THE MYSTERIOUS WORLD. THE WORLD OF CRYPTOZOOLOGY. PART 3.

Before you can even begin to Scientifically Justify a Belief in the Existence of a Legendary or Mythological Creature, several Criteria must be met.

1)  What Type of Physical Evidence are you using to back up the Claim? Is it still Available for Study and Analysis by Independent and Qualified Researchers, who have access to the Best Technology?

2)  How was any and all Evidence Obtained?  The Who, What, Where, When and How Set of Questions that can Validate or Invalidate any Conclusions regarding the Reality of the Creature in Question?

3)  Is the Evidence best explained by the Introduction of a Previously Unknown Member of the Natural World, or do the Laws of Probability Indicate a more likely Solution?

4)  To what Degree are you Relying on Anecdotal or Eyewitness Testimony to Support a Conclusion that Asserts the Existence of a Real and Tangible Entry into the Animal Kingdom?

5)  If these Creatures Exist in the Wild, and their numbers are Large Enough to Populate an Extended Area or Region, how many must be living to Overcome the Problem of Genetic Diversity?

Remember, much of what you see on Television regarding Cryptozoology is Virtually Worthless, from a Scientific or Critical Thinking Perspective. Much of the time you are given Stories and Legends that are nothing more than Wild Speculations, repackaged for Mass Market Entertainment.

However, when you Ignore the SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND THE RULES OF LOGIC, YOU ARE LEFT WITH OPINIONS THAT ARE LITTLE MORE THAN EMPTY WORDS.  THESE ARE OFTEN USED TO DUPE THE GULLIBLE AND THE DESPERATE.

A Good Start to Identifying this Line of Irrational Thinking, is to see how they stand up to the Questions that are asked above.

Real Science is done when these, and Other Pertinent Questions are Answered, and not Ignored.

In the next Installment, we will begin looking at the Different Creatures that make up the Cryptozoological World.

THE MYSTERIOUS WORLD. THE WORLD OF CRYPTOZOOLOGY. PART 2.

So why is CRYTOZOOLOGY a PSEUDOSCIENCE?  Here are a few reasons:

-  Starting with a Conclusion, and working from there.

-  The Extensive use of ANECDOTAL TESTIMONY.

-  Improper Methodology.

-  Financial Incentives that are much Greater if the Legendary/Mythical Creature exists, at least in the mind of Die Hard Believers.

-  Taking what little Physical Evidence there is, and not subjecting it to proper Laboratory Analysis by Credible Sources.

-  Not using the Scientific Method and, in some cases, rejecting Natural Law all 

together. 

-  Not Understanding the Cultural, Religious or Social Traditions that are the Foundation for many of these Beliefs. 

-  Counting on "EVIDENCE" that cannot be Properly Verified, Studied or Analyzed.

-  Falling into the Logically Invalid Category that says the More Evidence you have, the more likely that your Conclusion is True. 

IN SCIENCE, NOT ALL EVIDENCE IS CREATED EQUAL.

These are some of the points about CRYTOZOOLOGY, that will be covered in future posts, in regards to specific subject matter.

Don't get me wrong.  I would love to believe that BIGFOOT, SEA MONSTERS, AND GIANT SNAKES/REPTILES etc.,  ACTUALLY DO EXIST. The World would definitely be a more interesting place, and the Travel Industry would be Booming.

However I, like many others, refuse to toss out COMMON SENSE, THE RULES OF LOGIC, AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, TO SUPPORT A SHARED DELUSION.  WANTING SOMETHING TO BE TRUE, IS A POOR SUBSTITUTE FOR REALITY.

THE MYSTERIOUS WORLD. THE WORLD OF CRYPTOZOOLOGY. PART 1.

They would be hard to miss, especially on the Large Cable Networks.  T.V. Shows based on the Search for Earths most Legendary and Elusive Creatures.

It could be BIGFOOT, YETI, LOCH NESS MONSTER, MOKELE-

MBEMBE, or dozens of others.

They can be found on virtually every Continent, and in all the Seven Seas. 

It could be the Desert, Jungle, Forest, Mountains etc., no Habitat is lacking their presence.

Stories about their Existence, Manner of Living, and Cultural Influence are found in the History of many different Populations and Societies.  They are part of Religious Belief Systems, and are often claimed to have "Supernatural" and "God Like" Powers.

Many famous people have believed in, and searched for, Physical Evidence of their existence. Time and Money were often considered to be Unimportant, it was a labor of love. Lack of success, never seemed to discourage many searchers. Expeditions were mounted and carried out, regardless of past results.

Yet, CRYPTOZOOLOGY, (The study of such Creatures), is considered to be Pseudoscience.  The Academic World dismisses this subject, and considers it to be Irrelevant when discussing Nature, and the Animals that are part of it.

Why is this?  Because Cryptozoologists make the same mistakes that are found in other Fringe and Unverified Theories.

FEATURE ARTICLES. CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING- FIGHTING THE WRONG BATTLES. PT 5.

WHAT CAN WE DO?

When you are Faced with TWO DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSING VIEWS IN A DEBATE CONCERNING THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE, WHICH BY DEFINITION MUST INCLUDE NATURAL LAW AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, HERE ARE SOME WAYS TO JUDGE THE QUALITY OF THE ARGUMENTS PRESENTED:

-  MAKE SURE THEY ARE VALIDLY CONSTRUCTED. IF NOT, POINT IT OUT, AND ASK WHY?

-  ARE ALL PREMISES FACTUAL IN CONTENT, OR ARE THEY ASSUMPTIONS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PROVEN TO BE TRUE?

-  ALL STATISTICS MUST BE SOURCED PROPERLY, WHICH INCLUDES METHODOLOGY.

If these Three Conditions cannot, or will not, be Satisfied to the agreement of each side, then you Won't have a Debate, or a Discussion that will Yield Meaningful Information. Discerning or Finding Truth is not aided by Tactics Designed to Mask Deceive, or Avoid Answering Valid and Evidentiary Questions.

APART FROM ABOVE, HERE ARE SOME OTHER TECHNIQUES THAT COULD HELP TO IDENTIFY WHICH OPINIONS ARE GROUNDED IN THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, AND THOSE THAT ARE LITTLE MORE THAN SMOKE AND MIRRORS.

-  ASK BOTH SIDES TO PRESENT THE THREE STRONGEST POINTS THAT SUPPORT THEIR OPINIONS OR CONCLUSIONS.

THEN EVALUATE EACH POINT ON ITS OWN, TO SEE IF THEY STAND ON THEIR OWN MERITS, OR ARE DEPENDENT ON THE OTHER(S).

-  GIVEN WHAT CAN BE REASONABLY KNOWN ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER THAT IS NOT UNDER CONTENTION, HOW DO THE CONCLUSIONS 

THEY ARE ASSERTING FIT WITH ESTABLISHED FACTS?

-  WHAT MISTAKES THE OPPOSITION HAS MADE IN THEIR ANALYSIS, AND HOW CAN THEY BE CORRECTED?

FINALLY, THE MOMENT OF TRUTH. 

ASK EACH THE FOLLOWING:

IF IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT THE ARGUMENT(S) YOU ARE MAKING ARE INVALID, OR NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE, WOULD IT MAKE YOU RECONSIDER YOUR POSITION?

IF NOT,

WHAT TYPE OF ARGUMENT, OR FORM OF EVIDENCE, WOULD YOU ACCEPT AS INDICATIVE THAT YOUR CONCLUSION OR OPINION IS UNFOUNDED, AND THAT THE OPPOSITION IS CORRECT?

TRUE SCIENTISTS WOULD NOT BE AFRAID OF THESE QUESTIONS. IF THEIR POSITION IS REASONABLE, AND PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED, SUCH INQUIRIES WOULD BE WELCOME.