Omigod...Creationist Museum Embraces Cryptozoology

Have you heard about the new Creationism Museum that is being assembled in Kentucky? I noticed that they intend to have a section dedicated to Cryptozoology. Does that make you nervous? It does me.

Evidently they like the things that monster hunters seek. The reason for that is the possibility of "living fossils" or other life forms that remain a mystery to science. You see, conventional science not only denies the existence of mystery bipedal primates and living dinosaurs, they tend to ridicule or demean those who dare to look into the possibility of such things. That's because the evidence for these cryptids is largely anecdotal. Creationists are hopeful the cryptozoologists are right, as that will prove conventional science wrong (Creationists claim that dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together--contrary to the lesson in the fossils--and they figure a living dinosaur will make their case.) I think the scientific establishment needs to take heed, and change their evil ways.

People experience anomolous creatures all over the planet. Science denies these creatures exist. This creates a credibilty gap between the average person and our "scientific authorities." This can lead to a lack of confidence in the teachings of science and open the door to all sorts of weird belief systems and superstitions. Witness the use of crytids such as Bigfoot to bolster the concept of creationism! If anything, Bigfoot should be recognized as further proof of evolution.

A simple survey of the history of science shows that most discoveries of "new" animal species are preceeded by travelers' tales and the "mythology" of local eye witnesses. So why are so many scientists so extremely closed to the concept of studying these anecdotal accounts? This attitude transfers over to popular media: news anchors, not wanting to appear "unsophisticated," assume the wink, wink, nudge, nudge jokes when they report such stories.

I, for one, am darn tired of this attitude. Its this sort of thing that makes it so difficult for the amateur, volunteer seekers who do pursue answers to these mysteries, to get respect (not to mention funding). Isn't it about time to embrace anecdotal information as a viable starting point for the study of new life forms? Once the number of reports reach into the thousands and include physical traces such as tracks and scat, looking into the source of the reports certainly doesn't deserve the attitude exhibited by most skeptical scientists.