CryptoZoology

July 17, 2008, 9:58 PM

I've decided to make a thread about whether you guys think CryptoZoology is valid, or if its Bullshit.

For those of you who dont know what it is, allow me to break it down for you.

Crypto = The shit we've made up
Zoology = The Study of animals

As such Cryptozoologists dedicate their work to finding things like the Lochness Monster, Bigfoot, Chupacabra, etc.

What do you guys think?

- Kuja

July 17, 2008, 10:49 PM

Study of animals? No way but then again It depends which animals. Not all animals.

I say no, sorry... I don't like It at all.

July 17, 2008, 10:53 PM

It's the study of either animals that we thought were extinct, but perhaps are not, or the study of animals that appear in myth and legend and looking for evidence to support claims that they exist...

I think usefulness of Cryptozoology depends on the creature. With some creatures plausible theories and possibilities arise, but with others it appears to be merely crap.

July 17, 2008, 11:37 PM

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works here and say that I believe this "Cryptozoology" may not be such a bad thing. I think it's a perfectly plausible profession - there's no reason that these creatures cannot possibly exist and someone has to prove the sceptics wrong. Whatever happened to the world being flat? Some ridiculous people thought, "hey, what if it's round?" and went about studying and gathering evidence to prove this theory.

The only criticism I'd have is that it shouldn't be their day job. Then again, who are we to shoot down someone who has a dream of proving the existence of creatures thought to exist only in myths?

July 17, 2008, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Sephiroth Gene

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works here and say that I believe this "Cryptozoology" may not be such a bad thing. I think it's a perfectly plausible profession - there's no reason that these creatures cannot possibly exist and someone has to prove the sceptics wrong. Whatever happened to the world being flat? Some ridiculous people thought, "hey, what if it's round?" and went about studying and gathering evidence to prove this theory.

The only criticism I'd have is that it shouldn't be their day job. Then again, who are we to shoot down someone who has a dream of proving the existence of creatures thought to exist only in myths?

I agree. I've always been interested in reading about this.. And I think it is great when people think outside of the box. Think beyond what we know, and look at possibilities... Nothing is impossible! We're only humans, animals.. We're not guardians of the universe who know everything, so we should stop pretending that we do.

July 18, 2008, 5:57 AM

I agree with you guys cryptozoology is very intrigueing. However in terms of the Lochness Monster I have trouble believing that a Pleisiosaur, or however you spell it, somehow got stuck in the Lochness and is still alive. A dinosaur of that size couldn';t possibly live in the Lochness considering theres not alot of things it could eat. But two self-proclaimed cryptozooligts claim the Lochness Monster is an Eel that was born castrated.

In terms of Bigfoot, Penn and Teller, whos show I loved made a fake video about Bigfoot and got many hits on Crytozoologists who claimed they were experts. A Zoologist knew right away the video was fake. Of course by no means that doesnt mean Bigfoot doesn't exist.

But anyway I agree with the person who said it shouldn't be somebodys main job.

Good opinions, keep posting

- Kuja

July 18, 2008, 6:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by δ Kuja Ω

I've decided to make a thread about whether you guys think CryptoZoology is valid, or if its Bullshit.

For those of you who dont know what it is, allow me to break it down for you.

Crypto = The shit we've made up
Zoology = The Study of animals

As such Cryptozoologists dedicate their work to finding things like the Lochness Monster, Bigfoot, Chupacabra, etc.

What do you guys think?

- Kuja

CryptoZoology is fascinating stuff, but its not realistic. I agree with you said regarding the Lochness Monster.

Everything that appeals to our imagination, always makes life more exciting doesnt it?

~ Socrates the Great

July 18, 2008, 8:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by δ Kuja Ω

I agree with you guys cryptozoology is very intrigueing. However in terms of the Lochness Monster I have trouble believing that a Pleisiosaur, or however you spell it, somehow got stuck in the Lochness and is still alive. A dinosaur of that size couldn';t possibly live in the Lochness considering theres not alot of things it could eat. But two self-proclaimed cryptozooligts claim the Lochness Monster is an Eel that was born castrated.

I seriously doubt Nessie exists. The coelacanth (and even gators and crocs, for that matter) are proof that prehistoric creatures CAN survive into modern times, but something of a plesiosaur's size would hardly be able to survive in a loch. It might be able to survive in a full-sized ocean, and there are plenty of marine species that have yet to be discovered, but it's doubtful.

The one creature that has always caught my attention though is the dragon. Think about it, cultures around the world all have different mythologies, but the idea of dragons seems to be shared across the globe, from Europe to Asia to South America. I don't think any exist now, but it's quite possible that at one point they did. Maybe not an actual European fire-breathing dragon (I'm sure a great deal is embellishment), but there was likely some sort of large reptilian species that prompted all the legends.

July 18, 2008, 9:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meta Knight

I seriously doubt Nessie exists. The coelacanth (and even gators and crocs, for that matter) are proof that prehistoric creatures CAN survive into modern times, but something of a plesiosaur's size would hardly be able to survive in a loch. It might be able to survive in a full-sized ocean, and there are plenty of marine species that have yet to be discovered, but it's doubtful.

The one creature that has always caught my attention though is the dragon. Think about it, cultures around the world all have different mythologies, but the idea of dragons seems to be shared across the globe, from Europe to Asia to South America. I don't think any exist now, but it's quite possible that at one point they did. Maybe not an actual European fire-breathing dragon (I'm sure a great deal is embellishment), but there was likely some sort of large reptilian species that prompted all the legends.

The person who took the Nessie picture has admitted it was a fake I think.

Dragons are wonderful, they play leading roles in many movies and games. Now the issue I have with Dragons is how they all look different from European-South American Standards,.

Asian Dragon - Four Small legs, No Wings, Mane, Long Body
European Dragon - Four Legs, Two Full Wings, Dark Coloured
Mexican Dragon - No Legs, Feathery Wings
South American - Two Legs, many Bird-Like Qualities

As you can see amerindians paint the Dragon as a bird give or take, the chinese paint it as a snake with dragon qualities, and the Europeans paint it as a Reptilian like creature. As such...how do we know if dragons truly existed, and what they looked like? What you say might be true, and believe me I'd love it if Dragons were real.

~ Socrates the Great