Survey: Do you consider Cryptozoology to be a legitimate field of study?

Question

These are the people who search for such creatures as Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, Chupacabra, etc.

Cryptozoology consists of two primary fields of research :

1) The search for living examples of animals identified through fossil records, but which are believed to be extinct

2) The search for animals, the existence of which is only known by anecdotal evidence existing in the form of myths, legends, or unconfirmed sightings.

Those who study this field are known as cryptozoologists; the animals that they study are often referred to as "cryptids", a term coined by John Wall in 1983.

What do you think? Legitimate field or not?

For an overview of the field, the wikipedia link, in this case, seems best:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptozoology

Thanks!

Answer 1

I believe it's legitimate to gather evidence on a creature.  However, as with ghost hunters, most cryptozoologists I've seen aren't gathering data and drawing their conclusions based on the evidence, they're searching for proof to support their conclusion they've already come to.  That's what separates the legitimate from the illegitimate--whether the data you gather will influence your perspective.

Most intellectually honest cryptozoologists wouldn't be able to operate for more than a few years before they would be forced to consider the possibility that their pet creature doesn't really exist.

Answer 2

It sounds like you have already earned a degree in that stuff.

Answer 3

legit.

Answer 4

Sure. it's legitimate. Lots of animals that people have written off as being some fantastic, mythological beasties have actually been proven to exist. One of the best examples of these is the giant squid. It's a big world out there, and there are lots of places, particularly the ocean depths, which hold all sorts of secrets to which perhaps, someday, we will be fortunate enough to uncover.

Answer 5

Sounds interesting ... I was told to do Cryptology in school different thing but sounds the same ...

Answer 6

I think it is a legitimate field and an interesting one.  There are more and more species found every day, even ones that where once thought extinct.

Answer 7

I think it is a legitimate field of study from many other perspectives (biology, anthropology, zoology, etc.).

The person that said that if a biologist hunts for Big Foot it is legit but if Joe with a camera goes looking for him it is not has a point but allow me to expand upon that idea.

I think if cryptology was to ever attempt to become a legitimate science they would need a body of established knowledge and procedures to operate within. This doesn't mean that people couldn't take individual approaches just that there would be a guide. I would imagine training in tracking, hunting, and habitat (Nessie and Big Foot are going to have different needs) would be a start.

I think Joe is every bit as entitled to hunt Big Foot AND to use the methods that any science provides him as any biologist or any other scientist. Joe just has to use them.

Psi

Answer 8

Only if it is being practiced in a scientific manner. If, for example, somebody with an anthropolgy degree is looking for Bigfoot, it's legitimate. If some average joe with a camera is out there, not quite.

Also, it is more legitimate to look for physical rather then photographic evidence.

Answer 9

It's similar to Paleozoology. Yes I see it as a legitimate profession, we will not know if these animals are myth or fact without the proper researchers to help make that determination. Here is a link that is fascinating on the subject as well.

http://www.pibburns.com/cryptozo.htm

I may change career fields if it pays well enough. :)