The study of creatures, such as the Sasquatch, whose existence has not been substantiated.
cryptozoological cryp'to·zo'o·log'i·cal (-zō'ə-lŏj'ĭ-kəl) adj.cryptozoologist cryp'to·zo·ol'o·gist n.
|
Results for cryptozoology
|
On this page:
|
The study of creatures, such as the Sasquatch, whose existence has not been substantiated.
cryptozoological cryp'to·zo'o·log'i·cal (-zō'ə-lŏj'ĭ-kəl) adj.Term coined by zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans to characterize the study of "hidden animals." It includes the study of the existence of known animals in places where they were not expected to occur as well as the persistence of animals presumed to be extinct. The key trait of animals considered the object of cryptozoology is their unexpected nature. The idea of cryptozoology was suggested by the discovery of exotic animals through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They include the gorilla, the giant squid, and the coelecanth (a fish thought to be extinct for many millenia).
The primary interest of present-day cryptozoologists are such animals as the Loch Ness Monster and other lake monsters, Bigfoot and other living hominoids, and the possibility of various dinosaur survivals.
Heuvelmans established a Centre de Cryptozoologie in France.
Sources:
Heuvelsmans, Bernard. "What Is Cryptozoology?" Crypto-zoology 1 (Winter 1982): 1-12.
Mackal, Roy P. Searching for Hidden Animals. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980.
Michell, John, and Robert J. M. Rickard. Living Wonders: Mysteries and Curiosities of the Animal World. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1982.
| This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are insufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources. |
Cryptozoology (from Greek: κρυπτός, kryptós, "hidden"; ζῷον, zôon, "animal"; and λόγος, logos, "knowledge" or "study" – c.f. zoology) is the search for animals believed to exist, but for which conclusive evidence is missing. The field also includes the search for known animals believed to be extinct.
People who study or search for such animals are called cryptozoologists, while the hypothetical creatures involved are sometimes called "cryptids", a term coined by John Wall in 1983.[1]
Invention of the term "cryptozoology" is often attributed to noted zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans. But in his book, In the Wake of Sea Serpents, Heuvelmans attributes coinage of the term to the late Scottish explorer and adventurer Ivan T. Sanderson.[2] Heuvelmans' 1955 book, On the Track of Unknown Animals, traces the scholarly origins of the discipline to Anthonid Cornelis Oudemans[3] and his 1892 study, The Great Sea Serpent. Heuvelmans argued that cryptozoology should be undertaken with scientific rigor, but with an open-minded, interdisciplinary approach. He also stressed that attention should be given to local, urban and folkloric sources regarding such creatures. While often layered in unlikely and fantastic elements, folktales can have small grains of truth and important information regarding these organisms. Loren Coleman, a modern popularizer of cryptozoology, has chronicled the history and personalities of the science in his books.[4]
Another notable book on the subject is Willy Ley's Exotic Zoology (1959). Ley was best known for his writings on rocketry and related topics, but he was trained in paleontology, and did write a number of books about animals. Ley's collection Exotic Zoology is of some interest to cryptozoology, as he discusses the Yeti and sea serpents, as well as relict dinosaurs. The book's first section ("Myth?") entertains the possibility that some legendary creatures (like the sirrush, the unicorn or the cyclops) might be based on actual animals (or misinterpretation of animals and/or their remains). The most rigorously scientific analyses of cryptids can be found in the works of British zoologist and cryptozoologist Dr Karl Shuker, who has published 12 books and countless articles on numerous cryptozoological subjects since the mid-1980s.
| The quality of this article or section may be compromised by weasel words. You can help Wikipedia by removing weasel words. |
Many cryptozoologists strive for legitimacy – some of them are respected scientists in other fields – and discoveries of previously unknown animals are often subject to great attention. However, cryptozoology per se has never been fully embraced by the scientific community. One can not earn a degree in cryptozoology from any college or university. Some cryptozoologists align themselves with more scientifically rigorous fields like zoology, while others tend toward an anthropological slant or even a Fortean perspective – however, cryptozoology is often considered a pseudoscience by skeptical mainstream zoologists and biologists [citation needed].
Most criticism – and occasional ridicule – from the scientific mainstream is directed at proponents for the existence of the more "famous" mega-fauna cryptids (like Bigfoot, the Yeti or the Loch Ness Monster), whose existence is generally regarded as highly unlikely. As historian Mike Dash[5] notes, few scientists doubt there are thousands of unknown animals, particularly invertebrates, awaiting discovery. However, most cryptozoologists are uninterested in researching and cataloging newly-discovered species of ants or beetles. As Dash writes, cryptozoologists focus their efforts towards "more elusive" creatures that have often defied decades' work aimed at confirming their existence, and which are furthermore regarded by mainstream scientists as the animals least likely to remain undetected. Mainstream scientific skeptics have argued that larger cryptids such as Bigfoot would not only have to evade close contact with humans to remain undiscovered, but would have to do so in great numbers in order to maintain a viable breeding population and gene pool of perhaps hundreds of the supposed creatures[6]. Despite cryptid sightings reported all over the world, and the supposed creatures' significant size, no unambiguous physical evidence (such as a specimen) has ever been presented of the more sensational cryptids.
Sceptics also assert[7] that the legendary lake "monsters" thought to be prehistoric reptiles would have to live undetected even in lakes too cold for any known aquatic reptiles – and with too little space and food to sustain a viable population. Aquatic animals with lungs like mammals and plesiosaurs would need to surface for air, making their ability to remain undetected very unlikely.
However, cryptozoologists do point out that much of the planet remains unexplored, especially deep oceans, and cryptozoological claims about oceanic species may be given more credence. By plotting the discovery rate of new species, Paxton[8] found that as many as 47 large oceanic species remain undiscovered. Indeed, the comparatively recent discoveries of the Coelacanth and the megamouth shark show that large deep-sea animals can remain undetected.
Cryptozoology supporters have noted that in the early days of western exploration of the world, many native tales of unknown animals initially dismissed as superstition by western scientists, were later proven to have a basis in biological fact[1], and that many unfamiliar animals, when initially reported, were considered hoaxes, delusions or misidentifications[1]: the platypus, giant squid, mountain gorilla, grizzly-polar bear hybrid and Komodo dragon are but a few creatures whose existence was denied by reputable scientists, who often refused to consider the evidence seriously.
Supporters also argue[1] that the mainstream scientific response to much cryptozoology represents a frustrating paradox or Catch 22: sceptics often cite a lack of peer reviewed articles on cryptozoological subjects in their rejections of the subject, yet, simultaneously, scientific journals – the main forum for evaluation of scientific claims – mostly refuse to publish articles on cryptozoological matters. Additionally, supporters often argue[1] that evidence is evaluated not on its merits or failings, but rather based on ad hominem opinions of researchers, or on prevailing paradigms or world views. For example, scientists like Grover Krantz and Jeff Meldrum have cited ample physical evidence that they contend strongly supports the reality of Bigfoot. Yet despite the fact that Krantz and Meldrum are recognized experts in their fields, their arguments regarding Bigfoot have largely been ignored by other scientists. Another well-attested cryptid that was largely ignored by scientists was the so-called Minnesota Iceman of the 1960s[9], purportedly an unidentified hominid corpse inspected by two recognized experts, Sanderson and Huevelmans, who offered detailed descriptions and photos of the creature; despite their efforts and evangelizing the case, very few scientists expressed an interest. Sceptics of cryptozoolgy counter[citation needed] that their scepticism regarding the subject prevents an unwarranted flood of misidentified animal sightings attributed to cryptids.
As in other fields, cryptozoologists are often responsible for disproving their own objects of study. For example, some cryptozoologists have collected evidence that disputes the validity of some facets of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch phenomenon.[10]
| The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. |
There are several animals cited as examples for continuing cryptozoological efforts:
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
Join the WikiAnswers Q&A community. Post a question or answer questions about "cryptozoology" at WikiAnswers.
Copyrights:
![]() | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2007. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Occultism & Parapsychology Encyclopedia. Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology. Copyright © 2001 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Obscure Words. © 2008 by Michael A. Fischer http://home.comcast.net/~wwftd. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Cryptozoology". Read more |
Mentioned In: