1

In a sense, many cryptozoology stories seem to be close to mythology - some have supernatural angle (yet, admittedly, not all or even not most). And the "real, ontopic" myths themselves are full of cryptids (Nemeian Lion? Ruuh bird? Phoenix?)

Should cryptozoology stories (e.g. Nessie? Yeti? Chupacabra? etc...) be on-topic? If so, within what constraints?

| |
  • 2
    Sounds like part of folklore to me tbh. – Semaphore May 7 '15 at 22:15
  • 2
    El'endia's meta answer defining mythology covers this, and I agree with what it says: Folklore about Nessie et al is fine, actual cryptozoology is not. – Ixrec May 7 '15 at 22:31
  • 2
    @Ixrec - Whoah, the new "yes this solved my problem" self-dupe-hammer functionality is AWSOME! – DVK May 7 '15 at 23:34
  • As long as questions aren't about any pseudo science revolving around these things then it is probably fine. – frеdsbend May 8 '15 at 6:13
  • @fredsbend - that's generic to all Mythology questions (e.g. you can't ask if Thor is real etc... :) – DVK May 8 '15 at 9:34
3

Folklore and stories surrounding these creatures is on topic.

Attempts to actually find them, or prove their existence, in the natural world are not.

| |
  • Since my question was explicitly about "cryptozoology stories", I assume the answer you meant was "yes", the first option? – DVK May 7 '15 at 23:35

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .