Good point. Is there no such published paper? One published paper in Australia summarises 203 sightings of Tasmanian tigers – in Western Australia!

mystery_man, backing up Uriah, wrote “The vast majority of any serious research does not happen over night and I think anyone who expects that a show like this can set up shop for seven days and come up with some revelation out of the blue is likely going to be disappointed”

Hit the nail on the head. It’s a shame that’s the way it is, but that’s the way it is.

Boo on Monsterquest

First of all, any of us who know anything about our hairy friends know that 99 percent of the time in the field results in nothing (unless you are one of those “lucky” people who seem to see them everytime you venture out). I wonder,would you rather they “fake” some evidence just for the sake of entertainment?

I know many complained about them hyping shows and such, I just want the truth. Just seeing people out looking with modern equipment is good enough for me. Then again, I may just be a sasquatch fanatic. I never tire of watching, reading or learning about squatch. I am glad the show is fairly honest and doesn’t try to fake evidence just for the sake of entertainment. We have had enough of that in the bigfoot community.

I take MonsterQuest for what it is, an entertaining show about cryptids. I wish it was Squatch 24/7/365 but that’s just me. The show didn’t have groundbreaking news but I thought it was interesting enough to entertain me for an hour. I am just thankful that we have a few shows about squatch, for years we had nothing. Peace.

I used the burning analogy because you mentioned it above:

“I would rather support and modify than burn to the ground or act as if something that won’t be funded in the near future will solve all the complaints.”

That’s not some kind of internet rage or fatalist attitude. I used your words in place of “I want an honest show.”

I just believe that MQ is so far from good that you should support it indirectly by challenging its existence. If the History Channel saw you throw down the gauntlet and champion my “people’s collective” idea (for instance), it would be like watching the Russians build Sputnik. This is also why 3rd party candidates run, to push the other two parties forward by attempting to replace them.

What if you put all your energy into something like that? How many negative responses are there on this page to MQ? That’s will, that’s energy! Am I the one being cynical? Why do you believe there is no hope for funding of proper documentaries any time soon? Past experience? I thought you were an Obama supporter…Yes We Can!

As for Wikipedia, I’m talking about the first level of exposure, not the ultimate source of knowledge. As far as first responders go, I believe Wikipedia is to MQ as Doctor Hibbert is to Doctor Nick. There’s proof that I do watch some TV.

But I do admit, I am highly critical, but I just want an honest show. Dishonesty bleeds into everything about MQ, the ominous narrator, the wording, the scowling monster face, the name. That’s my point–it’s pure showmanship, but it’s about something that I think is real, so I find it offensive. Got to be loud about these feelings, not bottle them up. The emperor has no clothes.

Unfortunately they do rather feed the sceptical viewpoint with some of their antics which does not help those who would like the truth brought out and backing to do so.

I also admire the physical effort and hardship, if seeing is believing, the team seem to be making, no sleep, air travel etc etc.

If I remember correctly DNA from the (appalling) screw snare was first of all found to be absent by the (sceptical) NY lab and then elsewhere (after a zink? contaminant was removed) found to be human with a difference. This begins to look more like what would be expected from sasquatch given the apparently small difference between, eg, a bonobo and a human.

I wonder if in testing for DNA a trick is being missed in that labs are not taking advantage of the potential of hair samples to provide an uncontaminated and undegraded sample of DNA from within its interior. Something seems to be going amiss with the search for DNA, should it be that hard to find sasquatch hair and establish some uniqueness? There is the interesting case of the (Orang Pendek?) sample, analysed by prof Brian Sykes-Seven Daughters of Eve-found to be unique but apparently going no further ?

PT writes: “Yes, MQ may entertain, but does it help or harm Cryptozoology? It may be popular outside of CZ circles, but why should that matter? We’re here to try to find hidden animals.”

I’ve mentioned often, there is no modern funding via government sources, zoological societies, academia, or museums for the active searching or researching of cryptids, as there was during Victorian days. While some funding comes from on-going conservation efforts, the popularizing of cryptozoology has resulted in funding via documentary filmmakers and television production companies to support active searching in the field. While we may not be exactly happy with the time-limited nature of this effort to date, you have to start somewhere, to reinforce the eventual further, future funding.

PT: “I believe that the very foundation of the show lies in indifference to the merit of Cryptozoology.”

I find this unfortunate and merely reflective of a different point of view or objective to how this comment maker would conduct the searching via this show. The executive producer of MQ, while obviously wishing to make money and produce an entertaining series, does have rather high standards for his production values and educational content for his programming. All one has to do is look at the documentary that is the virtual and actual father of the “MonsterQuest” series, i.e. Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science.

PT: “I am not charging the MQ bosses with objectivity, I’m charging them with exploitation of Cryptozoology.”

Is ESPN exploiting baseball because they have a “Baseball Tonight” program vs producing another version of “This Week In Baseball”? I really find a heavy dose of bias being ditched out in the above sentence from PT.

PT: “Yes, I would totally like to burn MQ to the ground if that would mean that the people who are really curious would get their information from wikipedia or other reasonably sound sources.”

This has got to be a joke but reflective of the Internet mentality alive and well today. Wikipedia is not a “reasonably sound source.” In a perfect world, I would like everyone reading books, using libraries, going to universities, and referencing “reasonably sound sources.” However, television is a major source of education for the vast majority of people in the technologically-aware world, and even compared to “In Search Of” and “That’s Incredible” – two early sources of cryptozoological knowledge on television – “MonsterQuest” is like watching an Australopithecus evolve into Homo sapiens, right before our eyes. Patience, please, for the future flowering of MQ as it continues. In it’s absence, it will not be replaced quickly by anything “better,” for longterm funding of field expeditions do not happen overnight because we hope they will occur.

Burn MonsterQuest?

The recommendation of PT is an example of “Ben Tre logic.” It was at the provincial capital of Ben Tre during the Vietnam War where an unnamed U.S. Air Force Major gave Associated Press correspondent Peter Arnett the most famous quote of the war. Discussing Ben Tre on February 7, 1968, Arnett wrote: “‘it became necessary to destroy the town to save it,’ a U.S. major says.”

Think about it. Is that what people want?

Yes, MQ may entertain, but does it help or harm Cryptozoology? It may be popular outside of CZ circles, but why should that matter? We’re here to try to find hidden animals.

I believe that the very foundation of the show lies in indifference to the merit of Cryptozoology. Here is my reasoning: Lets say I am in charge of producing a new TV show. If I actually take serious (for instance) the possibility that unknown hominids are walking around out in the woods, I’m going to make it my goal to scour the lands with every resource I have until I dig up some evidence, because when I have it, my ratings are going to rival the moon landing. I think I could probably find the money to put a guy in the woods for more than seven days. Admit it, they do the bare minimum.

If however I regard the whole thing as a bunch of hogwash, I would create MQ in all its glory, making the most dollars possible with the least investment.

I am not charging the MQ bosses with objectivity, I’m charging them with exploitation of Cryptozoology.

Yes, I would totally like to burn MQ to the ground if that would mean that the people who are really curious would get their information from wikipedia or other reasonably sound sources. Think of all the intelligent people who are actually repelled by shows like MQ…It’s as much an anti-advertisement for CZ as it is an advertisement.

Well, spoke my piece.