Bernard Heuvelmans, Pity, and the Dictators of Science
There is no cryptozoological figure more misinvoked, misquoted, and misunderstood than Bernard Heuvelmans, the father of cryptozoology. Depending on the source (i.e. believers or Skeptics), Bernard is portrayed as either a genius and prophet or incompetent fool; focus is always placed on the facticity of his claims and never their context or intent. Bernard exists as little more than a caricature of himself in the contemporary cryptozoological literature. The lack of unbiased, objective discussion is maddening. I hope here, in this post, to push back against at least some of the misconceptions surrounding Bernard Heuvelmans and to recontextualize his intentions for cryptozoology. Bernard clearly positioned cryptozoology at the forefront of an ethical upheaval of the natural sciences, fueled by a particularly romantic perception of science as a clash between innovation and dogmatic stagnation. This post is derived from notes compiled for a presentation at the 2026 Folk Zoology Conferenc...