Cryptids, Speculation and Skepticism
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on December 11th, 2013
From Darren Naish:
My talk from Friday’s launch of the Cryptozoologicon.. mentions of Cameron A. McCormick, Michael Anthony Woodley, Daniel Loxton, Donald Prothero, Ben Radford and others…. speculative zoology, scepticism, cryptozoology…
Darren Naish introduces our new book, the Cryptozoologicon, in the book launch event in London on December 6th, 2013.
Darren introduces the book and talks about a brief history of speculative zoology and cryptozoology, and the need for a healthy skeptical approach in the study of mystery animals from around the world.
Cryptozoologicon is available from Amazon.com in print or Kindle versions.
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
OK, OK, I see “the need for a healthy skeptical approach in the study of mystery animals from around the world.”
Nice lip service. But I also see the names of Daniel Loxton and Donald Prothero, whose latest book is a very unhealthy approach.
Any time you are telling me “all the evidence amounts to this, and we don’t have any proof that’s the case, in fact we don’t have to supply any, and these are the facts and this is the answer”…
…well, all I have to do at that point is turn away from you to the people I can take seriously.
The biggest fallacy in cryptozoology is that “skeptics” can play the “you must believe me” card, and proponents can’t.
Sorry. Big-time wrong. NEITHER fringe gets to play. True skeptics are the referees in this discussion. And we need to see ALL the evidence. If you have none…then you aren’t playing, and don’t need to be taken seriously.
(That Abominable Book is my candidate for “Worst Contributor to Global Warming, 2013.”)
Thank’s so much Craig for posting this. It’s almost 35 minutes long but if anyone would like to understand the scientific view of modern day cryptozoology this is the clip to see.
Darren Naish is a British paleontologist that’s written extensively about cryptozoology over the past 15 years. And a believer that there may be still be undiscovered animals…within scientific reason. He doesn’t even trash the P-G filmage.
Well worthwhile viewing for those interested in natural world truth rather than the want to be dreams of the of the supernatural and paranormal.
Cryptozoology is not a science. Any cryptozoologist should be able to tell this to your face without much difficulty.
Zoologists know all too well that cryptozoology is not a science either.
The problem is, skeptical writers who make a living out of pessimistic opinions, rely on their negative banter to put food on the table. Technically, it’s their job to discount cryptozoology. They even go as far as to claim it’s pseudoscience.
If cryptozoology is psedoscience that would imply that we as cryptzoologists are trying to pass off the field as 100% accurate, tested material.
If this were the case, why are we referring to reports as “possible bigfoot” or “possible sea serpent”? Why are we not proclaiming without a doubt that every report of an unknown animal is authentic? Answer: Because cryptozoology is not pseudoscience.