Do we essentially know what every cryptid actually is irl or at least what they appear to be combined from, conceptually-speaking?
🅱️there many more mystiques under yet the same sun?
Orynx/narwhal : unicorn?
Cryptozoology is a pseudoscience but like with a broken clock it's right twice a day.
*Flatwoods Monster - was a distressed barn owl iirc
I have no idea how drunk a sailor would have to be to see a pretty mermaid in a dugong but there you go lol
Flatwoods Monster was a distressed barn owl iirc
mermaids, probably based upon the stellar sea cow, the closet now extinct relative of the dugongs.
There's a bunch that turn out to be idiots just regurgitating the description of a creature they recently saw in a movie.
There are many, MANY, MANY cryptids. Things we now call mythological creatures were, at one time, believed real in the same way moth man or the flatwoods monster is.
Griffins, sphinxes, minotaur, cyclops, to name a few.
Cyclops famously is thought to come from ancient elephant skull fossils
Modern ones are the results of the same pattern of human thinking, but elevated.
A unicorn is just a rhinoceros through a long game of telephone.
We don't know for every one for certain, but we have plausable explanations or backgrounds for nearly every cryptid and mythological creature. Usually, the explanation is either a diseased animal, misidentified bones, or someone looking to make money.
I was unaware that these creatures had an entire pseudo science, but I guess it makes sense. But the definition of knowledge is antithetical to this entire study, since at it's core it studies the undetermined. No question is stupid, but this is blatantly ignorant. Still I'm glad you asked it because I learned something new
There's probably a liminality or like liminal stage between those two of more becoming and nothing
Know - no
Hold theories - still no (definitely many lost to history)
Of the modern documented set, it seems like there are decent theories, but far from definitive. I'd go as far as to say there's a 50/50 chance that the field is right about at least 1 instance, see Pasteur.
Agreed it's toward the direction, but too far to say it's substantial.
fun fact chupacabra was actually based upon the 'SPECIES' movie alien, which i heard the series was also was contributed to the person who wrote for ALIENS.
sasquatch an GIANT APE that survived in NA recently, not likely, there hasn't been really apes in NA in the past.
only monkeys from south america, when the isthmus of panama connected, and those monkey came from africa like 40million years ago.
YETI/ a strange ape like creature in the himalayas, unlikely as ape has been shown to be cold adapted at all, misidentified from a bear species.
jackalope, a jackrabbit, hare with antlers, there is somewhat truth and misidentification. the jackrabbit/ or rabbits can be infected with shopes papiloma virus which cause horny warts growing all over the rabbits head, aka antlers.
Yes.
Either they've been identified or it's an animal with mange. For fun, go compare drawings of the Dover Demon with featherless owls, for instance.
Don't go searching for hairless bears, though. They're nightmare fuel.
Don't feed the Yao Guai!
Another fun one to (not) look up is a hairless Chimpanzee.
The premise of the question is flawed. Most of them are nothing but imaginations.