Speaking of threads moving on since the last time you logged on…
If only every thread on this board cold be conducted with this level of civility, I could retire
Thank you. I’ve always found Cryptozoology to be a polite forum. I think a lot of it may be down to the fact that’s that this is essentially the same discussion that’s a group of us have been arguing across multiple threads for nearly two years now, and as it’s got many different facets to it so we find ourselves agreeing with each other at least some of the time.
Also I think it’s between people whose primary interest is Cryptozoology so everyone has a sympathetic view of the subject, and again to echo the last post even those who find themselves forced into disbelieving would be glad to be proved wrong.
And again, I respectfully disagree. The negative evidence is IMHO easily countered by the positive evidence (credible anecdotal, indigenous tradition, anomalous physical.) It's entirely analagous with the ABC thing in Britain
Physical evidence first then, I can’t think of any examples that I can say are persuasive and never did. If there is anything particularly good I’d be glad to hear about it. Indigenous tradition is an interesting question, and honestly I think it’s one that can be used by either side as persuasive proof. It’s just so ambiguous, when one culture interprets another despite the fundamental similarities a lot of context may be lost. I think fairly good examples of this, for my argument, can be seen on the Nandi bear thread, but of course you can counter with equally valid examples, like the native stories about the mountain gorilla. I genuinely detest undermining eye witnesses but, as I say in this case I think it has to be considered.
As for ABC’s they’re there, we know this we’ve captured them we’ve even (and this too remote a chance to draw any conclusions from) found remains. Admittedly though we’ve never photographed one. As an aside I know two witnesses one saw a sickly Puma in his back garden, the other was an ex girlfriend who saw a black leopard on the Beacons, and even though she admitted seeing it totally refused to accept it was real.
Summaries probably better given our respective..erm.. propensities toward detailed answers ?
Yes, I’m starting to realise that this thread isn’t the home of the one liner. So in summary here are brief references to some of my main objections;
Problems with the animal itself;
*The reports are global indicating a hugely dispersed species
(Something that surprises me though is that Virunga population model for mountain gorillas isn’t cited in support of their existence, the actual numbers needed, if you try to extrapolate from the gorilla which I think is fair, are shockingly low for a sustainable population estimated as being viable for apr 400 years)
*No body despite huge economic incentives to produce one, we’ve managed to exploit every other species except this one which would be the worlds most widely distributed large mammal ever.
*It’s remarkably adaptable as it’s reported in every type of habitat and climate, so the main problem in that case is why aren’t there more of them.
*Reported in areas it couldn’t have physically reached
*Differences in reports i.e. Almasty to Sasquatch, indicating as Analis says a menagerie of undiscovered bipeds.
*Physiological features which seem strange.
General problems
*Timing for Sasquatch looks suspicious
*Evidence of sharp practice
*Continuity between mythology and modern reports
*Danger of westernising indigenous tradition to fit modern tastes
*Repeated Precedents for this level of misidentification, in the modern sense particularly interesting if not conclusive example here;
http://www.forteantimes.com/features/fb ... alien.html
Amyasleigh and Analis I’ll come back to you both your posts as of course there's been a lot of posting today, one thing out of order though;
If i recall correctly the 'yeti' in the loin cloth with a bow and arrow was no larger than a human being, which i think is exactly what it was.
I don’t think so, does anyone have a copy handy?