found the same evidence is suddenly scientific. With that sort of process crypotzoology can never win, because as soon as a crypto species is confirmed as existing, it ceases to become a crypto species.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here.

Would finding an IBW be a win for cryptozoology? Would finding a jagaurundi be a win for it?

I would say yes on both counts (but a conditional yes on the jag). Cryptozoology champions what folks have to say about "hidden" animals. They are primarily interested in confirming existence, not nonexistence (i.e. cryptozoologists don't run around saying that beavers probably don't exist). In some cases, these are species that are already known to exist or did previously exist. Folks have been claiming to see IBWs here and there and off and on since the last living one was confirmed. IOW, folks have been saying they weren't really extinct because they saw one. Actually confirming that to be true would be a crypto win because people were always claiming to see something that wasn't supposed to be there. I think the jaguarundi would be conditional upon the exact circumstances and location of the confirmation. Finding a specimen in S. Texas (where they most recently were confirmed to exist) is not the same kind of win as finding one in Georgia or Florida.

But regardless, crypto wins for the IBW or the jag don't automatically transfer legitimacy to any other proposed cryptid. IOW, finding an active IBW nest in Arkansas does not mean that Bigfoot probably exists, nor does it increase the chances that BF exists. As it stands now, the recent intensive searches for the IBW have not turned up any Bigfoots in spite of folks saying they do occur there in Arkansas.

If not it would seem a strange coincidence if crypto people believed these species existed, and they turned out to actually exist. Perhaps the crypto people throw a big enough net that at least some baseless predictions turn out to be true, but I imagine there are some normal people who think the IBW exists but aren't into bigfoot or anything.

Well, cryptozoologists and cryptozoology (which is essentially a non-professional pastime or endeavor) wasn't very excited about the IBW before the rediscovery that graced the world media, and they aren't very excited about the US jaguarundi either. It's no surprise that Bigfoot is the popular cryptid. It's popularity truly dominates over whatever is the next most popular cryptid. I'm not even sure what #2 would be.

 

[novaphile]

Hmmm... I can't see the need to invent weird (crypto) animals for the world, when the world contains things as weird as the Tuatara.

(Apologies, I can't post any links yet, but wikipedia has a good article about them.)

 

[William Parcher]

Hmmm... I can't see the need to invent weird (crypto) animals for the world, when the world contains things as weird as the Tuatara.

(Apologies, I can't post any links yet, but wikipedia has a good article about them.)

I know what you mean. But I might be able to anticipate what a cryptofan might say in response to you.

"I am intrigued with the weird Tuatara just as much as you are. But I have the Tuatara and one more weird creature. I have Tuatara plus Bigfoot. My world is even richer than yours. I didn't invent the Bigfoot. It was here before I was even born."

Here's the Wiki link. Thanks for bringing it up.

 

[Gribble]

I was fascinated by cryptozoology when I was a preteen/early teenager and I still have a fondness for the idea of previously dubious creatures turning up. I wonder if there are still believers in "tatzelwurm" in the Alps?

Miss Kitt,
I too shared your interest in "dubious creatures" and if people could just go back to admitting they had an interst in animal mysteries instead of calling themselves "cryptozoologists" they might argue less and learn more.

If you google for images of "tatzelwurm", and then "Proteus" you might find interesting similarities

Regards, Gribble

 

[novaphile]

Not quite as spectacular as the tatzelwurm but the Gippsland Giant Earthworm can be quite surprising. I've heard of people mistaking them for snakes...

See this page for example.

 

[William Parcher]

Especially for Drew at this holiday season....


Michigan Giant Snake of 1949

A posse of Salem citizens - 100 men strong and armed with an assortment of weapons - set out to get the monster Sunday...

...a local farmer reported, a huge snake - some 17 feet long - appeared while he was driving his tractor,... "Its head was standing four feet off the ground,"

Some of the local folks have a theory that the snake is one that escaped from a circus in Ann Arbor 30 years ago.

But conservation officer Davey Crockett of Ypsilanti doubts that. That serpent was a tropical one, he explained, and would have found the going rough in a Michigan winter.

Wasn't that guy on Miami Vice?

 

[William Parcher]

Nature Conservation unable to identify mysterious creatures

Concerns that unknown creatures reigning terror on villagers are linked to witchcraft have deepened after footprint studies by the nature conservation left more questions than answers about the identity of the creatures.

Most recently, one of the alleged giant dog-like creatures reportedly attacked a 16-year-old boy at the village, leading to his death at the Oshakati State Hospital. In another case, a woman at the village has allegedly become mentally disturbed after the creatures ate all her livestock.

According to an official at Nature Conservation in Ondangwa, the footprints of the creatures were unlike anything they had ever seen, which made it virtually impossible to name the creature. "At first we thought the footprints might belong to wild dogs, but there is such a large distinction like the size of the paws that we soon realised that the prints were of an animal we have never encountered," said the official.