Posted by: Nick Redfern on June 7th, 2011
I posted Nick’s article from his Lair of the Beasts column earlier today here on Cryptomundo.
Loren responded with his post Cryptids Are Not Totally Elusive, Actually.
Nick further expounds on his theory here exclusively on Cryptomundo.
Thanks for running this, Loren. It’s clear to see that discussion of such creatures as being anything than just that – creatures – provokes a lot of controversy!
As you know Loren, I’m not dogmatic about this theory. I certainly do have a great deal of time for it. But, at the end of the day, it’s a theory, and until all evidence is in, a theory is all it can be. But, until (or if) all the evidence is in, then in my view all other theories are simply that too. And i’ve always stressed that. But, to expand a bit further, here’s why I hold such views:
The biggest mystery to me (and which prompts me to address the Tulpa theory) is why it’s always specifically the large Cryptids that elude us (and that’s the point of my post) and not other large animals.
I’ll tell you what I mean by that: We find bears in the woods and secure proof for their existence. We never get definitive 100 percent evidence for Bigfoot (note in my post I didn’t say we had zero proof, I confirmed we had some that always seems to end up in the “Maybe” drawer).
It’s the same with the oceans as it is with the woods: we observe, classify, catch etc. whales, dolphins, squid, eels etc. But, we never get conclusive evidence of sea serpents.
Turning to the skies: we can see, catch and classify eagles, crows, etc. But we never get conclusive proof of the large, unidentified birds that people report, or the pterodactyl-style creatures people talk about.
I don’t dispute at all the idea that a colony of Bigfoot-style creatures could hide from humankind – possibly quite successfully…for a while. But, the problem I have is that all across the world, it’s these particular groups of creature that we never get hard evidence for:
(A) the unidentified apes/wildmen;
(B) the lake monsters;
(C) the sea serpents; and
(D) the large winged-things.
And the interesting thing is that these are clear, delineated categories of animals that are beyond elusive. If they don’t fall into those categories, we prove their existence. If they do fall into those categories, we don’t prove their existence.
That’s the thing: we can routinely find – all the time – large animals in the exact same environments in which all the above are said to exist (woods, oceans, lakes, skies). So, why are these particular groups always the elusive ones, when other animals in the very same environments are not? Occasionally, yes of course they could elude ultimate detection. But always, throughout human history?
And re the bodies angle: yes, if any or all of these things are real, just once we should surely have a body. Even if the Bigfoot bury their dead, or the bodies of the Nessie creatures decay on the bed of the loch. I’m not asking for a thousand bodies of Bigfoot, or 40 Nessies, etc. Just one will do. Just one (of any of the varied Cryptids – flying, swimming, or walking). But, we don’t even have that. We have people who have claimed to have seen Bigfoot bodies etc. But, if the story of a body being found was undeniable, I wouldn’t be writing these words.
To me, there is something deeply weird as to why certain specific classifications of cryptid have – forever – eluded us, avoided undeniable classification, and have not turned up in the form of a corpse that can be confirmed as genuine for all to see.
None of this should be seen as me being skeptical of the existence of any of these things. I’m sure they do exist – absolutely. But, it’s the nature of that existence (physical, ethereal, somewhere in between) that I question.
One last point: some people (although certainly not you) seem at times to react with barely concealed hostility to my Tulpa-style views. But why? If Bigfoot exists, what does it matter if it’s some sort of ape, or something infinitely weirder that is connected to the human mind?
I’ve never really understood the emotional angle of people getting bent out of shape because someone suggests Bigfoot isn’t just an unknown ape, or some relic like Gigantopithecus. The goal, surely, should be to prove its existence, whatever that may be, and address all possibilities, wherever they may lead, and then accept the evidence when it’s found and if it’s found.
Nick Redfern – has written 744 posts on this site.
Punk music fan, Tennents Super and Carlsberg Special Brew beer fan, horror film fan, chocolate fan, like to wear black clothes, like to stay up late. Work as a writer.