Interesting: Cryptidcore and summarized UAP official report

A Cryptid Aesthetic

Last month, I wrote up some thoughts on the state of cryptozoology in response to questions posed by Colin Schneider (the Crypto-Kid). One of the questions was "Where do you think cryptozoology is headed in the next few years?" Here was my answer:

I’d guess that cryptozoology will continue to be shaped and changed by the media machines. Cryptids - as very interesting and flexible things - will filter more into pop culture. There is a growing interest in “cryptids” as an aesthetic - called “cryptidcore” - where stylized cryptids are used throughout one’s lifestyle. Popularized by the internet, people into cryptidcore romanticize cryptids, and embrace the weird, dark, and mysterious aspects of fantasy and legendary creatures.

I only learned of the existence of cryptidcore a few short months ago from my regular correspondent on such matters, Dr. Jeb Card. Upon seeing it, it was clear that I had indeed seen this developing for a few years now. Younger people were showing up at cryptid conferences and, even though it was not my scene, it was impossible to miss the use of stylized cryptids in pop art, comics, and other modern creative products. The "in" cryptid was Mothman who was not only popularized but sexualized. The muscular statue of Mothman in Point Pleasant, WV was even co-opted as a gay icon. There is more about that here.

I feel somewhat vindicated in my answer to Colin this past week when a new article came out discussing cryptidcore as trendy on TikTok:

At the time of writing, videos tagged with #cryptidcore have been watched almost 15 million times, but TikTok users didn’t create the aesthetic. It’s appeared in some form online (think niche Tumblr and Pinterest boards) and in film and TV shows (think Stranger Things and X Files) for years, but the app has arguably popularised the trend and brought it to a larger audience, thanks to being able to share the trend in short video format.

As I noted in my response, the internet has been the most influential factor in what cryptozoology looks like today. Without the internet, there might still be a trend to romanticize cryptids, but it would likely not be so widespread, popular, and accepted as “cool”.

[T]he internet has turbo-charged cryptozoology in modern culture, beginning with the chupacabra, through to the rake and the dogman. Bigfoot and other cryptids were reinvented and are all over - more popular than ever.

I have a lot of thoughts on the field of cryptozoology, a subject that has never not been interesting to me… until lately when I felt that it was almost entirely subsumed by fantasy fiction. I tried to remain engaged with the news and content producers of this modern version of the cryptid zoo but it just isn't working out. Modern cryptozoology is not based so much in science or folklore - it’s imaginative, but often shallow and juvenile. I'm finding it hard to believe that modern "researchers" have read a solid reference book or done research beyond YouTube videos. They simply want to believe and to exist in an enchanted world. That’s of no interest to me.

I'm not sure in what capacity I'll remain engaged.

The Long-Awaited UAP report

Another subject that I just cannot get too excited about is UFOs. Unfortunately, when I was active in the paranormal podcast circuit, interviewers really wanted to talk about this, even if I explicitly said that I had no interest or expertise in it. At that time, it felt like ufology was dying. Instead, the framing suddenly and radically adjusted. Perhaps due to politics and cultural factors, UFOs were rebranded as UAPs and the theme of disclosure got a huge boost from some old and familiar names. Yet, it resonated with the 20-30-year-olds in a way I did not expect. Here we are in 2021 and the topic is regularly in mainstream news. It will not be obvious to the average person, but the history of ufology in the US and where we are now is a complex story full of weird twists, money grabs, and boatloads of lies. I can't readily follow it all. So I rely on a number of highly credible researchers like Jeb Card, Jason Colavito, David Clarke, and Mick West.

The “big report" came out on Friday, June 25. It was not so big, however, and was not much of a report. It was a 7-page generalization with hardly any details. It appears that they cut out a lot of content. An Executive Summary seems unnecessary when the main report consists of only 4 typed pages. I assume that the significant detailed portions were cut out and put into a classified supplement that the public won't see. I read it but don’t follow UFO Twitter or the other chatter about it.

Mick West provides a careful reading of what there is of the report here. Much of the text says what he has been saying for months regarding the questionable observations of UAP. This video provides a good lesson on how to read an article or report. People typically read selectively or miss important qualifiers. I expect the same will occur even with this short and non-technical paper.

The takeaway is that UAP can be many different things - but they do not appear to be alien spacecraft (despite many headlines in news reports saying that the report doesn’t “rule out extraterrestrials”- it does not mention aliens at all). Because the data generated by these claims of UAP is not complete, the task force responsible for the report concludes there is no evidence of advanced technology. In other words, even though pro-ufo commentators are sure that UAP are strange craft and/or a legitimate threat, we do not actually have the data to make those conclusions. We have not even clarified the problem.

The same can be said for other paranormal subjects like ghosts or cryptids. The eyewitness reports, visual or sound recordings, and questionable evidence are not good enough. The collective descriptions of what people will call ufos, ghosts, or Bigfoot remain unconfirmed, ambiguous, and may be explained by phenomena that are not at all like the headline-grabbing dramatic interpretation of what one person saw one time. People make errors. Technology has artifacts that we misinterpret. Even military pilots are not perfectly accurate observers. No one is.

One of the points in the report is the need for better data collection. It would be great if the government would fund and implement data collection processes regarding sky anomalies. It would also be awesome if they could coordinate with knowledgeable consultants to investigate anomalies instead of allowing the pro-ufo media mongers to dictate the wild interpretations of the UAP "evidence". Such an effort would be useful only if it was not hamstrung by the UFO framing. There are undoubtedly odd things in the sky - natural and man-made. Recording, tracking, and possibly identifying them would be a highly useful endeavor to many interested parties. Even me.

No Weekly Weird News This Week

I’m traveling out of town until Sunday so there will not be a WWN release on Friday. Please send me stories though.

I’d be really happy if you subscribe to this newsletter. It’s always good to know someone is listenening.