Half a century ago, Belgian Zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans first codified cryptozoology in his book On the Track of Unknown Animals.

The Centre for Fortean Zoology (CFZ) are still on the track, and have been since 1992. But as if chasing unknown animals wasn't enough, we are involved in education, conservation, and good old-fashioned natural history! We already have three journals, the largest cryptozoological publishing house in the world, CFZtv, and the largest cryptozoological conference in the English-speaking world, but in January 2009 someone suggested that we started a daily online magazine! The CFZ bloggo is a collaborative effort by a coalition of members, friends, and supporters of the CFZ, and covers all the subjects with which we deal, with a smattering of music, high strangeness and surreal humour to make up the mix.

It is edited by CFZ Director Jon Downes, and subbed by the lovely Lizzy Bitakara'mire (formerly Clancy), scourge of improper syntax. The daily newsblog is edited by Corinna Downes, head administratrix of the CFZ, and the indexing is done by Lee Canty and Kathy Imbriani. There is regular news from the CFZ Mystery Cat study group, and regular fortean bird news from 'The Watcher of the Skies'. Regular bloggers include Dr Karl Shuker, Dale Drinnon, Richard Muirhead and Richard Freeman.The CFZ bloggo is updated daily, and there's nothing quite like it anywhere else. Come and join us...

Search This Blog



Click on this logo to find out more about helping CFZtv and getting some smashing rewards...


Wednesday, August 18, 2010


You can't say that I didn't try. Yesterday I wrote:

"We have 25-30 of these hairs, and will make them available to anyone who has the resources and expertise to test them, including - if they wish to participate - the Big Cats in Britain research group, who have made no secret of their animosity towards us".

Mark Fraser of Big Cats in Britain has totally twisted what I said and wrote:

"Why we want to get involved in your research is beyond me, you need to pay for this yourself not get others to pay for it" and later "I will ask you again, why would we want to test hairs that the CFZ found? Get them tested yourselves, but for any credibility get them tested from a source completely independent of the CFZ".

That, my dear fellow, is exactly what we have already said that we are doing.

I did BCIB the courtesy of treating them like a bona fide research group who might be interested in trying to verify our claims, but they seem to have interpreted this as me trying to get them to pay for our research. They even perceived my headline as an attack on them.

Within minutes of me replying to their blog posting, (coincidence, or what?) our old friend Highland Tiger weighed in with another bit of bile, writing:

"Yet here we are, the CFZ boasting they've found evidence, at great pains to ensure that everyone knows that it was CFZ members who found these hairs. Does it really matter who found these hairs. What matters is not the CFZ asking other organisations to do dna sampling for them, but for them to get independent laboratories, (ones without CFZ allegencies),organised and the testing done post haste."

Again, this is exactly what we are trying to do. Like the "revelations" elsewhere in his posting that the WW had less people this year (there is a recession on) and that some speakers pulled out at the last minute (there has been a serious illness, a bereavement and a couple who missed their flight because of the Coventry railway vandalism incident) he - like Mark Fraser - seems to be telling us to do exactly what we are going to do; get independent verification of Lars Thomas's findings.

He also writes: "Yet here we are, the CFZ boasting they've found evidence, at great pains to ensure that everyone knows that it was CFZ members who found these hairs. Does it really matter who found these hairs."

Well, yes actually. For months he and his idiot cronies have been accusing us of stealing other people's work and claiming it as our own. You can't have it both ways guys. Either we are responsible for something or we are not. And as far as asking other independent organisations to verify our findings with independent tests, this is standard scientific practise, and for the record one major university has already asked for samples.

It appears that HT and to a lesser extent MF will always do their best to misinterpret anything that I or a select band of other folk write. And I thought that I was the one with a cognitive disorder.


Dale Drinnon said...

I genuinely can't see what the big deal is all about. If you have leopard hairs, you have leopard hairs-and that ceases to be even mysterious at that point. You have a leopard loose and that's all that can be said. It isn't even Cryptozoology any more at that point, it's a case of an unreported dangerous animal release into Britain.

Dr Dan Holdsworth said...

About all that needs doing at this point is to start putting up scent lures with barbed wire wrapped around them, as big cat population surveyors in the USA do, to try to ascertain how prevalent these cats are in the UK as a whole. Before that marvellous talk by Lars Thomas at the Weird Weekend, I confess that I had no idea how variable mammalian hair is (I'm an entomologist and nematologist by training), and quite frankly I found the whole subject quite fascinating.

I already have a microscope suitable for the analysis at home, and have bought the book Lars recommended as a starter; it just remains for me to sort out a likely survey area and get to work on the matter. I understand that US hunting websites can supply synthetic catnip and musk as scent lures; I will be experimenting with these in due course to see how effective they are.

Davey-C said...

You have the Golden Baboon award. May I suggest a new award. The Sad, Bitter and Twisted Award for people who moan about sweet F.A.

A portrait of Ena Sharples should do the trick!