Tumgik
#'they caught what sounded like an ivory billed woodpecker call. could the cryptid still be alive?'
Text
okay so here's something ae'm genuinely curious about-
-when talking about, for example, the megalodon, a lot folks say stuff like 'proof the megalodon exists'
-a lot of extinct animals are apparently considered cryptids by some
so where's the line drawn
cause for voie it's like. if you've got a sauropod in your background, yeah, you can probably call that a cryptid. if you've got an ivory-billed woodpecker flying around, that's not a cryptid. it's just not. maybe a long time from now, but certainly not right now
the megalodon thing is especially interesting for us, just because with the cryptid thing we at least kinda see why some folks might consider any extinct animal that's found alive a cryptid, but ae genuinely don't know why folks say 'proof the megalodon exists'
we know it exists. we have fossils of its jaws and teeth and other evidence it existed. like, yeah, it's not around anymore, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. are we missing something. it feels like we're missing something. are we overthinking this too much. do other folks not think this hard about stuff like that
5 notes · View notes