#evidenceforcryptids — Public Fediverse posts

No explanations, just believe

Once upon a time, when “cryptozoology” was invented as a field, the idea was this: Behind every strange animal report was a real animal we hadn’t identified yet. If the creature’s reputation was dramatic enough, it accrued even more amazing qualities along with additional tales. But such mysterious animals were NEVER found. The evidence did not get better. Some of the original dramatic stories eventually were revealed as more exaggerations than reality. Modern monster reports are far less revealing (because we can now check the details). The body of claims for any particular creature is so ambiguous as to be essentially worthless, except in the context of local folklore, where it gains new life as the monster spirit of place.

The golden era of cryptozoology ended by the late 1970s. The incredible photos of the Loch Ness Monster, the Bigfoot films, and the Yeti footprints made a huge splash but subsequently fell under heavy suspicion. Most have been definitively established as hoaxes, or misidentifications. Yet, those reveals have been ignored. There are even many cryptid-curious people who don’t know that the infamous Surgeon’s photo of Nessie was a hoax. They still carry that iconic image in their minds. We reject the truth and conveniently substitute our own.

For most local cryptids that are undergoing a resurgence in popularity within small towns across the US, the basis for their existence is a smattering of dubious tales during an initial flurry of events. Sometimes, only one questionable event. Then, people may shoehorn weird accounts from the past into the same framework, or imaginative observers will interpret their own weird event as another creature encounter.

Without exception, this “evidence” is poor, too poor to add anything more to the phenomenon except media publicity and heightened speculation. There has never been solid evidence for one of the iconic cryptids. Yet, as we can observe today, that does not matter one whit. There will still be believers.

Cryptids such as the Fresno Nightcrawler, the billowy pale ambling pair of legs, gained attention based on one grainy video that was a copy of a copy of a screen showing a low-res security recording. That was the extent of the evidence that bloomed into merchandise, artwork, other poorly sourced stories, hoaxes (that people still present as real) and copycat videos.

The Van Meter Visitor, the huge winged beast of an Iowa coal town with a spotlight horn, is based on a preposterous tale from a local paper. It involved some real names, which gives it credibility, but the events are certainly manufactured sensationalist fodder designed to entertain and sell newspapers.

Mokele-mbembe, depicted as a sauropod dinosaur in the lake regions of Central Africa, was formulated by overly-eager white explorers misled by their own hopes of a new “lost world”. No one ever documented the creature well enough to make heads or tails of it, but any unusual noise or ripple was attributed to it. Creationists kept the dream alive nearly to the present day, based on long-outdated cultural views of prehistoric creatures.

I could go on with dozens of similar examples where the initial push for the existence of a cryptid was established half a century ago (or more) based on doubtful evidence. The original evidence or new observations got less persuasive over time (as technology improved), only to be resurrected in the 21st century as beloved pop cryptids, regardless of the evidence quality. If these were real animals, this is not the way the story would unfold.

A recent opinion piece on the Altamaha-ha river monster of Georgia laid bare how cryptid fans no longer need evidence to believe in their favorite monsters. In fact, the facts just don’t matter at all. In a June 2026 article, author Steve Hudson speaks lovingly of Altie as he visits its space:

But why must we always seek explanation? What’s the fun in that? Maybe it’s just…Altie. That’s what I was kind of hoping, deep down, as I walked along the river there just the other day.

He notes that he just wants to see it, to have that moment of magic, to “keep the legend alive”. The hoax from a few years ago didn’t make people believe it any less. The hoax was an effective way to revisit the legend, instead of discounting it. The locals still celebrate Altie and adore it even more that it remains hidden, open to interpretation to be whatever you want it to be.

For an excellent historical account of another aquatic creature that had a heyday and then turned into a perfectly useful icon, I encourage you to check out Chessie: A Cultural History of the Chesapeake Bay Sea Monster by Eric Cheezum.

Those who still say cryptozoology should be a zoological effort to find and name the real creatures behind the legends are still living in that 1970s era. We are so very far beyond that. Reality can be tough to take. People much prefer an alternative reality of their choosing today. I can’t always blame them for that. It’s infeasible to search for a singular monster based on belief and speculation. But it is enlightening to recognize and understand why we still embrace and celebrate pop cryptids. The idea of them is magical; it gives us hope and joy.

For more on Pop Cryptids, check out my 20 part newsletter series Pop Cryptid Spectator.