Definitions

from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

  • noun The study of creatures, such as the Loch Ness monster, whose existence has not been substantiated.

from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.

  • noun Study of animals whose existence has not been proven.

Etymologies

from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License

crypto- + zoo- + -logy

Examples

  • Here are a few abstracts to somewhat recent papers pertaining to Gigantopithecus (of interest to some in cryptozoology):

    Archive 2009-02-01

  • First though, a review of what’s already been written in cryptozoology literature about Sudan’s potential mystery animals.

    Archive 2008-04-01

  • A convincing argument could probably be made that cryptozoology is not a science, but these arguments were not.

    Archive 2007-09-01

  • Because, as I've pointed out (in detail) in Cryptozoology: Science & Speculation, cryptozoology is primarily a methodology, and focuses on discovery science, not empirical science.

    Archive 2007-09-01

  • (And, for this, I recognize that cryptozoology can be, and often has been, used incorrectly; but, it does not logically follow that cryptozoology is inherently unscientific.) 1.

    Archive 2007-09-01

  • I am not an expert in cryptozoology or publishing (I don't think one can even be an expert in CZ), but I have enough experience with both (and a stake in the ongoing development of cryptozoological books), to make some observations without being entirely from left field.

    Archive 2007-03-01

  • There must be books that are primarily for popularizationthese should (accurately, scientifically) engage the beginning reader, introducing the reader to new concepts and a basic understanding of what cryptozoology is about, and the mystery animals with which it is concerned.

    Archive 2007-03-01

  • Within cryptozoology, ethnoknowledge leads to scientific knowledge, which engages the outside world.

    Archive 2007-02-01

  • A recent posting to another blog site suggested that the recently published Big Bird!, by Ken Gerhard through CFZ Press, is indicative of lowered standards in cryptozoology publishing (e.g., a thin, quick-print job with little to contribute and just looking for a fast buck).

    Archive 2007-03-01

  • No. I can count on one hand the number of "classics" published in cryptozoology in the last five yearsmake that one finger (Meldrum's Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science is the only true recent classic to come to mind).

    Archive 2007-03-01

Comments

Log in or sign up to get involved in the conversation. It's quick and easy.