For years, I have been fascinated in the evolution of cryptozoological thought. There are clear fractures happening in the field, but I don't really see a ton of discussion about it in public. Yet, I have had plenty of personal conversations with a variety of researchers about the changes. So, I decided it would be valuable to the field to ask a variety of researchers, all with different approaches and expertise, the same five questions about the field today. Hopefully, the differences in answers will be valuable information on the diversity of thought in the field.
My last interview was with writer Sharon Hill and you can read it here. For this interview, I talked to my good friend Brian Parsons.
Brian is an Ohio cryptozoologist and paranormal investigator. He has written an excellent series of books on the investigation into the unexplained and hosts the best paranormal news radio show the Paranormal News Insider. He can be found at this link.
1. What is cryptozoology as you see it?
Brian: Avoiding the standard definitions, I see cryptozoology as a set of beliefs in creatures that defy logic, scientific support, or possibility of existing in nature. Many times, cryptozoology is defined using “the search or study of” based on the “ology”, but I feel the strongest aspect is the belief in not just the creatures themselves but also the fact that they could exist despite the overwhelming data against it. Folklore plays a big part in the creatures associated with cryptozoology and folklore depends on belief for survival and not on physical evidence at all. In fact, I feel the lack of evidence fuels the folklore even more and secures more interested parties into attempting to “discover” these creatures that are so elusive (since they often live in the beliefs of the hopeless romantics who seek them).
This might seem skeptical, but it is hard to believe in many of the creatures associated with cryptozoology existing in nature when you set aside the logical fallacies that skew the judgment of researchers and field investigators alike. What is even more difficult is to not be a complete skeptic or true believer. Creating a balance in belief is not easy, but a perfect balance should still weigh closer on the skeptical side to help escape many of the things that has held the topic back such as being unscientific, surviving on speculation, and having a lack of objective evidence to support the claims of witnesses.
2. Where do you think cryptozoology is headed in the next few years?
Brian: Cryptozoology will continue to evolve based on the creatures that are most popular within it. Bigfoot continues to be the primary driver since varieties of this creature are said to exist on many continents and the creature is easily identifiable by most of the public. Belief in the possibilities of such creatures will not diminish despite the continued lack of evidence and the increase in the technology and use of drones, camera, video technology, etc. In many cases personal accounts (even when they lack evidence or credibility) as well as ambiguous photos, videos, or audio evidence will continue to fuel the belief engine that drives cryptozoology.
Example: The Loch Ness Monster is currently seeing decades of popularity despite a lack of evidence as well as the Otago University DNA research project which did not find DNA to support any large creature in the loch. Nessie and other creatures associated with cryptozoology will continue to fuel interest if anecdotal accounts continue to flow in. My prediction could include the “next big thing” will be more flamboyant than a flying humanoid or a Sasquatch/werewolf hybrid and will create a sub-sect of researchers who are “experts” in that arena and maybe even a conference or two (and keep an eye out to see who can publish a book first)! Kidding aside, but cryptozoology is seeing a high popularity probably due to many ghost groups getting bored as well as the distraction of fantasy. I would, however, expect to see many flee this pursuit to investigate the UFO field in the next few years as this topic continues to get worldwide mainstream news attention.
3. Who do you think (living or deceased) has had the biggest impact on the state of cryptozoology in today's world?
Brian: This is a tough question since cryptozoology has relied on many different people to give it life to those who have helped give it shape over the years. While one can (and should) easily point to either Ivan Sanderson or Bernard Heuvelmans for creating a foundation for cryptozoology one could question who influenced them. Sanderson himself was a follower of Charles Fort who really deserves the credit for creating interest in all things paranormal and challenging many to think outside the scientific boundaries.
4. What, if any, have been cryptozoology's biggest contributions to modern science?
Brian: Cryptozoology and science are not exactly bedfellows. Cryptozoology itself is founded on belief and folklore and is considered pseudoscientific since it does not rely on the scientific method. Again, cryptozoology is cemented in belief and the folklore that perpetuates that belief. Many cryptozoologists talk about the coelacanth, giant squid, megamouth shark, okapi, and other creatures that used to exist only in folklore. The problem is scientists (people funded by organizations for scientific research) were the ones who documented these findings and thus took the credit for them, not cryptozoologists, although they have been adopted into cryptozoology lore.
The contribution here is that part of cryptozoology gives hope to the flesh and blood creatures that should be extinct and hopefully gives someone motivation to go out and rediscover them or not give up on a creature such as the thylacine or ivory billed woodpecker since they might become the next Laotian rock rat (related to a family of rodents thought extinct for 11 million years rediscovered in 2005) or the aforementioned coelacanth (order of fish that was thought to be extinct for over 65 million years). Every discovery of animals that are thought extinct gives hope, although not credibility, for the more outlandish cryptids to be discovered.
My hope is that like an interest in airplanes might lead someone to being an astronaut, an interest in planets might lead them to being an astronomer or physicist, a person interested in cryptids might lead them to being a biologist or zoologist. Animal educating celebrities are fewer than famous physicists these days. Gone are Steve Irwin who was made fun of due to his accent although he pulled more people into the world of animals than anyone. Jack Hanna recently left the Columbus Zoo and public life due to personal illness and all we really have left is Jeff Corwin, Jane Goodall who turned 87 this year, and a few other minor influences. Cryptozoology might be a good enough gateway to get young people interested in animals enough that they want to pursue a legitimate career in helping or helping to understand animals or other aspects of nature.
5. Why do you think that paranormal and ufological subjects have been gaining traction within the field of cryptozoology?
Brian: Interestingly, my personal pursuit of cryptozoology and UFOs came from research I was doing on extra sensory perception while working primarily in the ghost field. In my opinion we are seeing the continuation of a shift in cryptozoology from belief in Lazarus taxon and longstanding regional folklore to more incredible creatures that defy biology or physics in their makeup. We have gone from Bigfoot (and the many other varieties) and the Loch Ness Monster (and other folkloric lake and ocean monsters) to one-off monsters like Chupacabra, Mothman, dogman, and many other modern day boogeyman stories that have created a loyal following of believers and instant folklore.
Belief in the more incredible creatures has also laid the foundation for more incredible claims to accompany them. The Bigfoot being an alien hypothesis has been around for decades (see Stan Gordon, Jon-Erik Beckjord, and John Keel for starters). While this camp has been in the minority it gained a lot of traction about ten years ago and even led to an episode of Ancient Aliens being dedicated to the topic which has now made it a popular opinion to many.
On the flipside of this UFO researchers have included creatures in their witness description lineups since the early days of research. A few decades ago, ghost investigators, cryptozoologists, and Ufologists wouldn’t be caught in the same room together. Now, many of these groups have adopted pursuits in two or all three of the anomalous fields and have also blended techniques and beliefs together at the same time. This cultural shift has also influenced witness testimony which has further solidified the new folklore of every cryptid potentially being a ghost or alien creature hopping from other worlds or dimensions to elude humans on Earth.
This could also potentially be influenced by the current rise in comic book culture. Those in the UFO field also know how heavy of an influence comic book culture has been on their field going back to the beginnings of comics (John Carter of Mars, Buck Rogers Flash Gordon, Superman, etc.). Of course, books and movies helped shape the culture of belief in aliens making their way to Earth and we are amid a widespread belief in aliens today thanks in part to movies and television and the current U.S. government’s interest in UAPs. About 40% of the top grossing movies of all time involve aliens as part of their content (although most are part of the MCU, DCEU, Star Wars, and Transformers franchises). We could even point at shows like the X-Files for blending these topics together as well. The once three separate fields have been slowly melting together for decades due to pop culture and belief.
Brian and myself at the 2017 PA Bigfoot Camping Adventure
No comments:
Post a Comment