[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Re: There Be Dragons

>>>A. there is insufficient evidence that there is really anything there
>>>   to study at all.
>>You call hundreds of eyewitness accounts insuffiecient evidence?!
>Yes.  Hundreds of eyewitnesses have seen Elvis walking the halls of K-Marts
>across America, but that doesn't invalidate the conclusions of his death
>certificate.  I used to be into cryptozoology, ancient astronauts, etc.,
>until I came to an important discovery: people lie.
Sure, but not everyone lies. So then obviosly there are going to be some
reports that are true, and what are we to make of these?

>>>C. if such a large animal still existed, it would be fairly easy
>>>   to loate and verify.
>>I agree that one living in Loch Ness should have been found by now, but
>>it's not like people are out there every day searching for the beast. The
>>Loch Ness is very deep and quite long... plenty of room for a "living
>>dinosaur", though I must say that's not what I think it is. I think it's
>>probably a giant amphibian.
>>> > Cryptozoology is full of speculation, and so is dinosaurology.
>>>Cryptozoology is nothing but speculation combined with unverified,
>>>and unreliable, second-hand reports.
>>I want you to go to a university library that has the Journal of
>>Cryptozology. Read through them. Then tell me if it's juts speculation.
>>Like any science, it has competent researchers, scientific groundings and
>>reliable and verified reports. Cryptozoology is not a joke...anyone who
>>thinks this is just ignorant...
>I have read the JC.  Some of the papers are quite good; others are idle
>speculation with a lot of fourteen letter words added in.  Falsifiable
>hypothese are not the prime focus of most of them...
I agree. But most are always trying to be as scientific as possible, and
so merit attention. And juts because one cryptozoologist says somehting,
dosen't mean all of them will agree, and think "lets go get this monster".
That';s why there often lengthy comments and responses.

And these sientists are not crackpots: Everyone on the board of directors
and the president and Vice have doctorates, and are very respected in
thier field: e.g. Eugenie Clark, Philip Tobias, Eric Buffetaut(a
paleontologist), Colin P. Groves, Leigh M Van Valen, David Heppell,
Dmitiri Bayanov, and others.