Before anyone sends me nasty emails, comments, etc., please know I am not taking sides. I'm just describing IMHO, an observation on the climate of this article's question (along with a small dose of sarcasm in parenthesis).
With that in mind ... are you having trouble deciding? Maybe these story headlines & quotes by category will help! NOTE: for the sake of article brevity, and although I don't discount that it doesn't belong, I have included Bigfoot in the Cryptid category.
BIGFOOT/CRYPTIDS:
- Massive 'Flying Gargoyle' Recently Reported (the Alien UFO people aren't going to like this)
- Terrifying 'Crawler Humanoid' Encounters
- A bird transforms into a woman
- 2 English boys encounter a walking human 'skeleton' with a bloody knife
- "How would we react to creatures that are not even vaguely humanoid? You can just see the hate groups lining up."
- "I have spoken with many witnesses and researchers, and the general consensus is that bigfoot bury their dead."
- "One of the reasons why we may not find Bigfoot bones often is that they bury their dead" (isn't that where we would find the bones?)
- "Five best Bigfoot sightings of last 10 years that 'PROVE' beast exists" (as I perused this article I noticed that the "proof" was interlaced with words like, "not sure what it is, some say, it's not a person, moving in an apelike, if not bipedal fashion, if it's not a bear..." Well, I don't know about you, but what more convincing proof could a person want?)
GHOSTS:
- "All a skeptic is is someone who hasn’t had an experience yet." — Jason Hawes (or a TV show, Jason)
- "It’s easier to dismiss ghosts in the daylight."
- "Ghosts were created when the first man woke in the night."
- "Don’t matter if you believe in them or not. If they’re there, they’re there." (and if they're not, they're not)
- "if you don't believe in ghosts, you've never been to a family reunion" (sorry, I had to put this quote in)
ALIENS
- Nativity painting 'contains proof of ancient aliens', conspiracy theorists claim
- Mars orbiter image shows a crashed flying saucer.... or something else entirely (all possibilities covered here)
- "Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying." (all possibilities covered here also)
- "Another thing to consider is that ... Arizona, Scotland & New Mexico ... all three of those destinations are good places to play golf. So there's possibly some connection between aliens and golf." (AHA! the smoking gun!)
- "I think the surest sign that there is intelligent life out there in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
- "9 things we learned about aliens in 2021"... (Eight of the titled items on this list contain words like, "could be, may be, still holds potential for, may look like, could have, might be," and from this preponderance of powerful, convincing, descriptive adjectives, culminates in stating "ARE REAL!!!")
Expert sounding titles like Cryptozoologist, Parapsycholgist, UFOlogist are often bandied about. By definition, "the use of ‘ologist’ as a word is simply calling someone an expert or a specialist, without specifying in what." A legitimate 'ologist' would be a zoologist.
A zoologist by definition: studies wildlife and other animals to gather data on how they interact with their ecosystems. They study the impact humans have on wildlife and natural habitats and the physical characteristics of animals and animal behavior.
A Cryptozoologist by definition: involves the study and search for animals which have not been formally described (often called cryptids, mystery beasts, or simply unknown animals). It is frequently regarded as a pseudoscience by a large amount of mainstream zoologists and palaeontologists.
A UFOlogist is involved in the study of unidentified flying objects. This title is a credible one as long as the term "ufo" is not defined to implicitly mean extra terrestrial flying vehicles.
By definition pseudoscience is a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific.
1) claims that must not have been proven false must therefore be true.
2) Lack of Progress – the claims remain the same, and nothing new is learned as time goes on
(science does not accept personal experiences or testimonials as evidence whereas pseudoscience may accept personal experiences or testimonials as evidence.
Justin Barrett's 'Hyperactive Agency Detection' theory for the origin of spiritual beings suggests that an inbuilt cognitive propensity to detect predators in the environment led to the emergence of beliefs about 'counter-intuitive' nonphysical beings.
Three questionable things that in my opinion perpetuate throughout concerning paranormal investigation are (1) no definition/testing standards for what acceptable conclusive data actual is (2) a place is considered "haunted" based solely on previous, carried-forward-in-time folklore, (3) automatic suspicion of paranormal activity based solely on fact of previous deaths (by whatever means), societal negative character traits (prisons, jails, etc), or simply because a building is old. Paranormal investigation has become stuck in the quicksand of stagnation of pseudoscience and lack of new ideas (cognitive flexibility). The unsupported claims of advanced abilities of spirits affecting a physical environment, including their alleged capabilities to communicate with those in the living world via various electronic methods, are a major hindrance in accepting certain realities that would allow us to adapt and change our mindset.
In the end we are left with our plethora of hypotheses concerning aliens, ghosts, cryptids, etc. Our enduring short-sighted view of the laws of nature precludes any further development to a testable theory, as we lose sight of the simple fact that nature is always in control and doesn't care how compelling our ideas may be!
The human brain is a complex system of many interacting parts yielding a multitude of patterns of activity. There is no single, primary driver of human behavior. Simple answers are intuitive and comfortable, but that doesn't make them true. "No one sees a ghost without being there to see a ghost; or hears a strange voice in the dark without being in the dark themselves to hear that voice." The term "ghost" might be considered interchangeable with something like "unexplained perceived phenomena." Also, this experienced phenomena might occur without being even of the most remote consideration or thought at the place & time involved, necessitating the individual to possess observational skills that later call into question the very occurrence itself. At some point, when some logically lose their fear of the dark, even in the safety of their own homes, a decrease in or absence of observations of phenomena might be the "reverse" research direction to take to further data collection on how our cognitive biases may telepathically have an influence on ourselves or even transferrable to a child. Whether you do or don't believe, fear is a driving force behind experiences that establish the basis of those beliefs. Having less fear or even being fearless might be the key to understanding.
The conclusion I have drawn in pursuit of an answer to the topic quest is:
Alleged aliens, ghosts, bigfoot and cryptids are apparently equally smart among each other, and each individually are smarter than us in their ability to remain hidden from our smartphones, binoculars, telescopes and varied array of technical equipment. The commonality of "proof" is the personal experience, as measured by our own five senses. This begs the next question: Are your personal experiences good enough 'evidence' to convince you?
- MoonJoey