Cryptozoology

[Marduk]

Cryptozoology is pseudoscience.






Source

For example, either there is a large unknown animal in Loch Ness, or there is not. The means to test the hypothesis may not be available (e.g., a definitive sweep using the most modern naval sonar gear and hydrophones may be something no one can afford) but the hypothesis is, nonetheless, logically testable and thus scientific.

this is where it falls down as a claim of science, the loch ness monster was tested and found to be non existent, what did cryptozoologists do, carried on making claims and using it to argue a pointless point irregardless. Thats not science, its fundamentalism

 

[William Parcher]

I don't see how much of cryptozoological hypotheses are falsifiable. Bille uses UFOs and ghosts as examples of unfalsifiability. Then he uses Loch Ness as an example of how cryptozoology is falsifiable. This may be the easiest example because Loch Ness is a finite and descrete location which lends itself to a relatively simple survey. But that becomes a strawman example when compared to the undisputed King of Cryptozoology which is Bigfoot.

The proposed range for Bigfoot is not properly defined and even in a general sense it would involve large wilderness regions. How would "cryptozoologists" define the falsifiability of Bigfoot? Many suggest that you would have to somehow conclusively prove that every bit of proposed evidence is false and that every eyewitness account is false.

 

[Marduk]

The proposed range for Bigfoot is not properly defined and even in a general sense it would involve large wilderness regions. How would "cryptozoologists" define the falsifiability of Bigfoot? Many suggest that you would have to somehow conclusively prove that every bit of proposed evidence is false and that every eyewitness account is false.

You can use the fossil record
There is no precedent for a bipedal giant hominid in the Americas, So it either doesn't exist, or its ET,
studying either option is not scientific

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip... How would "cryptozoologists" define the falsifiability of Bigfoot? ...snip...

Captain Obvious to the rescue!

Simple! Ask Roger Patterson and Bob Gimilim! They falsified bigfoot, after al...

 

[William Parcher]

Doubtful News seems upbeat and hopeful about the new cryptozoology society formed by Loren Coleman. I can guarantee that it will be more of the same because cryptozoology is pseudoscience.

Inaugural cryptozoology conference held – New society to be formed

Science writer and author, Matt Bille (Shadows of Existence and Rumors of Existence) attended the inaugural International Cryptozoology Museum Conference in St. Augustine, Florida last week and reported on the proceedings. You can read his entire review of the 3-day event here but I’ll highlight some of the news and views that came out of the meeting.

The event was arranged and hosted Loren Coleman, the founder of ICM in Portland, Maine. Speakers included Bigfoot-hunter Cliff Barackman of TV’s Finding Bigfoot, biologist and Beast Hunters TV personality Patrick Spain, Canadian cryptozoologist Dr. Paul LeBlond, and author Lyle Blackburn who wrote readable, well-researched books for general audiences on the Beast of Boggy Creek and the Scape Ore (Bishopville) Lizardman.

Cryptozoologist of the Year award was bestowed upon film-maker, attorney, writer, and philanthropist Jeremy Efroymson, a supporter who exists in the background providing funding for cryptozoological projects. The Efroymson Family Fund have provided grants toward the Virtual Footprints Archive at Idaho State University, the Ohio Bigfoot Conference, and the International Cryptozoology Museum.

On the last day, Coleman opened with the announcement of the formation of the International Cryptozoology Society (ICS) to be headed by Dr. LeBlond as the President and an advisory panel. Details on the new society to be run by Coleman and another museum director are not yet available but the ICS is intended to be the long-hoped for resurrection of the principles of scientific study followed by the defunct International Society of Cryptozoology (ISC). The ISC met a messy end in 1998 that left existing and prospective members (such as myself) in the dark for years, hoping the society would come back, until it was clear that it was truly gone along with its remaining founder, Dr. Roy Mackal. It does not appear that remnants of the old ISC will be continued but this will be a fresh start.

The new ICS will include a journal and a conference. The first associated conference will be at Coleman’s museum in Maine in 2017. It’s not clear if this proposed journal is the same as the Museum journal that was projected for April 2015. That, as far as I know, has not yet materialized....

 

[MikeG]

Doubtful News seems upbeat and hopeful about the new cryptozoology society.........

Sharon Hill is a member here (it was her who acted as some sort of go-between when JREF dropped the forum), but it does seem to me that she is somewhat less sceptical than A/ she used to be and B/ she should be.

 

[The Shrike]

Doubtful News seems upbeat and hopeful about the new cryptozoology society formed by Loren Coleman. I can guarantee that it will be more of the same because cryptozoology is pseudoscience.

The second half of her post was a lot more cautious, but it does strike me as odd that she seems to be wishing for this effort of Coleman's to be some great leap forward in cryptozoology. We need no cryptozoology because we have zoology. Zoology is only thing we need to do to promote cryptozoology.

 

[Cervelo]

Sharon Hill is a member here (it was her who acted as some sort of go-between when JREF dropped the forum), but it does seem to me that she is somewhat less sceptical than A/ she used to be and B/ she should be.

What's in it for her? That's all you really need to know.

 

[DennyT]

Speaker:
A former director of the International Society of Cryptozoology, Dr Leblond [retired] is a driving force behind the success of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club. In establishing the BCSCC Quarterly as the club’s flagship publication and acting as its editor from 1989 to 1996, Dr Leblond has given the cryptozoological community a publication which is both informative and of immense value to those who seek the facts about cryptozoological research on a global scale. His leadership in the area of research into the enigma of the North Pacific Megaserpent, Cadborosaurus willsi, has resulted in extensive data being gathered on this animal. Along with Dr Edward Bousfield, Dr Leblond has authored Cadborosaurus: Survivor from the Deep (Horsdal and Schubert, 1995), the seminal work on this great cryptozoological marvel. Dr Leblond resides on Galiano Island and is much-coveted speaker at many scientific and cryptozoological forums around the world. His rapier-sharp wit and gallic charm make a speaking engagement by this brilliant scientist a most enjoyable and informative experience. The Search for Caddy The family of large aquatic reptiles that frequents the coast of British Columbia has been repeatedly sighted by credible witnesses -- the legends about them date back to Native American traditions. The locals affectionately call the creature "Caddy", short for Cadborosaurus, which takes its name from the Cadboro Bay where it is most often seen. In 1937 a slightly digested juvenile "Caddy" measuring about 10 feet was extracted from the stomach of a sperm whale and the photographs of it, published in Bousfield and LeBlond's book and scientific journal, may be the best evidence to date of a contemporary sea serpent.

 

[DennyT]

What's in it for her? That's all you really need to know.

She seems to have the idea that there is some merit in the bigfoot claims. I assume this is why she thinks this organization is good news. She has some major blind spot, that is for sure.

 

[fuelair]

Those giant beaver hunter jokes just write themselves.

Oh yes they do !!!!!!!!!






























111

 

[Resume]

I suggest a craptozoology society where anxious scofftics, skepticbunkers and pseudoskeptics can wallow in the relative comfort of their cognitive dissonance, while ridiculing the good science and scientists of cryptozoology.

 

[BayWatcher]

Exactly how many crypto-critter discoveries can be credited to the fine scientifical researchers at the at the International Society of Cryptozoology? Coleman's been in it long enough that he should have found a bunch of them, right?

 

[John Nowak]

Cryptozoology is to zoology as alternative medicine is to medicine.

The prefix means "this is nonsense."

 

[The Shrike]

Exactly how many crypto-critter discoveries can be credited to the fine scientifical researchers at the at the International Society of Cryptozoology? Coleman's been in it long enough that he should have found a bunch of them, right?

That's the problem. The cryptozoologists claim every new species as one for their side. Every newly described species was a "cryptid" the day before its discovery was announced.

When you dig into the discoveries of these species, however, you find that none of them is similar to things like ape-men, lake monsters, etc. Gorillas, okapis, Coelacanth, soala, giant squid - not one of these meets a definition of cryptid that could include something like bigfoot.

At the very least, people like Coleman are being disingenuous when they claim these as cryptozoological hits. I see those claims as pseudoscientific fraud. It's beyond me why someone like Sharon Hill would be encouraging these folks to "do cryptozoology better" instead of simply calling them out as the charlatans they are.

 

[Cervelo]

That's the problem. The cryptozoologists claim every new species as one for their side. Every newly described species was a "cryptid" the day before its discovery was announced.

When you dig into the discoveries of these species, however, you find that none of them is similar to things like ape-men, lake monsters, etc. Gorillas, okapis, Coelacanth, soala, giant squid - not one of these meets a definition of cryptid that could include something like bigfoot.

At the very least, people like Coleman are being disingenuous when they claim these as cryptozoological hits. I see those claims as pseudoscientific fraud. It's beyond me why someone like Sharon Hill would be encouraging these folks to "do cryptozoology better" instead of simply calling them out as the charlatans they are.

Ummm...because she has a business that specifically makes things "sciencey" sounding?

 

[Pterodactyl]

I'm interested to see where this new ICS goes.
I wouldn't mind being a member of such an organization because Im generally interested in cryptozoological topics, particularly bigfoot stuff. On the other hand, Loren Coleman's involvement would preclude me from paying any sort of dues or membership fee in good conscience.

That said, if they're serious about putting out a journal, Id be happy to offer my services as a reviewer.

 

[EHocking]

The second half of her post was a lot more cautious, but it does strike me as odd that she seems to be wishing for this effort of Coleman's to be some great leap forward in cryptozoology. We need no cryptozoology because we have zoology.

Zoology is only thing we need to do to promote cryptozoology.

^^^^^^^. This

 

[DennyT]

Speaker:
A former director of the International Society of Cryptozoology, Dr Leblond [retired] is a driving force behind the success of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club....His leadership in the area of research into the enigma of the North Pacific Megaserpent, Cadborosaurus willsi, has resulted in extensive data being gathered on this animal. Along with Dr Edward Bousfield, Dr Leblond has authored Cadborosaurus: Survivor from the Deep (Horsdal and Schubert, 1995), the seminal work on this great cryptozoological marvel. ...The Search for Caddy The family of large aquatic reptiles that frequents the coast of British Columbia has been repeatedly sighted by credible witnesses -- the legends about them date back to Native American traditions. The locals affectionately call the creature "Caddy", short for Cadborosaurus, which takes its name from the Cadboro Bay where it is most often seen. In 1937 a slightly digested juvenile "Caddy" measuring about 10 feet was extracted from the stomach of a sperm whale and the photographs of it, published in Bousfield and LeBlond's book and scientific journal, may be the best evidence to date of a contemporary sea serpent.

1937: In October a purported Cadborosaurus carcass was retrieved from the stomach of a sperm whale in Naden Harbour and photographed. A sample of this carcass was sent to the BC Provincial Museum, where it was tentatively identified as a fetal baleen whale by museum director Francis Kermode.[11][12]

 

[Craig B]

When you dig into the discoveries of these species, however, you find that none of them is similar to things like ape-men, lake monsters, etc. Gorillas, okapis, Coelacanth, soala, giant squid - not one of these meets a definition of cryptid that could include something like bigfoot.

In fact, the Coelacanth can't possibly qualify as a cryptid at all. Prior to the discovery by the scientific world of living examples of the species, it was familiar to people resident in the area in which its population is located: and it had long been known to science as a fossil. That is all perfectly in order.

So how was it ever a "cryptid"? It's very different from Bigfoot, at any rate.