New PA bigfoot sighting? Set your skeptical flags flying.

Oh, dear. Out of the news loop for a day or two and another Bigfoot sighting comes along.

Intermission – Idea for new kids site

That creepy picture of JesusJayZombie is freaking me out so I needed a post to bump it down.

I should be reading some papers for school but I’m not. They are BOR-ING. Why is academic writing so boring? I can read some long-haired stuff but, man, this crap puts me to sleep.

I’m in the process of starting yet another blog. But, it’s not very bloggy just yet. I am constructing a web site for kids (middle readers) about monsters and spooky stuff.

Of Zombies, Ghosts and Werewolves

Now that the veil between the worlds of the living and dead are thin this Hallows Eve, I ponder the surging popularity of zombies, ghosts and werewolves – the walking dead, the persistent dead and the wished-they-were-dead.

As you might guess, I’m quite doubtful of all three categories but what fun they are!

Pennsylvania bigfoot sighting – just a story?

Cryptomundo is reporting a bigfoot (or dogman-type creature) sighting the occurred in western Pennsylvania on July 10.

The report should say “Jumonville” not Jammonville. This area east of Uniontown is rugged and heavily wooded.

I won’t bother commenting on Cryptomundo anymore because my words get edited or might not even appear. But, I noticed, as usual, the Cryptomundo commentators are impressed with the witness and her report. They find her believable. Yet, they easily slip into paranormal mode – Bigfoot can have pointy ears, the odd traits mentioned make it more believable, etc.

I see several problems with the report. At 6PM, the alleged time of sighting when the woman was driving, it was not dark. She reports she was going 35 MPH. That’s not very fast – something approaching the car would either look human (bipedal) or not (quadruped). How did it run away? On two feet? Did it run like a human? The report doesn’t say.

I don’t understand how it managed to “leap across the trunk”. How did it get behind the car? Apparently, she did not hit it but successfully avoided it. There are scratches shown on the car. (So what – lot’s of people scratch their cars up.) There are several details left out. Then investigators from the PA Bigfoot research group followed up on the report. They took pictures.

The pictures are what got me a bit flabbergasted. THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA. It’s not the wilds as was suggested. Why was no one else around at 6PM on a Friday night?! The thing apparently ran from a school yard area through the parking lot of a convenient store. I have a harder time believing that there weren’t people around the store getting a pack of smokes, buying beer, picking up a pizza, hanging out. This makes no sense whatsoever.

The PA Bigfoot group has a closed forum and I am not currently intent on registering to listen in on speculation. This closed community aspect makes this type of forum nice for participants but excludes it from being scientific. The same can be said for Cryptomundo – a closed community ends up with warped thinking. No new input is incorporated. Mistakes are propagated, not corrected. They make little progress.

As a PA resident, I can tell you that bears are apparently all over the place right now. Did the witness see a bear? I can’t say. I think it’s more likely she almost hit a person. Having this close and unexpected an encounter with any living thing (except maybe a bug) is upsetting. If it was me, I would think that I would have chased after it, yelling to get people’s attention or at least go back and check to see if anyone else saw it. I’m sympathetic to this witness because she may think she saw something quite scary. I could and would not tell her she was crazy or wrong. This event was a matter of interpretation. So, nothing personal towards her, but the researchers’ intent is to consider this sighting as a real occurrence – outside of personal interpretation.

I’m not sure that’s possible. There is no corroborating evidence. It ends up only as a personal experience. I’m confounded about such reports. Because they make no sense and can’t be followed up, they actually have little value. Eyewitness evidence is weak and totally prone to error due to environmental conditions, physical constraints of the witness, emotional interference and the like. So, anecdotes can guide you where to look but can’t be used to support a claim such as this. If researchers really think there are big, unknown, physically implausible animals running into town on a Friday night, the Bigfoot organization needs to follow up better on this. I wish them well and I hope they find something better than a story.

Cryptozoology – Sham Inquiry

Cryptozoology is “the study of hidden animals” (called ‘cryptids’). More precisely, it is the pursuit of animals that science does not recognize as existing and, in some situations, be considered ‘monster hunting’ in comparison to the ghost hunters in a forthcoming discussion.

Like the closely related field of UFOlogy, cryptozoology can accurately be described as “a simulacrum of systematic rationality…quite impressive to many…nonbelievers.” [1] In order to become a cryptozoologist, one needs no special training, just an interest in and knowledge of the jargon, and reverence of the self-appointed experts.

To establish evidence for the existence of these mystery creatures, there is little zoology involved. Researchers rely heavily upon anecdotes, historic tales, and circumstantial evidence of alleged sightings. A cryptozoolgist will frequently set up a false dichotomy, especially to the media: either an eyewitness saw something mysterious or he/she is lying. Anecdotes are taken at face value – it is assumed that the eyewitness knows what she saw. Better explanations, like mistakes, misidentification, exaggeration and confabulation, are lightly regarded. One cannot reasonably analyze data at face value when misperception, fraud and expectations are so common [2].

Though thousands of eyewitness sightings have been documented, remarkably little data exists for scientific scrutiny [3]. The best evidence that has been obtained for hundreds of mysterious creatures claimed to exist on land, in the water and in air is considered to be print casts, photographs, video and a few biological samples. All are controversial. No bodies exist, not even parts.

Cryptozoologists have a classic love-hate relationship with the scientific community. This field has a history of interest from credentialed scientists including anthropologists, zoologists and wildlife biologists who commendably make repeated attempts to insert their work into conventional scientific journals and conferences. The crypto-community is warm and welcoming to professionals that are sympathetic but show blatant disdain for scientists and investigators critical of their claims.

Cryptozoologists revel in examples of new species discoveries (made by actual zoologists, not part-time scientists), citing “Cuvier’s rash dictum” in response [4]. They enjoy exploding the (erroneous) concept that “science knows everything” and “the world is fully explored”. These tenets serve as inspiration that one day, a cryptid body will be found.

All skeptics are a token ’straw man’, lumped into the bin of debunkers. Cryptozoological skeptics are characterized as ridiculing eyewitnesses, refusing to look at evidence and dismissive of cryptid existence. Those of a critical mindset, who wish to examine the evidence of cryptozoology, are treated with disdain, as noted by Radford (2008), who states that investigators are denied the opportunity to view collected samples. Evidence is hoarded. Close scrutiny is disallowed except to select few.

In researching the existence of unknown animals, the cryptozoologist, by definition, has made the assumption that an unknown creatures exists. In the mind of the cryptozoologist is a preconceived notion of the creature they aim to find.

Speculation is rampant and forms the basis for the majority of media content. A prime example is Coleman & Huyghe’s The Field Guide to Bigfoot, Yeti, and Other Mystery Primates Worldwide (published by Anomalist Books). Field guides carry an assumption that one can locate such creatures in the field. Though science has never recognized any of these mystery primates, this descriptive guide explains their natural history which amounts to complete conjecture far beyond what any evidence can support. Cryptozoologists have proposed not one large unknown mammal species existing in the modern world, but several.

Locating an animal in the woods is difficult and takes patience and skill. Yet, we do find rare and secretive animals. Trail cameras have been successful in finding animals like the wolverine and jaguar returning to areas from where they had been previously eradicated. Fishermen dredge up new species or some just wash up on shore. The cryptozoologist has not captured unequivocal evidence and so will instead engage in special pleading: animal ‘X’ is so rare, in remote habitat, very smart, with enhanced senses to avoid people. When these excuses are strained, they might even propose that cryptid behaviors and abilities transcend normal biology making them paranormal, not subject to natural laws. Cryptids are commonly closely associated with other paranormal concepts like UFOs and demons. In the cryptid community, there is an argument between those that would blend these concepts and those that wish to retain a semblance of scientific professionalism by excluding paranormal explanations.

Leaving out important considerations and telling only one side of the story without disclosing the weak points is intellectually dishonest. Mystery mongers seem satisfied with retaining mystery and will not attempt to seek a reasonable explanation. Radford (2008) likens the behavior of cryptozoologists to obstructing justice.

A confounding factor with cryptids arises with the spectrum of creatures that may be included under this label. They range from actual animals, now presumed extinct to clearly mythical creatures that make sense culturally, but not biologically.

Accepting the idea of unknown animals in our midst has a strong component of faith. The public will consider whether they “believe” in the reality of Bigfoot or other cryptid without consideration of the actual evidence. Mystery is fun and the idea of monsters in our midst is exciting. Cryptozoology claims success when some unknown creature (even a mundane one), previously described by a culture, is recognized by science. New species are not found by cryptozoologists out investigating tales of sightings. While they truly want to do science and be accepted into that circle, in the final analysis, cryptozoology is essentially about pursuing a belief, being immersed in a mystery, and feeling important.

References

Carroll, R. T. (2003). The Skeptic’s Dictionary, John Wiley & Sons.

Coleman, L., J. Clark (1999). Cryptozoology A to Z, Fireside.

Daegling, D. (2004). Bigfoot Exposed, AltaMira Press.

Levitt, N. (1999). Prometheus Bedeviled, Rutgers Univ Press.

Radford, B. (2008). “Problems with Cryptozoology.” Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://doctoratlantis.com/wordpress/?p=9.
———–

[1] Levitt, p. 84
[2] Daegling, p. 72
[3] Ibid., p. 61
[4] Coleman, p. 16-18

Back to Sham Inquiry contents page.

Flying Spaghetti Gift Monster

This would be my Holiday Greetings card if I decided to send one out. It would totally confound everyone I know. But, that would be funny.

Happy Holidays to all, no exceptions.

I’d like to remind everyone that a mid-winter holiday was celebrated long before Jesus. It’s sad that some feel they have a right to hijack a perfectly good time to gather family together, eat and reconnect (or at least attempt to do so) by being prejudiced and self-righteous about those that don’t share their exact belief system. It reminds me of the stories about war time officers frowning upon enemy combatants holding a truce over Christmas Eve. They thought that was bad strategy because the soldiers might actually realize the so-called enemy was also real person, just like him, more alike than different.

I admit that I can not comprehend why a person would want to have one solid, unshakable belief about the world and their place in it if it meant demonizing everyone else. It’s no different than being racist. If I could design a holiday display for the center of town, it would have a menorah, a manger, a Yule log, a bottle of Coca-Cola, and a symbol representing every other cultural, natural or pagan symbol of the season. Something for everyone and anyone.

Christmas as a general holiday has survived and flourished because it has changed with the times. It has become a secular holiday because we all don’t like being burdened with religious connotations in order to have a happy time. It’s such a good time that various folk (of various religious backgrounds) celebrate it in some way. If you want to be Puritanical about it, go ahead and have your holy day. Puritans didn’t celebrate it at all.

Mythic Creatures in NYC

I visited the Mythic Creatures: Dragons, Unicorns and Mermaids exhibit on Saturday at the American Museum of Natural History in NYC. Here are my thoughts from it.

I’ve been to this museum many times. It’s packed on a pleasant Saturday. If you go, I suggest you go early. Before I went to this section, I strolled through the familiar dinosaur halls. As usual, it is jammed with strollers, crying toddlers and excited parents, holding their little ones up to show them how T. rex is related to birds. They follow along the branches of the evolutionary tree, they grapple with the names, pointing to “this guy” when they can’t pronounce names like “coelophysis“. They read off the text to their listeners, emphasizing the “‘blank-blank’ million years ago”. It was wonderful to see so many embracing the most basic concepts of biology. I went around counting skeletal toes, looking for the remnant digits on the theropods, and comparing numbers of tarsal bones. I tested myself trying to name the skull bones marked with abbreviations on the hadrosaur head.

The Mythic Creatures exhibition costs extra (adult price is $22 including access to the entire museum and Rose center), which is fair to support such an institution. The curators are anthropologist Laurel Kendall, paleontologist Mark Norell and marine natural historian/artist/paleontologist/author Richard Ellis and features sections on myths of the land, sea and air. Television screens have video clips interspersed among a presumable “life-size” dragon and a surfacing Kraken. The Kraken is made of tough foam making it really touchable.

It is very difficult to move through the wave of people when the entrance is opened. One might run ahead and see the end and work back to avoid the people stuck at the earlier displays. Photos are not allowed.

Here are the highlights:

• Watching a screen where you can make a manatee turn into a mermaid;
• Compare a line of swimming porpoise to a sea serpent;
• Seeing the historic naturalists’ books that describe the wonders of the sea and new worlds;
• Comparing yourself to the life-size Aepyornis with egg;
• Chuckling at the chupacabra display with colorful ancient depiction of a blood-sucker of myth contrasted with the boring robotic-like Chupa toy of recent times;
• Seeing the (possibly original) Feejee Mermaid (Note: it’s far too pathetic to ever be taken as a real animal but so delicate, a true work of art);
• Touching a narwhal horn;
• Imagining the Roc swooping from the ceiling, eyeing your children as a tasty morsel;
• Using your creativity to mentally construct a giant cyclops or a griffin from the fossils found by ancient peoples.

The purpose of the show is to explore how these animal myths came about and continue to be so enduring in cultures of the world. In that, it succeeds. While the big three might be dragons, unicorns and mermaids, they include a lot more – touching on the Griffin, Naga, Garuda, Bunyip, Pegasus, Barong, Kappa, Tengu, and more. Many will be introduced to these for the first time and might be amazed that there are so many “common” strange creatures. The tone is decidedly skeptical, but not an in-your-face denial, regarding cryptids. One video clip did hint that, although it is impossible that these mythical creatures exist as we imagine, there is far more astounding life to be discovered that no one has yet imagined.

My favorite part might have been marveling at the life-size Gigantopithicus blackii (that looks more like a large elegant gorilla, than Bigfoot). Oh, how I wanted to touch it! It was part of the section that examined all the humanlike creatures. I can imagine several visitors will be struck with amazement at the map showing the locations of reported human-like ape creatures or wildmen worldwide. It’s not just Bigfoot, it’s a worldwide phenomena. I wonder how people will interpret that – are those creatures really there – not a myth, or are they a motif – common to many cultures. I continue to wonder that myself.

It is a hallmark, for me at least, that museum exhibitions can leave me feeling I have just gotten a taste of the subject. There is so much left to learn about it. Even the experts admit they don’t know why this or that is such, they must go on looking. There is the essence of science. It’s perpetual.

One must exit via the gift shop, as expected. I was very disappointed in paucity and poor quality merchandise associated with the theme: stuffed dragons, lots of Draconology books and figures, fluffy winged or horned horses for the girls, pretty mermaid dolls, dragon-themed DVDs, fantasy posters and Asian-type dragon logo tees, bags and coffee mugs. The book selection was pretty shallow. I expected to find the more scholarly discussions about myth, such as the works on dragons and monsters, interspersed among the juvenile selections. There was, instead, Beowulf (movie to come out soon), Charles Gould’s Dragons, Unicorns and Sea Serpents (19^th century), [retitled from his Mythical Monsters, available here http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/mm/index.htm] an encyclopedia of fantastic monsters, and Cryptozoology A-Z (Coleman & Clark). The bookstore did contain all of Ellis’ reprints, which are wonderful.

When I went to the last special exhibit here – about Charles Darwin, I was far more impressed. Of course, that was not exactly marketed to children so the fluff was not there. But, I found it more touching and enlightening. I was examining the existence of a real person who was surrounded by myth and rumor. I found a real person in there, with emotions and fears like we all have, but a brilliant idea. With this exhibition, I found the myths alive but the presentation failed to reach the depths, in my opinion. But to most, I think it will have been interesting, perhaps not captivating. There is a brilliant idea in there — that we both fear and are attracted to the natural world. We want to touch it even though it may bite.

Official Mythical Creatures site
NY Times review

Images from AMNH site: Chupacabra and Gigantopithecus

A Cryptozoo in Your Garden

Gardening is my hobby. Right now, I have lots of daffodils and lots of promise growing green in the garden but I don’t have much shrubbery or trees. If I did have some forest backdrop with cover, I sure would like this guy to decorate my garden:

Unfortunately, he’s not life-size. This website* has loads of statuary to make your garden into your very own cryptozoo. From mermaids, dragons, mastodons, unicorns and gargoyles to more out-of-place critters like alligators and big cats. You can really have fun with this stuff! If you’re into it, add an alien. How about Nosferatu in the foyer? Awesome. They have lots of really original stuff.

 

My personal favorite is the sea serpent which they don’t sell here. A local garden center has the concrete version in bronze, natural or vert de gris finish. It’s very eye-catching swimming through the mulch. Maybe I can convince my husband to get it for me. It would be the hit of the neighborhood.

No boring garden gnomes for this girl.

*Note: I have not ordered from this site so I can’t endorse it or vouch for the quality of products.

Advice for parents – when the kids are afraid of monsters

I’ve been afraid of and fascinated by monsters since I can remember. Even today, I wonder if there are real monsters in the world.

My previous post spoke about the concept that using the excuse “it’s not real” may not be good enough to quell a fear. The small chance that it might be real can just shatter your idea about life and truth.

Of the few things in life that I am certain of, I’m secure in my certainty that there are no monsters under the bed. No vampires, demons, werewolves, nasty witches or zombies. (I’ve been watching classic Scooby Doo reruns with my kids. Can you tell?) But when I tell my little ones that monsters “aren’t real”, it does little good.

I haven’t researched literature to find out why this excuse doesn’t work. It’s not that they don’t trust me. Perhaps it’s just that they must make the leap of faith in their own minds to assure themselves that something so dreadful and harmful to them can’t possibly be real. I can’t do it for them.

So, I use a different technique.

It’s obvious that during the day no monster are around. Mommy doesn’t threaten to tell the bogeyman about bad behavior and I don’t go about suggesting that the Wicked Witch of the West was a real person. Mommy’s pretty tough but I’m not a monster either. I don’t spank, I try not to scream. But, I do get angry and I don’t put up with nonsense, from children or monsters, at all.

When the fear of monsters surfaces from the young ‘uns, around 9 PM, sure, you can check under their beds and in the closets if it helps but make sure to tell them this. Mommy (or Daddy) will not tolerate big, ugly, smelly monsters in the house at night or at any other time. And, (this part is important) assure them that Mommy will personally kick their sorry hides clear down the street if they even approach the door. Mommy’s not afraid of those monsters.

Mind you that this technique is predicated on the assumption that you do not tolerate monstrous behavior from the child either. If you can’t control the child, he/she knows you are no match for the monster. But, if they truly believe in you and that you are the boss, they feel pretty secure in the thought that you will stand your ground (and might have a slight tinge of sympathy for the monster’s hide). Plus, laughing eases the fear a bit. The vision of me squishing up the hairy green critter and rolling it down the block like a bowling ball is enough to make us all feel a bit better.