Editing Cryptozoology (section)

==Terminology, history, and approach==
As a field, cryptozoology originates from the works of [[Bernard Heuvelmans]], a [[Belgium|Belgian]] zoologist, and [[Ivan T. Sanderson]], a Scottish zoologist. Notably, Heuvelmans published ''[[On the Track of Unknown Animals]]'' (French: {{lang|fr|Sur la piste des bêtes ignorées}}) in 1955, a landmark work among cryptozoologists that was followed by numerous other similar works. In addition, Sanderson published a series of books that contributed to the developing hallmarks of cryptozoology, including ''Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life'' (1961).<ref name="REGAL-326-329">Regal (2011a: 326–329).</ref><ref name="MULLIS-2021-185a">Mullis (2021: 185): "Historians attempting to trace the beginnings of cryptozoology typically locate the practice's origins in the mid-twentienth century when Belgian-French zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans (1916–2001), with deference to Scottish-born naturalist Ivan T. Sanderson (1911–1973), is believed to have coined the term."</ref> Heuvelmans himself traced cryptozoology to the work of [[Anthonie Cornelis Oudemans]], who theorized that a large unidentified species of seal was responsible for sea serpent reports.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Davis |first=Leecy |date=2021-01-23 |title=The Beginnings of Cryptozoology |url=https://blogs.iu.edu/sciu/2021/01/23/the-beginnings-of-cryptozoology/ |access-date=2023-05-22 |website=ScIU |language=en-US}}</ref>

''Cryptozoology'' is 'the study of hidden animals' (from [[Ancient Greek language|Ancient Greek]]: κρυπτός, ''kryptós'' "hidden, secret"; [[Ancient Greek]] ζῷον, ''zōion'' "[[animal]]", and λόγος, ''logos'', i.e. "knowledge, study"). The term dates from 1959 or before— Heuvelmans attributes the coinage of the term ''cryptozoology'' to Sanderson.<ref name="REGAL-326-329"/><ref name="OED-CRYPTOZOOLOGY">Additionally, see discussion at "cryptozoology, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2016. Web. 25 October 2016.</ref> Following ''cryptozoology'', the term ''cryptid'' was coined in 1983 by cryptozoologist J. E. Wall in the summer issue of the [[International Society of Cryptozoology]] newsletter.<ref name="Regal-2011-B">Regal (2011b: 197–198).</ref> According to Wall "[It has been] suggested that new terms be coined to replace sensational and often misleading terms like 'monster'. My suggestion is 'cryptid', meaning a living thing having the quality of being hidden or unknown ... describing those creatures which are (or may be) subjects of cryptozoological investigation."<ref name="WALL-COINS-CRYPTID">Wall, J. E. (1983: 10): "The Spring, 1983, issue featured an interview with Paul LeBlond and Forrest Wood, in which it was suggested that new terms be coined to replace sensational and often misleading terms like "monster." My suggestion is "cryptid," meaning a living thing having the quality of being hidden or unknown. As far as I know, this would be an entirely new word, describing those creatures which are (or may be) subjects of cryptozoological investigation."</ref>

The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' defines the noun ''cryptid'' as "an animal whose existence or survival to the present day is disputed or unsubstantiated; any animal of interest to a cryptozoologist".<ref name="OED-CRYPTID">"cryptid, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2016. Web. 25 October 2016.</ref> While used by most cryptozoologists, the term ''cryptid'' is not used by academic zoologists.<ref name="PAXTON-2011">Paxton (2011: 7–20).</ref> In a textbook aimed at undergraduates, academics Caleb W. Lack and [[Jacques Rousseau (secular activist)|Jacques Rousseau]] note that the subculture's focus on what it deems to be "cryptids" is a pseudoscientific extension of older belief in monsters and other similar entities from the folkloric record, yet with a "new, more scientific-sounding name: cryptids".<ref name="LACK-ROUSSEAU-153">Lack & Rousseau (2016: 153, cf. p. 272).</ref>

[[File:Arthur_Grant_loch_ness_sketch.png|thumb|right|Anonymous sketch by A. Grant from a book on the Loch Ness monster by [[Rupert Thomas Gould]] (1934). Like Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster has historically been of significant interest to cryptozoologists.]]While biologists regularly identify new species, cryptozoologists often focus on creatures from the [[folklore|folkloric]] record. Most famously, these include the [[Loch Ness Monster]], [[Champ (folklore)]], [[Bigfoot]], the [[chupacabra]], as well as other "imposing beasts that could be labeled as monsters". In their search for these entities, cryptozoologists may employ devices such as motion-sensitive cameras, night-vision equipment, and audio-recording equipment. While there have been attempts to codify cryptozoological approaches, unlike biologists, zoologists, botanists, and other academic disciplines, however, "there are no accepted, uniform, or successful methods for pursuing cryptids".<ref name="REGAL-326-329" /> Some scholars have identified precursors to modern cryptozoology in certain medieval approaches to the folkloric record, and the psychology behind the cryptozoology approach has been the subject of academic study.<ref name="REGAL-326-329" />

Few cryptozoologists have a formal science education, and fewer still have a science background directly relevant to cryptozoology. Adherents often misrepresent the academic backgrounds of cryptozoologists. According to writer [[Daniel Loxton]] and paleontologist [[Donald Prothero]], "[c]ryptozoologists have often promoted 'Professor [[Roy Mackal]], PhD.' as one of their leading figures and one of the few with a legitimate doctorate in biology. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that he had no training that would qualify him to undertake competent research on exotic animals. This raises the specter of 'credential mongering', by which an individual or organization feints a person's graduate degree as proof of expertise, even though his or her training is not specifically relevant to the field under consideration." Besides Heuvelmans, Sanderson, and Mackal, other notable cryptozoologists with academic backgrounds include [[Grover Krantz]], [[Karl Shuker]], and [[Richard Greenwell]].<ref name="LOXTON-PROTHERO-2013-304-305">Loxton & Prothero (2013: 304–305).</ref>

In a 2025 interview with science writer [[Sharon A. Hill|Sharon Hill]] "Cryptids have become cutified" ... The reason why cryptids are seeing a resurgence are because of the Internet, for example, the [[Flatwoods monster]] is seen in over 33 video games, but the real reason according to Hill is because for a while cryptids were thought to be real animals that some people had assigned magical powers to, and with some investigation the hope was that the magic could be stripped away and they would discover a real, perhaps unknown animal. “One of the reasons why I think that fell apart completely was because the [[International Society of Cryptozoology]] fell apart completely, so there were no longer any gatekeepers as of the early 1990’s to say ‘a cryptid is these animals that we are studying because we think it’s got a zoological basis’, those people were gone ... they were quite old, they died and there was nobody there to take over that gatekeeping aspect although some people tried. ... Then you saw an explosion of amateurs in the 2000s ... they became researchers that connected via the Internet. Now they start making media they can publish themselves ... it started to hit a younger and younger generation ... who love these creatures ... now everything can be a cryptid.”<ref>{{cite web |title=Episode 250 - Cryptids go Pop! with Sharon Hill |url=https://squaringthestrange.libsyn.com/episode-250-cryptids-go-pop-with-sharon-hill |website=squaringthestrange.libsyn.com |publisher=Squaring the Strange |access-date=30 March 2025 |language=English |date=March 28, 2025}}</ref>

Historically, notable cryptozoologists have often identified instances featuring "irrefutable evidence" (such as Sanderson and Krantz), only for the evidence to be revealed as the product of a hoax. This may occur during a closer examination by experts or upon confession of the hoaxer.<ref name="RADFORD-2014-167">Radford (2014: 161–170).</ref>

=== Expeditions ===
Cryptozoologists have often led unsuccessful expeditions to find evidence of cryptids. Bigfoot researcher [[René Dahinden]] led searches into caves to find evidence of sasquatch, as early sasquatch legends claimed they lived in rocky areas. Despite the failure of these searches, he spent years trying to find proof of bigfoot.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Loxton |first=Daniel |title=Abominable science! origins of the Yeti, Nessie, and other famous cryptids |last2=Prothero |first2=Donald R. |date=2013 |publisher=Columbia university press |isbn=978-0-231-15320-1 |location=New York |pages=32}}</ref> [[Count|Lensgrave]] Adam Christoffer Knuth led an expedition into [[Lake Tele]] in the Congo to find the [[Mokele-mbembe]] in 2018. While the expedition was a failure, they discovered a new species of green algae.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Madsen |first=Fie West |date=2018-11-28 |title=Lensgreve Christoffer Knuth har brugt kæmpe summer på vild dinosaur-jagt: 'Vi fandt noget, som ingen har set før' |url=https://www.bt.dk/content/item/1240591 |access-date=2023-12-11 |website=www.bt.dk |language=da}}</ref>

===Young Earth creationism===
A subset of cryptozoology promotes the pseudoscience of [[Young Earth creationism]], rejecting conventional science in favor of a literal [[Biblical hermeneutics|Biblical interpretation]] and promoting concepts such as "[[Young Earth creationism#Flood geology, the fossil record, and dinosaurs|living dinosaur]]s". [[Science journalism|Science writer]] [[Sharon A. Hill|Sharon Hill]] observes that the Young Earth creationist segment of cryptozoology is "well-funded and able to conduct expeditions with a goal of finding a living dinosaur that they think would invalidate evolution".<ref name="SCIENTIFICAL-AMERICANS-66">Hill (2017: 66).</ref>

[[Anthropology|Anthropologist]] Jeb J. Card says that "[[Creationism|[c]reationists]] have embraced cryptozoology and some cryptozoological expeditions are funded by and conducted by creationists hoping to disprove evolution."<ref name="CARD-32">Card (2016: 32).</ref> In a 2013 interview, [[paleontology|paleontologist]] [[Donald Prothero]] notes an uptick in creationist cryptozoologists. He observes that "[p]eople who actively search for [[Loch Ness Monster|Loch Ness monsters]] or [[Mokele-mbembe|Mokele Mbembe]] do it entirely as creationist ministers. They think that if they found a [[dinosaur]] in the [[Democratic Republic of the Congo|Congo]] it would overturn all of evolution. It wouldn't. It would just be a late-occurring dinosaur, but that's their mistaken notion of evolution."<ref name="NAT-GEO-2013-PROTHERO-INTERVIEW">Shea (2013).</ref>

Citing a 2013 exhibit at the [[Petersburg, Boone County, Kentucky|Petersburg, Kentucky]]-based [[Creation Museum]], which claimed that [[dragon]]s were once biological creatures who walked the earth alongside humanity and is broadly dedicated to Young Earth creationism, religious studies academic Justin Mullis notes that "[c]ryptozoology has a long and curious history with Young Earth Creationism, with this new exhibit being just one of the most recent examples".<ref name="MULLIS-2019-249">Mullis (2019: 249).</ref>

Academic Paul Thomas analyzes the influence and connections between cryptozoology in his 2020 study of the Creation Museum and the creationist theme park [[Ark Encounter]]. Thomas comments that, "while the Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter are flirting with [[pseudoarchaeology]], coquettishly whispering pseudoarchaeological rhetoric, they are each fully in bed with cryptozoology" and observes that "[y]oung-earth creationists and cryptozoologists make natural bed fellows. As with pseudoarchaeology, both young-earth creationists and cryptozoologists bristle at the rejection of mainstream secular science and lament a seeming conspiracy to prevent serious consideration of their claims."<ref name="THOMAS-80-81">Thomas (2020: 80–81).</ref>

===Lack of critical media coverage===
Media outlets have often uncritically disseminated information from cryptozoologist sources, including newspapers that repeat false claims made by cryptozoologists or television shows that feature cryptozoologists as monster hunters (such as the popular and purportedly nonfiction American television show ''[[MonsterQuest]]'', which aired from 2007 to 2010). Media coverage of purported "cryptids" often fails to provide more likely explanations, further propagating claims made by cryptozoologists.<ref name="LACK-ROUSSEAU-170">Lack (2016: 170, cf. 159–160).</ref>