Cryptozoology forums > Debates > Cryptozoological debates > view thread

Subject: Why should Cryptozoology be admitted as a scientific field? From: herdtrackerV2 posted Sun, Oct 18 2009, 9:19am  I'll start by taking the con side. I admit that reading about the discovery of new animals is fun. I fail to see the benefit of grouping these discoveries into one scientific field would provide any benefit. These animals come from many different parts of the taxonomic tree. If the animals are not grouped into a "western science" explored biome like Papua New Guinea or the Tasman Fracture, the animals also come from a variety of isolated pockets. In "isolated pockets" I am dismissing the belief that sasquatch exists everywhere. To me there seems little physical similarity in behavior, structure, geographic region. I doubt there will be any similarity in how these animals have stay hidden so long from humans. One could be using nocturnal activity, another could be using caves. I can see no plausible scientific benefit. To merely pick out the "zoology" part ignores the many plants, fungus, and bacteria that are also discovered. I also admit that those would be more niche less exciting fields to the people. I think I may be being picky on this point. Cryptobiology could be a possibility. How best to put an example? It would be like an archaeologist who only studies square buildings. On one level I have fun here. It's fun, it's exciting, it's interesting. I think to believe that Cryptozoology would ever get past websites or social groups or entertainment up to a full scientific field is a belief that will be unfulfilled. Subject: Re: Why should Cryptozoology be admitted as a scientific field? From: Rangoon posted Mon, Oct 19 2009, 9:35am  Cryptozoology is more of a study of myths relating to "undiscovered animals" than it is a proper subset of zoology. It is true that native stories have led to discoveries of new or legendary animals but not by cryptozoologists. Subject: Re: Why should Cryptozoology be admitted as a scientific field? From: Stu posted Wed, Oct 21 2009, 9:49am  I like this definition best. From 'The Skeptics Dictionary' by Robert Todd Carroll: cryptozoology - Cryptozoology is, literally, the study of hidden animals. It is the study of such creatures as the Australian bunyip, Bigfoot, the chupacabra, and the Loch Ness monster. It is not a recognized branch of the science of zoology. Cryptozoology relies heavily upon testimonials and circumstantial evidence in the form of legends and folklore, and the stories and alleged sightings of mysterious beasts by indigenous peoples, explorers, and travellers. Since cryptozoologists spend most of their energy trying to establish the existence of creatures, rather than examining actual animals, they are more akin to psi researchers than to zoologists. Expertise in zoology, however, is asserted to be a necessity for work in cryptozoology, according to Dr. Bernard Heuvelmans, who coined the term to describe his investigations of animals unknown to science. This focus on evaluating the evidence for "cryptids" was continued by the International Society for Cryptozoology, which is now defunct. Subject: Re: Why should Cryptozoology be admitted as a scientific field? From: Rangoon posted Wed, Oct 21 2009, 10:00am  Expertise in zoology, however, is asserted to be a necessity for work in cryptozoology The most telling credential that most self titled cryptozoologists lack imo. Granted a smart person can gain all the knowledge they can without a degree in most subjects. They can be very well versed in subject matter but may not be able to gain any acceptence without the diploma.

Close Window