Paranormal Research and Cryptozoology should be taken more seriously in the Scientific Community

CZ and PR both use experimentation (a set of observations performed in the context of solving a particular problem or question, to retain or falsify a hypothesis or research concerning phenomena) in very practical senses. Both fields set out to confirm and in some cases deny the existence of their subjects. You said to give you examples of where people are specifically going out and doing research. For PR, the best team would be TAPS, as seen on the Sci-Fi channel's Ghost Hunters, who were doing this work before the show caught on, and are internationally renowned for their research. They use night vision cameras for video evidence, recorders for EVP's (which as I clearly said before, stand for Electronic Voice Phenomenon), thermometers for temperature reading, etc in their research, all of which anyone can buy and use. They refrain from using 'magical" tools like rods, wegi boards, saionses, etc and instead use only recognizable and legitimate tools. There, specified. http://www.the-atlantic-paranormal-society.com... http://www.angelsghosts.com... http://youtube.com... http://youtube.com... and just for fun http://youtube.com... This is their website, you can do your own investigation into their working, though I assure you it is in no way tampered with. In many shows they come up with nothing, and any show that just trying to get ratings would have a remarkable find every time. For CZ there are several teams going out into the world attempting to find concrete proof of the beasts. There is not just 1 good team I can give out but good old wikipedia has some sources: http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.cryptozoology.com... Here is some, but not all the sources I'm sure are out there. I believe you are capable of doing some of your own research here.... :D ... Evidence where previously believed to be false animals have been found to be real are as follows: The coelacanth, believed to have been dead for millions of years was found to be alive http://en.wikipedia.org... The megamouth shark, believed by many to be a total fraud was documented and found to be real by "legit" scientists http://en.wikipedia.org... Further evidence you can find on your own, for now, these will suffice. You can find evidence of creature study on your own time, and plenty is out there. Many expeditions are documented on the discovery, history, and science channels as well as A&E. It is all a work in progress, so there is not 100% concrete evidence of many cryptids, though there is enough so that legitimate research can be done on them. So while they can't be catalogued yet, there is enough proof so that they cannot be written of the 'maybe' s', and this alone makes it more imperative that research be done. However, because the scientific community does not support or look well upon CZ or PR, research is hindered. This means that there is plenty of hard evidence that could be found, but is hindered simply because of scorn. Esteemed professors at places like MIT, who believe in things like bigfoot, must do their research in private time so they do not get looked down upon by colleagues. This is what I mean by the scientific community needs to take it more seriously. They must start accepting them as legitimate branches of science, rather than babblings of lunatic, regardless of whether they are granted specific scientific fields. You say one cannot research something until they find it. DOes this make the study for the cures of AIDS and cancer illegitimate, simply because they have no concrete results? Is the experimentation of better fuels null because they haven't found one that can forever replace oil? Absolutely not, so why is it that these fields are segregated? They could hold evidence key to the betterment of mankind. Anecdotal evidence is evidence, and may not work as direct scientific proof, but has always been a factor in science. It provokes science to get to work, and builds upon the documented or otherwise observations of civilians. Thus, though it may not be direct scientific proof, it still has a hold over it, and is therefore perfectly viable. SO far you have given NO EVIDENCE why either field should not be taken into serious consideration by the scientific community, rather you've only made me back my arguments up. Shifting the burden of proof is a fallacy used only because one cannot actually make any rebuttal, but would rather attempt his opponent to disprove himself. Well, I have backed everything up. You have not. I will remind the audience that the determination of voting is on who made the better argument, not which side you like. As of yet, my opponent has FAILED to refute any of my evidence, and as his own request, I have only strengthened my point. He has only attempted to point on minor contradictions and holes, all of which I have explained and given evidence toward. Once again, I say: YOU HAVE FAILED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF WHY CRYPTOZOOLOGY AND PARANORMAL RESEARCH DO NOT HAVE SOME BASIS IN SCIENCE. Until you give some actual reasoning OF YOUR OWN, it would appear I have won. Darth_Grievous_42 out.