It makes sense to have a non-existant field to study non-existant animals.
How many of these folks have a degree in Cryptozoology? Or are they simply self appointed Cryptozoologists?
There are some very good people in the field that really expect proof and look for it. Loreen Coleman took a hit for even releasing anything on the last fake Bigfoot, before he looked at it. He didn’t say it was real, but he had the pictures released to him as an exclusive, so he got covered in shit by association with this. I think he might have grabbed the pictures due to his financial problems after his mother’s recent death. Now he’s kicking himself. I think he’s still basically reliable at this point. To me most of this field is a good source of myths, new species reports, mutants, what is this beached thing, foreign hysteria trends, and lets print outright fantasy to make a buck. I do think some of these animals can be found, but most are plain nonexistent.
Once the main media get hold of the material they mix it all together like it’s the same stuff. A yeti isn’t a Sasquatch, a wild man or a yowie. Keep the legends straight please.
A “yowie?” Is that anything like a bunyip?
Well, they are both Australian mate. S’truth. No worries. G’day.
No.
From your link:
Crytpozoology is a “field” in the same way that Astrology is a field.
The people who actually look for and find previously unknown animals, like the sao la and Chaco peccary, call themselves mammalogists or zoologists. They don’t refer to themselves as cryptozoologists.
What are the diagnostic differences between them? Without a specimen, how can you tell that they don’t refer to the same species?
Colibri Does Panama have any cryptid legends?
If you want to read some Australian material here is a good link. Giants From The Dreamtime. You can read excepts from each chapter.
http://www.theaustralianyowieresearchcenter.com/contents.html
Enjoy, because it has good material regardless if you think they exist or not.
In fairness, it could also be argued that Coleman is at least as interested in the sociology of the field of cryptozoology as in the actual existence of cryptids themselves. It was obvious that the latest Bigfoot thing was a hoax, but I have zero problem with him releasing the photos.
And what about it?
I go by the legends and descriptions of form and behavior in them to say don’t cross link the myths. Each people and it’s legends are different.
Have you seen a selkie or mermaid? They each have specific traits attributed to them and shouldn’t be interchanged, because their only tie in is the sea and they’re kind of a a woman.
As to the first point: I concede that there may be road-killed bears, but I have never seen or heard of one (because I have never lived in their proximity). I would think a full-grown bear would win most road conflicts against anything short of a dump truck full of gravel, because I have seen photos/video of what a grizzly can do to a car if it thinks there is food inside. If this is an occasionally occuring incident for you, enlighten me.
Second: chimps are apparently omnivores - I have seen video of a troop of them hunting down a monkey to kill and eat it. Are there other things that qualify as a “large primate”? - because I admit that I don’t know. If it is patently obvious that large primates usually eat fruit, please explain.
Third: please lay off the sarcastic rolleyes. I already stated that my experience with both bears and Sasquatches is nonexistent.
Heuvelman’s is the “father” of cryptozoology, FYI folks (some claim it’s Ivan T. Sanderson, both started early in the 2oth century). Before then, there were many Naturalists who could be considered cryptozoologists but were legit scientists. Even Darwin could be considered a cryptozoologist in one way. But once we get into the 20th century and the term " cryptozoologist", we pretty well get into psuedoscience.
Pretty much the only cryptid that gets some serious sceintific attention is the Thylacine, now thought extinct, but doubts remain. There are also a few subspecies thought extinct, and a few subspecies that are doubtful.
I suppose one could call the Ivory Billed Woodpecker a “cryptid” though. Colibri, what do you think the chances are for that species being back?
Most bears (especially ones that encounter cars) are black bears, and they are much smaller then your average grizzly. But even so, a 4000 lb car moving at 40 MPH will take out pretty much any animal in North America. The car might night be happy when you are done, but the bear isn’t going to last long after the accident.
It wouldn’t have taken a great deal of effort for you to check, though.
This is the first Google hit for “bear roadkill”. (It’s a map showing every bear that was killed in a motor vehicle collision in Florida in 2005)
Anyway, a bear attacking a stationary vehicle is just a little different than a bear being hit by a moving one. Think about what you could do to a vehicle if the occupants just sat there watching you dismantle it. Now think about what the vehicle would do to you if it hit you. Works the same way with bears; the difference is that the bear weighs enough that the collision may be just as fatal for the occupants as for the bear.
Holy crap, that’s a lot of bear rugs. Thanks.
No problem. I must confess I was just as surprised as you when I realized how common an occurrence this is. I didn’t even realize that were that many bears in Florida to hit.
I’ve been hit by a deer (yes, hit by a deer- it ran into the side of my car while I was doing 40 mph) and had a few near misses with other deer, plus an alligator, but no bears.
Not really. An adventurer/soldier of fortune named Richard Oglesby Marsh mentioned a tale told by a dying prospecter who supposedly saw a mysterious anthropoid in the Darien in the 1920s in his book White Indians of Darien, but Marsh was a pathological liar and almost certainly made the tale up out of whole cloth.
Based on the field notes of observers and recordings I have heard, I would say that the Ivorybill almost certainly still exists.
The difference between the Thylacine and the Ivorybill vs Bigfoot is that we know that the former are/were real creatures, and we have physical evidence of them and know exactly what they look like. Someone who sees an Ivorybill has to note the exact details of its plumage in order to have some credibility; they can’t just say they saw a really big black bird.
Good–now let’s make this harder.
There are persistant rumors of giant catfish in the Mississippi River & its tributaries, including the Cumberland, near where I live.
The rumors place them as being 10 feet to 24 feet in length.
Allowing that the high end length is likely caused by too much homebrew preying on the weak-minded, could these be real?
Giant catfish do exist–in the Amazon & in Southeast Asia. North America’s river system is enormous. The fish in question are simply too large to be landed with the light poles & lines used by local anglers. Scuba divers in the Cumberland have reported frightening face-to-face encounters with them, usually near TVA & ACOE hydroelectric dams.
Opinions?
Of course Bigfoot is real. They invented perpetual motion machines. :smack::rolleyes: