Table of Contents |
|---|
| What's New |
| Exploring The Boundaries Of Cryptozoology. |
| Cryptozoology And Relevant Paleontology News |
| Cryptozoology--Hard Evidence |
| Bigfoot:An Alternate History |
| Old News 1 (March/April 1993) |
| Old News 2 (May to October 1993) |
| Old News 3 (November 1993 July 1994) |
|
Cryptozoology resources
Ben Roesch's On-Line Cryptozoology Archives |
Useful Anthropology and Primatology resourcesEarly Pleistocene Hominids China:f you can wade through the jargon, this page has some interesting facts about Asian apes and early humans. Anthropology in the News: Brief, useful summaries of new discoveries involving men and primates. Primate Information Network --Has links to several on-line newsletters and journals involving monkeys and apes. The journals are often jargon-filled and difficult to read, but they sometimes have real Cryptozoology gems in them. For example, a 1994 issue of Sulawesi Primate Newsletter had a paragraph in it about how a team of primatologists sponsored by National Geographic spotted, but did not catch a monitor lizard almost as big as a Komodo Dragon. The paragraph also said that the same area seemed to have the potential for several other discoveries of new animals. The journal Neotropical Primates recently had an article on the discovery of two large new fossil spider monkeys (see my paleontology news section).
|
|
|
Cryptozoology is the search for animals that haven't been acknowledged by western science yet. That search throws science and pseudoscience together in an uneasy co-existence. I try to plant myself in the science camp. But where is the boundary line? I mention Bigfoot in the title because it's something most people have heard of. I doubt very much that Bigfoot exists. I'd put it, along with the Loch Ness Monster, in the pseudo-science category. I would genuinely love to be proven wrong in both cases. The science part of Cryptozoology mainly involves animals that, if they really exist, would be of interest to almost no one outside the scientific community. The headline grabbers like Bigfoot and Loch Ness monster are headline grabbers because they're not likely to be real.
The real action in Cryptozoology is in smaller, more obscure animals. There are still a lot of them to be discovered. In July 1995, a biologist took a two week trip to the Columbian Andes and came back with six new species of small mammals. An article in the September 13, 1996 issue of the prestigious journal SCIENCE says that there are currently a little over 4600 species of mammals known to western science. The article estimated that number will jump by at least 15% when all of the new mammals that have been found in the last decade are officially named and described. The article quotes Lawrence R. Heaney, an evolutionary biogeographer at Chicago's Field Museum as saying that he thinks the number of mammal species will eventually reach 8000. Heaney says, "The tropics are still so poorly known, even for mammals that just about anywhere you go, you'll find something new." Heaney himself recently found 11 species of small mammals in the Philippines.
Most of the new animals will be small--rats, bats and shrews. A few of them will be big. Several large new animals in the cow/goat/deer tribe have turned up lately in Vietnam. A monitor lizard almost as big as a Komodo Dragon has been seen by reputable and trained observers on the island of Sulawesi, but not captured yet. New species of monkeys still turn up in Brazil at the rate of about one per year.
In a few cases, there is apparently hard evidence of a cryptozoology-type animal's existence, but the animal is still in limbo. If anyone has word of what happened in these cases, I'd like to hear about it. I'm especially interested in:
January 7, 2002:
I've gone a long time between updates--over 3 years. I started the cryptozoology part of my site at a time when I wasn't aware of a lot of good cryptozoology information of the web. That changed, and it got to the point where frankly I felt that I was re-inventing the wheel. A lot of other people were covering the same ground and doing a better job of it than I was. I still feel that way. I gave the page a cosmetic facelift and updated the links, but that's about all this time. I'll try to keep the links current, and I'll do an update once in a while if I feel that I can contribute something out of the ordinary, but I won't be updating this page on a regular basis.
Sept 10, 1998:
I hope you enjoy the new look of the page. The only significant recent news I've come across hasn't happened yet. Supposedly, later this month a reporter is going to air a segment proving that the famous Bigfoot video footage is a fake. That's an easy and attention-grabbing claim. We'll see if it also happens to be true.
March 12, 1998:
Just one quick news flash: Discover Magazine's current issue has a long, rather skeptical
article
on Champ, Lake Champlain's answer to the Loch Ness Monster. The article does let both skeptics
and believers have
a voice, and it is well written. I haven't looked into Lake Monsters deeply enough to know if the
dominant theory
in the article--that Champ sightings are mostly due to an odd type of wave that exists in both Lake
Champlain and
Loch Ness--is valid. I'd be interested in hearing what people who have looked into this more
closely think.
Jan 14, 1998:
Dec 28, 1997: Dec 21, 1997:
Nov 28, 1997:
Nov 4, 1997:
Feb 25, 1998:
Added New Crypto news (hot story)
I'm sure there are other good cryptozoology sources out there. If you know of any I'd love to list them. I'd also love to talk to others out there who try to keep up with this stuff. Click to e-mail me. DaleCoz@aol.com