Read my post again.

The things you are bringing up are about as much cryptozoology as…well, name something that isn’t, and you can lump anything you brought up with that.

In other words: nothing you bring up touches cryptozoology – a science, when it’s treated properly – with a ten-foot pole.

Ever? When I was a kid in the ’70s, there was always In Search Of or a doc about UFOs or the Loch Ness monster on TV. I even saw that crappy Sun Pictures feature-length Bigfoot documentary in a movie theatre! And, of course, the Six-Million Dollar Man fought Bigfoot — that was like the Superbowl for me! I never watched Harry and the Hendersons, but I recall that was on TV more recently.

So come on! When were you born, 1997?

Obviously a rhetorical question. Cryptozoology has not, ever, been touched by the mainstream media. With a ten-foot pole.

I’m not talking about the multitudinous discoveries of ‘new’ animals similar to those we already know about by mainstream scientists looking for them. That is, technically, crypto. But nobody in the TV biz would know that.

I’m talking about the search for the yeti; the sasquatch; the orang pendek. OK, Nessie/Chessie/Ogopogo/Champ et al. That kind of cryptid. Everything ever done by the media here has been the-funny-stuff-people-will-do. Yes, even MonsterQuest, really. (Look at the name.)

There is really no limit to the interest that could be garnered and used to account should the search for unknown animals get treated with respect wherever the evidence appears to merit that. The media could drive this search by coverage the perusal of which could encourage budding scientists to move their interest to crypto. But all we get – when we get anything – is the scaaaaaryyyyyyy-mooooonnnnnnsteeeeerrrrrrrrrr angle, or the dueling idiots: True Believers vs. Bonehead Cynics.

Crypto, that ain’t.

[CRYPTOMUNDO response: This video was noted on this blog in February 2010, here. Thank you.]