Cryptozoology

Cryptobranchs are pretty giant and also real. As for extinct taxa, look at Labyrinthodonts. Those are GAINT predatory salamander-like animals from the mesozoic.

I just wanted to say that it's fun to believe, but belief doesn't have a place in proper science. Anyone who takes shows like ghost hunters (or similar cryptozoology ones) should be keel hauled or educated. While fun, they aren't good science and should only be taken at face value.

I do find it could have some application if done correctly. For all the flashy, tv stuff, its a good time waster.

I do remember on a ghost show this guys used infra-sonic sound to make people 'feel' like they weren't alone. He also noted that solid structures with long corridors (old prisons and such) harbor these sound waves frequently and that it could stimulate the brain into seeing light that isn't there. That was cool.

actually, in the case of bigfoot or yetis, there have been numerous cases where evidence of a previously unknown animal where found, this includes hairs, sounds, foot prints, mysterious sightings, videos, etc. on more than one occasion hairs have been collected that didn't match any known species but did resemble apes, kind of a mix between humans and gorillas.

i personally do believe in some cryptids, such as bloop and i like to believe in nessy (i know it's fake and i know it's been a fake for a long time, i just like nessy because it basically started me on my love for dinosaurs and palaeontology, lol).

FYI silverback gorillas were considered a total hoax by scientists until the 1850s, just think about that, as well the modern coelecanth was considered a cryptid (because they seemed to disappear from the fossil record quite some time ago) until it was actually investigated and caught. im a man of science and because of that i realize that there is nothing that is impossible, it is just not seen yet.

No. When done responsibly, those hairs were typically found to be from a Bison. When I was going to Uof Alberta we had at least 3 instances of hair being possibly bigfoot and they all came back as a woodland Bison.

Sounds are the result of people not knowing what they are hearing and jumping to conclusions. Completely unconfirmable as no matter what sound you show them they could say "Yeah that's not what I heard" to perpetuate their story.

Foot prints...really? One of the most widely faked evidences of BigFOOT.

Mysterious sightings are just that, mysterious sightings. They hardly confirm bigfoots existence; if you see something you can't quite make out or confirm, that's all it is. Something you can't quite make out or confirm.

The hairs you are talking about are totally falsified. How would could a hair be a cross between a gorilla and a human? Of course mammalian hair resembled apes. Most mammalian hair is pretty much the same, just a strand of keratin. It was likely a bison too, but the people didn't do the science right and now it's unconfirmable.

The Platypus and the Okapi were both thought to not exist. There was a large bovid discovered in S.E. Asia within the last decade. The past discovery has no bearing on present ones. I can tell you that area is widely traversed now by people. The more time and people that get out there, the less likely that bigfoot can go undiscovered. It's not like you're talking about the jungles of Congo, you're talking about 300 km away from a major city.

When animals "seemingly disappear" from the fossil record it is assumed, quite reasonably, that they are extinct. The Coelacanth was presumed dead about 250 MYA until a man who knew what they were (easily identified by the Caudal 'flag' along the midline of the tail) happened by one in a market and checked it out. It's not like someone set out to prove that the Coelacanth was still alive. No offense, but by the sounds of it you are not a trained man of science and you either believe or want to believe in this stuff.

I always wondered how does the situation look like from the point of view of "professional cryptozoologists"... people who create entire articles, websites about cryptid, do they believe in all those dinosaurs walking every corner of the world about which they write?

it isn't that at all, i do prefer to keep an open mind about things, any man/woman/child of science should be able to do the same, i have yet to find a reliable source that indicates that bison are found in the wild in asia and/or the himalayas, or that bison frequently roam the swamps of lousiana, i will confess that i'am not a profesional biologist and that i'am not a geneticist, but all things considered i have seen more than a single instance where the hairs couldn't be matched with any currently catagorized animal. i will concede that the tests could very well just have been botched but i sincerely doubt that the modern places where genetics happen (i have no idea what the standarized name is for these places, maybe any old laboritory or museum but there has got to be a place that is purely genetics) are run by incompetent morons that are unable to notice the difference between a bison and an ape.

i have seen various pieces of footage where the prints were located entirely by accident and without any reason to fake the prints, i myself have not seen or located any prints in any of my pregrad studies or work in the field, then again i have never heard of reports of any large biped cryptids in the hot arid locations that i frequent, just because most of something is faked doesn't mean that some are real/genuine.

the more that people get out to the areas where saskquatchs are located the more sightings are reported, i will not try and say that all the reporst are real as the first footage of saskquatch (the one where he turns his head and walks away) was recently confirmed to be a hoax and was only revealed after the death of the man that was in the suit.

i don't want to actually get into any kind of debate over such a silly thing as bigfoot, i just really dislike when people talk in absolutes, that there is no possible way this could ever exist, science is not a hard structure that is unchanging, it is always morphing and fixing itself, the current numbers say that saskquatch isn't real merely because we humans are such masters and brilliant hunters that the bigfoot couldn't evade us (which i doubt the average joe could succesfully hunt down any critter that is renowned for evasion), maybe in the uture we will have a corpse and it will show up all the non-believers or maybe it will be tunr out that humans are the only bipedal ape inhabiting north america and most cryptozoologists will cry themselves to sleep, who knows? not i.

all that said tho, i do doubt that bigfoot exists.

here's a universal reason to fake footprints: fame.

My main point really is that you see SOMETHING, but you can't identify it. Another issue is that there have been no actual specimens. That is required by biology, kind of an irony. To study life you must kill it.

morm said:

Mysterious sightings are just that, mysterious sightings. They hardly confirm bigfoots existence; if you see something you can't quite make out or confirm, that's all it is. Something you can't quite make out or confirm.

Click to expand...

For the record, the scientific process itself hasn't changed. It is within that basis that science appears to change, but what is really happening is the self correcting and self moderating system working. Also, I don't believe I was talking in absolutes at all.

"An absence of evidence is evidence of absence". It's interesting also to point out that as the ones making the claim, they are burdened with providing the proof. If it doesn't exist, it becomes non falsifiable, which means I can't prove it wrong so the people who believe think it's real.

indeed, but couldn't the actual morphing of the system be explained simply by the way that it has those systems? and on further review you actually weren't talking in absolutes just generalities, my mistake.

"An absence of evidence is evidence of absence" i never liked this particular quote, i have no good reason why other than it seems so redundent, and i must disagree with your statement that it becomes non falsifiable if no hard evidence is found, if that was applied to palaeontology for example it becomes ridiculous, say if i was to claim to have found an intact specimen of a fossilized bunny from the mid cambrian period but i was unable to provide any evidence for the discovery then my claim would be found false, there must be evidence before something can become plausible, especially claims that are extraordinary, other than that i think we have a general agreement about this particular subject.

A."but what is really happening is the self correcting and self moderating system working."

B. "indeed, but couldn't the actual morphing of the system be explained simply by the way that it has those systems?"

Click to expand...

A. Yes.
B. No

Mac Myers said:

A. Yes.
B. No

Click to expand...

oh wow, i just noticed my mistake, lol, i said the exact same thing in different words, i feel so silly now .

wait, the sytem seems to morph because of those systems, so then the morphing is explained by those systems, isn't it? im so confused right now, darn words!

shmifty5 said:

...the sytem seems to morph because of those systems, so then the morphing is explained by those systems, isn't it?

Click to expand...

Ow, ow, ow, it hurts my head!



-Eva

I am a believer in science, but when there's a profession that is basically a mix of my two favorite subjects in the entire world (animals and horror), I'm all over that. I'd love to be a cryptozoologist. Sure, a lot of the stuff is faked or imagined. But imagine all of the other cool things you'll see while (responsibly) traipsing through the woods looking for a bigfoot. And maybe you will find some kind of "new" animal. I know the Dover Demon is more than likely fake, but that doesn't mean I didn't get a chill down my spine the time I got to drive by the actual place it was "seen" over 30 years ago. It's fun and most people aren't doing a lot of damage by believing. It's not like people start wars or kill over it (sorry religion).

I got another caudate cryptid.... Giant mudpuppies of the east!

Giant Mudpuppies?

My take on cryptozoology is that it's fun to dream and fun to see the creative imaginations of humanity, but you have to also live in reality. A little bit of walking on that fuzzy boundary never hurt anyone, though.

Aren't there any reports of gigantic Desmognathus catching people with tongues and swallowing them?

Yahilles said:

Aren't there any reports of gigantic Desmognathus catching people with tongues and swallowing them?

Click to expand...

No idea on that one. Personally, I prefer the cryptids that have a grain of truth and don't require too many jumps of faith to get there. Sure why not an isolated population of unique reclusive giant salamanders that no one has been able to confirm.... gigantic man-eating Desmognathus now that's a bit too extreme for me.

I was just joking, pete. It's always easier to believe in bigfoot than in some much more crazy, like some sort of hybrid, or the Jersey Devil.

Yahilles said:

I was just joking, pete. It's always easier to believe in bigfoot than in some much more crazy, like some sort of hybrid, or the Jersey Devil.

Click to expand...

Or an honest American Politician. (oooops... did I say that out loud?)

Mac Myers said:

Or an honest American Politician. (oooops... did I say that out loud?)

Click to expand...

Looks like it would fit when you say just "Politician" cause as i see, problem with honest politicians is same all over the world. This species should be on cryptid list, i'm pretty sure of that!

Ohh cryptids! One of my all time favorites! Some of the stuff is just beyond the realm of believable. but I enjoy any bit of info on cryptozoology I can get my hands on. Even if it is purely for the fun of it. Scientifically, I can't go for believing in most of the claims/creatures that have been reported. But any new or rediscovered species always makes me wonder what else really is still out there? As for Bigfoot or Nessie I'm kinda bored with them. Gimme giant salamanders anytime! Proof is always the biggest key to whether or not I think something is worth believing in.