I will attempt to post this response to Cryptomundo later today regarding Loren Coleman’s commentary on my previous blog post. We shall see if it appears uncensored:
Mr. Coleman: I’m disappointed in your response to my post but I thank you for paying it some attention.
I understand that you have taken personally my thoughts about the ICM. It is your collection which is meaningful to you and many others. I don’t doubt that it has value to our culture as do all large collections. I’m a big advocate of museums as a means to show visitors the huge variety of natural and cultural things in the world and to satisfy curiosity. Thus, I put the ICM in the category of “American history” rather than “natural history”. You are correct in that I don’t think there is enough quality evidence to bring this field into the realm of zoological study.
I don’t appreciate the concocted story of my imagined trip to museums just as I don’t appreciate the guessing about an unknown animal’s behavior and physiology based on a questionable footprint or photograph. As cryptozoologists can read too much into the trace evidence of cryptids, you have focused on one bit of my piece and speculated on it. The mention of your museum was one five-sentence paragraph among over a thousand words. In no place did I say it was fake or worthless. It’s a real reach to say that I intended to “collapse the infrastructure of your museum”.
I would definitely visit the museum if I was in the vicinity (I have never been to Maine) because I, too, LOVE representations of cryptids. I have, since I learned how to read, relished the stories and ideas that these creatures are genuine. I’m familiar with the evidence that exists for cryptids, yet I am not impressed. I have concluded for this moment in time that cryptids are not as they are described. I’d delight in evidence to suggest otherwise, but the bar is set very high. The claims become more extraordinary every day that passes and nothing is found. Prints and artifacts won’t make an impact.
My blog piece was my way of looking back at the decade that I thought was fun and interesting. You didn’t talk about any of the rest of the post! Do you disagree with the interpretation of the other events regarding the various crytpids I spoke of? Is there more to these stories that I missed? What about the big picture thoughts about the community? My hope was that readers might contribute follow-ups to the stories that seemed to just fade away or talk about the way investigation groups contributed to the field. You obviously did not like what I said and how I said it. I can not see where I was either unfriendly or unstable as you suggest.
The Doubtful blog has been active since December 2006 during which time I chose not to attach my name directly to it. That’s a really common security practice. However, those who have contacted or connect to me through social sites know my name and much about my personal life. It does not follow that everything that is not obvious is deliberately hidden. I’m not out for money, Mr. Coleman, and I’m not out to heckle, but will call things as I see them with good reasons. I’ve studied both sides (and multiple angles) of the topic and feel qualified enough to speak about it.
Other cryptozoology related posts from this author.
UPDATE: Because this reply is long, I posted it as a link to Cryptomundo. Loren replied: “You have the option, like everyone else, to submit a comment to the specific blog. However, the exchange for the blog at Cryptomundo will occur at Cryptomundo, not through a link, thank you.” I decided to not to submit it as a comment because I do not trust Cryptomundo to post it uncensored or even to post it all except to continue the traffic. I don’t really want to increase their traffic so I won’t post it. However, based on the response, and from outside sources, I’m inclined to think that their hits have generally decreased by excluding all critical commentators and by posting lots of fluff stories. However, an occasional Boing Boing reference and their dedicated fan base sustains them, I’m sure. It’s really sad that there is no good place to go for open discussion. For news, I enjoy Still on the Track. They are rather pleasant there.