If you've read my last post, you're probably wondering how cryptozoologists can approach their research in a more scientific manner. Well, in this post, I will try to explain that in a bit more detail.
First of all, the main problem that I have noticed with how many cryptozoologists conduct their research is the fact that they approach the situation from a biased perspective. In other words, they go out into the field and start searching for evidence to prove the existence of a particular cryptid. Well, that is not quite how real science works. It is my opinion that scientists should definitely try to be as objective and neutral as possible, when they are doing their research out in the field.
For instance, if I travel to Lake Champlain in order to investigate the claims that a large, unknown aquatic animal lives there, I should not try to search only for evidence supporting the existence of Champ. However, at the same time, I also should not try to search only for evidence against the existence of Champ, either. I should examine all of the available evidence, and then draw a conclusion based on my research, rather than on whatever pre-conceived notions I might have had before I arrived at the lake.
However, to be fair, it is not only the cryptozoologists who are guilty of conducting biased research. A lot of times, it is the debunkers who are not using the scientific method. I have often encountered people who automatically assert that a certain cryptid cannot possibly exist, even though they haven't even bothered to look at any of the evidence before drawing their conclusion.
In my opinion, both the true believers and the debunkers are guilty of not using the scientific method properly, in this case. When a good cryptozoologist goes out into the field, he/she should not arrive there with pre-conceived notions about the topic at hand. Instead, they should come there with an objective and open-minded attitude, and a willingness to discover new things.