The inaugural issue of The Journal of Cryptozoology

from Scientific American blogs

By Darren Naish | December 22, 2012


“I still maintain that cryptozoology cannot and should not be considered a pseudoscience. Why? Mostly because there is no contradiction whatsoever between the scepticism, hypothesis-testing, self-correction and need for autoptic evidence typical of ‘proper’ science with analyses of cryptozoological data, nor does investigation of cryptozoological data hinge on the assumption that there are always real, flesh-and-blood animals at the bottom of eyewitness reports.” . . .

“So, there we have it. Volume One of The Journal of Cryptozoology is out, and very nice it is too.  I look forward to seeing the contents of Volume Two, I congratulate those involved in the production and putting-together of this inaugural issue, and I hope that the dialogue and debate about the nature and direction of cryptozoology – however we understand and define this term – continues.” . . . Read Complete Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *