
Originally Posted by
WVBIG
What, if anything, could we do as a control in Cryptozoology besides researching in areas with no history of reports for comparison to research in areas with a history of reports?
Sorry I'm late on this one, I hurt my back doing field work and have been out of it (in some cases, literally- muscle relaxants are savage) for a few days.
I don't think the thing you suggested could even be a control on cryptozoology. Doing research in places with no reports is like going to antarctica to look for reptiles just because there aren't any there. You really would need to focus your research on places where there are reports- logic would dictate a higher prevalence of reports would yeild a higher chance of seeing the cryptid in question.
A really good place to start is actually musuem field collections.
Haplodactylus was absolutely a cryptid that people really did doubt- native stories and 200 year old sketchy traveller stories of a giant gecko that dwarves all other species. Sure enough, a researcher working in my home town went to europe to look through collections and found that these reports were actually true! Note one imperative thing here though- he didn't believe he would find anything, just acknowledged that it could be there and that if he were to find it it would be really really cool; for the record, it is still really cool.
Cryptozoology is something that really has a shit reputation in science. This is because it has been hijacked by crazies that are more like hobbiests with an internet search engine rather than a scientist with any sort of method. I'm not saying they are all idiots, there are some pretty awesome cryptid finds out there- look at
Haplodactylus,
Rhacodactylus ciliatus,
Okapi johnstoni and
Latimera. That being said, It is an ABSOLUTE imperative that anyone undertaking cryptozoological studies makes them just that- a study. This doesn't mean reading some library books and listening to some farmers talk about some dead chickens. This means using scientific method and a rigorous field search for evidences, approaching it with the thought that it could be out there, rather than believing it is. Remember, science is based on disproving hypothesis' rather than vindicating your own personal wants.
So the only real controls you actually need here are common sense and an actual scientific method. Also, ditch your beliefs; that's what this is really, you are believing bigfoot is real because you believe the stories you've been told to be true.