On the topic of New Jersey and ‘cryptids’ in general;
A wandering albatross was spotted over the Garden State Parkway and later radio collared…

A large flyer could end up anywhere, its nice to have the habitat when they get there. The ropen reports in Papua match older Jersey devil reports.

Crypto is hobbled by its inability to channel resources and discussion down one channel: the evidence. It’s so open-minded its brains constantly fall out.

That’s usually where a hierarchy comes in. Either a person or a small group in charge of things who steers the researchers and funnels the funds. A sort of “I know you want to work on ‘X’, however right now our best information tells us ‘Y’ is more probable and if you wants the funds to carry out any research at all that is where you need to concentrate your efforts.” sort of thing.

But how do we come to an agreement as to whom is in charge and under what authority? From what you’re saying we need a central command (either person or small group) who can direct and concentrate the efforts of all the various researcher, while keeping the more outrageous ‘loose cannons’ either sidelined or at the very least diminish the damage they can do to the ‘respectability’ of Cryptozoology.

I know they say organizing atheists is like herding cats, but I have the feeling organizing all the varying groups and people who refer to themselves as Crypto would be an even bigger undertaking. As you state we (as a group) are just all over the place and who can say, with any authority ,who should be allowed and who shouldn’t?

“Just curious, how would you go about discouraging ‘woo-woo’ from the field in general and/or from any sort of conferences without alienating too many people. (And, yes, I do know that there are some people you fully want to alienate but I’m not talking about them.) And how much ‘woo’ is tolerable? Is believing Sasquatch and UFO cycles are related okay but believing Sasquatch itself is an alien is a no-go. What about Sasquatch sightings as related to moon cycles? I’m curious as to where you would draw that line in the sand and what your reasoning might be.”

My take:

I draw the line at the evidence. Which means ‘woo’ isn’t tolerable; and the woo-wooers need to be wooed away from woo-woo and put on the scientific path.

Sasquatch/UFOs: no connection. (We don’t even know – the name says so – what UFOs are. And until they stop in for unleaded and tell us, we won’t.)

Moon cycles: no connection.

(OK. There may be a few – and I mean few – “high strangeness” accounts in which stuff seems to coincide.)

(I mean FEW.)

(I think one chapter of Loren’s “Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America” covered every single one. But in no way could one read those reports in a way that would lead one to posit a UFO/Bigfoot connection. It’s like saying that if you saw a UFO, you’re an alien.)

Just sayin’. I read reports; there may be few if any who have read more. And I think about them, and read what scientists say about them, and make connections in my mind…that seem to happen to just coincide, coincidence? I think not! with what the scientists are thinking too. No UFOs, no moon cycles, no little green men. Just an animal that was exhibiting behaviors reported in the 19th century that were exactly like those that scientists started reporting in the great apes we know about when field research on those got started a century later.

In other words, people who knew nothing about apes were reporting great-ape behaviors a century before scientists “confirmed” those behaviors in other animals.

(I read Bindernagel’s books and throughout them thought to myself: it’s like I wrote these. That’s what evidence will do. He looks at it, too.)

Myths don’t predict reality. Logic says so. But the sasquatch “predicted” the known great apes.

This is just an animal that has been seen, heard and smelled just about every way from just about every angle in just about every kind of situation that an animal can be (a key indicator that the evidence is solid). There is nothing I have read about the sasquatch – and I could write the encyclopedia article now – that I haven’t read many times in many reports. It’s as consistent as 500 people describing a robin. Or a geranium. Or anything else. Real stuff is like that. Myths aren’t.

The tracks alone are so compelling that Krantz said: “Even if none of the hundreds of sightings had ever occurred, we would still be forced to conclude that a giant bipedal primate does indeed inhabit the forests of the Pacific Northwest.” He is only talking about a fragment of a fragment of the evidence!

Here ya go: http://www.texasbigfoot.com/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/91-anatomy-of-the-sasquatch-foot

There may be no better single thing to read than that about a critical component of the evidence.

If you can do a anatomical treatise on a critter’s foot, ’tain’t no Jersey Devil.

And I could tell you that if no tracks had ever been found and no film had ever been shot, the sighting reports – alone – are equally compelling. I’ve READ them.

No supernatural no paranormal. Just the facts sir madam, just the facts. They’re out there. I don’t see them for the Jersey Devil and the chupacabras. Point me to them, somebody, if they exist. Something odd (hallucinogens?) is going on at Loch Ness but reports are so all over the place one cannot tell what.

You discourage woo-woo by asking the wooers how far woo-woo has gotten them. You explain to them that if crypto doesn’t start using scientific protocols to investigate large bodies of consistent evidence we’ll still be here typing these words a century from now. (If there is any wild left.)

Crypto, if it’s gonna get together and talk, should get together and talk about the kouprey; the saola; the Chacoan peccary; the kipunji; the coelacanth; the snub nose monkey. [s].

Crypto didn’t discover those.

Zoology did.

Time to do zoology.

I don’t like sounding impatient but you know what they say.

Insanity = doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Time to do zoology.

For a change.

It is ESSENTIAL to put all the eggs in as few baskets as possible. I say two. Period.

Here is what crypto needs to do:

1) assemble evidence to show frequency and coherence;
2) marshal resources to gain scientific attention.

Not to “prove.” No resources; no time. Nothing more obvious than that. We trust the proof to the forces of mainstream science. The proponents should be getting their attention. They have to prove. Society says so. If George Schaller had shot the P/G film, the sasquatch would have sailed to confirmation within months. If not weeks or days.

We see how effective crypto has been in dealing with evidence. Crypto can’t keep its yap shut. Science just chuckles and turns away from the latest misadventure. And turns to what it’s best at: quietly assembling the case then BANG in your face and you are blown away. Another mystery solved. How do they DO IT?

Answer: they don’t go all over the place with silly theories. Not in front of the public, they don’t. If they weren’t performing such monumental feats of ignorance in some areas, flat contradicting everything they say they believe, it would be tempting to call them godlike.

(nnnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh.)

And we all know that fans of various cryptids aren’t going to drop their pets. If they aren’t convinced by the lack of evidence, what would convince them? Clearly the mainstream isn’t convinced. They characterize crypto as a bunch of people holding an irrational desire to believe stuff. Largely because that’s true.

Crypto is hobbled by its inability to channel resources and discussion down one channel: the evidence. It’s so open-minded its brains constantly fall out.

Sciences are driven by science.

Crypto isn’t. Plain and simple. All one needs to do is look at the evidence.

Maybe it’s because I live in Pa and have visited the Pine Barrens and Salt Marshes but I have a hard time accepting the Jersey Devil as written. In some cases it is reptilian, in others it seems more mammalian, in others I am pretty danged sure it was nothing more than an overly large owl.

As for flying serpents/reptiles in general, I wouldn’t rule them out completely as anomalies such as winged snakes have been found from time to time although these are usually the result of either birth defects or consuming too large a meal and having their stomachs rupture. Lizards are a bit more iffy as several of them do have various appendages, frills and throat sacks that could easily be mistaken for wings and in a few cases can actually be used for gliding short distances.

Now a larger sized flying reptile, a la medieval tales of dragons attacking villages, is stretching the imagination as many of these animals were traditionally placed in geographies that now hold huge human populations and, as with any animal, a breeding population must be maintained in order for the species to continue. I think any reptile inhabiting Europe that is larger than 3 feet (much less flies or glides) and remains unnoticed is just too far out there. How recent are the reports you’re seeing? Anything from the last 50 years or so that can be reasonably followed up on?

The water cryptids are, at least statistically, the most likely to be found as our exploration of both marine and fresh water bodies increase. Although I wonder if it is best to have a ‘roster’ for an International Crypto line up or would it be better to have various National rosters so that each nation can have their own local cryptids spotlighted which would bring more attention and hopefully more eyes to their own backyards to look for these animals. More eyes tend to means evidence and all we need is a few ‘proven’ to get mainstream attention.

Does anyone know how many ‘international cryptids’ there are? Such as Sasquatch/Yeti/Yeren/Yowie. Similar creatures that are seen in multiple countries or across the globe?

@ DWA
Just curious, how would you go about discouraging ‘woo-woo’ from the field in general and/or from any sort of conferences without alienating too many people. (And, yes, I do know that there are some people you fully want to alienate but I’m not talking about them.) And how much ‘woo’ is tolerable? Is believing Sasquatch and UFO cycles are related okay but believing Sasquatch itself is an alien is a no-go. What about Sasquatch sightings as related to moon cycles? I’m curious as to where you would draw that line in the sand and what your reasoning might be.

Personally if it’s extraterrestrial then it falls outside Cryptozoology for me as I would consider that outside of our ‘natural’ world. However if someone could prove that there is a correlation between moon phases or reports of UFO’s and crypto sightings I would be willing to hear them out as long as the evidence is sound.

As I have said here many times:

There is no comparison – none – between the volume and persuasive nature of the evidence for the sasquatch and that for any other cryptid. In fact, other than the animals already known to the ancients, no animal – no phenomenon, period – has compiled more and more convincing evidence than the sasquatch has before being accepted as real.

Show me one scientist who vouches for the Jersey Devil based on the evidence. Then show me that evidence.

(Show me what a Jersey Devil looks like. EVERYONE knows what a bigfoot looks like.)

The film you mention as the sole evidence for the sasquatch could be proven a hoax tomorrow – hint: it isn’t one – and the evidence for the sasquatch would not diminish in quality one iota.

Cryptozoology needs to put its bets on bigfoot. Period. We may want to talk about all this other stuff after that’s proven, which it should have been decades ago.

Until crypto realizes this, it ain’t a science.

Thanks for the thoughts

To address some concerns,

Unicorn- rhino
centaur- ?? guy riding a horse
chupacabra- mangy canines ?
Unicorns and fiery serpents are in the bible. Marco polo wrote about unicorns and flying reptiles. Names change ie: dragon and dinosaur.

Jersey devil, We have detailed accounts that match other accounts of flying beasts from around the world and one mythological tale about a lady with lots of kids

We have lots of fossils (many funerals) for animals that fit jersey devil descriptions, the accounts of jersey devil with live stock characteristics could be like centaur stories and two things as one. Perhaps the most famous account of the jersey devil being seen is by a train and then flying around Philadelphia after going for livestock. Many accounts describe a glow to the jersey devil much like the characteristic ropen glow. This could be the fiery serpent.

Some quick rough math => 100 miles long 5 miles wide atlantic side, 50 miles long 10 miles wide delaware bay side, 1000 square miles contigous wetland/shallow estuary
27 countries with less land than that? If you havent ever been, its beautiful, and has some extensive dense avian populations with many rare species. That area borders the vast pine barrens. (just to note, not to make it sound bigger than British Colombia)

NOT to make people mad… (not saying shouldnt investigate)
Bigfoot has a video made by hollywood hopefuls after a worldwide frenzy on yeti expeditions and gorilla discoveries. It is claimed to be a giant that lives in temperate forests, perhaps the most well known forest habitat, and there is no fossil record to match. (No funeral)

By your own definitions, a pterosaur skeleton makes the jersey devil more plausible than bigfoot who does not have a fossil match.

My comments henceforth focus on the sasquatch and yeti. If crypto wants to make any headway it is hereby advised by me to drop all other avenues; focus on these; and use them as “gain leaders” for scientists to raise their eyebrows and maybe – just maybe – start looking at the rest.

I’d agree with you that it’s time to get youngsters’ minds opened on this. (I should say: take advantage of their innate openness of mind.) The inattention by the scientific mainstream has been nothing short of spectacular. There is no way – no, there is absolutely none conceivable – that a scientist exposing herself to the evidence as much as I have – let alone Meldrum, Bindernagel and Krantz – could fail to be moved at the very least to my position: the evidence is compelling and demands the attention of science. Ad sure enough I’m right: I have never heard a scientist pronounce negatively on this question whose pronouncement doesn’t display, loudly, (1) ignorance of the evidence; (2) ignorance of the way science works; or (3) both.

I’ve gone into that, in detail, way too many times here. I won’t again. (I’ll just say, for those who aren’t acquainted: Read up. If you are surprised by the above paragraph, yes, I’m talking to you.) But YouTube and the social media (in which YouTube should really be included) are outlets of which crypto should start taking copious advantage. Start clean: do away with the goofy music and the portentous stentorian pronouncements, and simply address the evidence. Get it online; get people talking about it. Public television could do an absolutely gripping job on this, as many installments as they want to do, just the way they work now, sticking strictly to the evidence. (Sir David Attenborough considers yeti evidence “convincing.” Bingo.)

And maybe they should, as you and Max say, just wait out the funerals, and focus on people who aren’t scientists.

Or on their kids, who aren’t either.

Yet.

I’ve got three and I’m working on them.

@ DWA
I do understand your point about ‘if the woo-woo’s give the money the woo-woo’s want to control things more’ so its a bit of a fine line between getting the money needed to get the message out there. (As I firmly believe only the skoftic side of the argument is being heard by 85% of the population) While keeping our core values and insisting on being seen as more of a mainstream science as opposed to a ‘fringe’ science. I’m just not sure how to do that as so many people involved in one discipline find the others interesting as well and may be torn as to which group to give their hard earned dollars too.

My best bet would be a grass roots campaign, starting with places like YouTube, FB, Tumblr and for those few brave souls like myself, 4Chan (as anons can be a huge help if you tickle their fancy and something like this would, if not for truth than for the sheer trolling potential). To be honest with you, at this point in time I do not see any other way for Cryptozoology to be taken as a serious science short of Sasquatch walking out of forest and crashing a presidential campaign junket. We need to get ‘kids’ involved, tweens and teens who haven’t closed their minds to the possibility of there being more undiscovered animals out there, who aren’t drowning in adult worried of putting food on the table and making the mortgage payment. They have the time and inclination to look at more than one side of a subject, they want to know ‘why’ and most importantly, they are willing to at least listen. So if we can do that, then, much like the Gnu Atheism movement, within 10 years you will see a huge upsurge in people clamoring for mainstream science to TRULY evaluate the evidence we have and if it’s strong enough, start really looking in our own backyards for what may be the find of the century.