I can be contacted on thehighlandtiger@yahoo.co.uk

Wednesday, 5 May 2010

The pettiness of Jon Downes at the CFZ leaves me with no option

It's common knowledge that I am banned by the CFZ from posting any comments on any site they own. (and Jon threatened to ban me from sites he didn't own as well, not sure how he was going to achieve that but there you go ).

I know, I was a bad boy for asking too many questions they didn't really want to answer. But no matter, I created this blog so I could still put over my views.

Well the CFZ's bestest ever British big cat researcher, Mr Arnold penned another article all because of yours truly. An article full of errors I may add.

But as usual I'll post it here and reply in, lets go for a different colour this time, lets try yellow


Recently I wrote a post regarding my opinion’s on as to why large, exotic felids roam the wilds of the UK. This seemed to irk a few in the ‘big cat’ community, as it always seems to do.

So I'm now classed as a few eh? I know I've put on a little weight recently, but I'm still not twice the size I was

I’ve always thought that a rather down to earth explanation could solve the riddle as to why black leopard, puma and lynx inhabit the woods of Britain. For me, it always pointed, certainly in more recent times, to the introduction of the 1976 Dangerous Wild Animals Act, where many cat owner’s decided to dump their novelty pets in the woods.

One slight problem, there was not a rise in sightings, as one would expect, around 1976. It was no different than any other year. Unless of course you have any proof of these "many cat owners" releasing cats

Reports dating centuries previous could well be explained by escapees/releases from circuses, private zoo’s and travelling menageries. All the evidence points to this when you consider report’s in the press, menagerists’ and their incident’s, and some owner’s admitting they’d released animals.

I agree with you, no difference in opinion here

Now, after stating this I was accused by the hilariously named ‘The Highland Tiger’, of being ‘outlandish’, and full of ‘hot air’, with no evidence to back this up, or the claims that I’d ever seen or filmed a large cat in the wilds.

I'll ignore the "hilarious" jibe, and get straight to the point. Yes I did ask you to provide proof of your outlandish claims of 100's of big cats released. Yes I did ask you to provide proof of the films you claimed to have taken.

Was that wrong to do so, If you make a claim are we not allowed to see your proof. If you have the proof, if you have the footage, why not share it.

Usually, any posts I decide to write always provoke a petty response from those cowardly folk who are unable to come out from their façade, but tragically, it has always proved me right that the ‘big cat’ community is unfortunately littered with people who

a) are completely deluded by thinking these animals have some more esoteric, or even prehistoric explanation,

So, we get to the nitty gritty here. Neil Arnold thinks that Merrily Harpur and Di Francis, the two main writers on the theories he mentions are deluded. Some may say, no more deluded than someone who thinks 100's of big cats were released 40 or 50 years ago and are breeding all over the country. But then that's my opinion of course.

b) are simply out to stir the s**t,

No stirring, just trying to get proof of your claims

c) seem to gave no valid theories to put forward themselves,

Errrr, I did. I believe its likely to be a mixture of a number of current theories.

d) have never seen a large cat in the wilds because they are too busy stuck behind a PC all day.

I've already said I've seen a big cat, and I'm probably out walking in the hills more times in a week than Mr Arnold does in a year. After all, all those lectures at the WI can't leave much time for field research.

I’d like to hear everyone’s opinion to maybe put this boring, tiresome debacle to bed.

Thanks to Jon Downes and his petty ban, that should read, everyone's opinion apart from the person who this article is aimed at.

I’ve always written about monsters, but in regards to the ‘big cat’ situation I’ve sought no reason to create any kind of mystery when there isn’t one to create. It’s clear that myself and the CFZ has opposition out there, and that’s always going to happen, but clearly, this debate will rage forever, because there clearly are a lot of sad, anorak’s out there with nothing better to.

So everyone who doesn't agree with Mr Arnold, is a sad anorak. Say's it all really. Now what is that saying about stones and glass houses

I’d simply like to know, where do you think ‘big cats’ came from, and if you’ve seen one please do reply.

Many thanks,

Neil Arnold

I think that's enough replying today

There is a postscript to this, Chris Clark of the CFZ, made a comment I would like to reply to.

Chris Clark said...
Yes, last September when some of us on the CFZ expedition saw orang pendek in Sumatra the same person (or at least the same pseudonym) went to a lot of trouble to rubbish us on Cryptomundo.

Not quite true my friend, (Do all CFZ members have a selective memory, is it mandatory?) I, like MANY MANY others on Cryptomundo, just posed the question, WHY were no pictures taken. The sighting, after all, was relatively long. The only other point made, was the release of pictures of "footprints" to The Sun newspaper without the knowledge of the expedition leader Adam Davies, (something he confirmed himself to Loren Coleman at cryptomundo). The Sun article, whilst mentioning the CFZ, strangely did not mention Davies, who actually did the organising of the expedition.

Should not these points be discussed, or are we not allowed to comment on any CFZ expeditions and the results they come back with.

And just a little comment for Tabitca, who appears to be desperate for me to say something bad about her so she can sue me for libel. Sorry love, but it'll never happen. You're just not that important.



  1. Not really familiar with Brit slang.....but.....: From WIKI==ANORAK (slang).....In British slang an anorak (pronounced /ˈænəræk/) is a person, usually male, who has a very strong interest, perhaps obsessive, in niche subjects.
    Then it goes on to a meaning describing a geek or someone with a mental handicap. All I can say to this is...Neil....Who does your hair?
    Maybe the (ANORAK's) are right....in expressing a very strong interest in..........the truth!!!
    Maybe...it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black!
    Maybe its another case of arm chair cryptozoology.
    I go to the CFZ website to check posted facts only. And they are quite questionable at times, but I choose to carry a to each their own mentality.
    If as much energy would be put into providing proof to back up their spouts.....this entire conversation would be moot.
    As I stated previously......If your spout is theory....call it that. If it is truth......offer the proof. Stop petty bickering and back your words up.

  2. Tg I am surprised at you resorting to personal insults about appearance.Anorak is some one who is obsessed with their hobby. It comes from train spotters who apparently always wore anoraks.You could say we are all anoraks in cryptozoology.
    HT I am not your "love" so please don't patronise me, it is not clever .As for not being important ...I would not wish to be important to you, nor any other person who brings cryptozoology down by personal vendettas. I would feel insulted if I were important in your sphere.
    BTW was BCIB on your survey? I don't see it.Have you updated your survey yet? It seems that only USA groups are on. There are lots of research groups in the UK,usually under paranormal but who also look at cryptozoology.It just seems that you haven't contacted many UK groups or is it that they haven't answered? Just wondered in the interests of fairness in this survey of yours.

  3. Dearest Tabitca, As I have said, the survey will be done over a number of months. To date I have only contacted the bigfoot groups, some creationist sites, and a couple of general crypto groups including the CFZ, who strangely enough did not reply. It'll be interesting if they ever get charity status, if they will continue this stance.

    I'm not saying the CFZ have anything to hide, but seeing as they claim to be a non profit organisation, with no money being paid to any of the directors, you have to wonder what they spend the donations and publishing profits on.

    I still have to contact the big cat and sea/lake creature groups. This will be done, later in the summer.

    I will admit, I did hope that I would get more replies. But I certainly did not expect to though. One of my aims was to prove just how insular the world of cryptozoolgy is. It is full of cliques and in fighting, with very little cooperation and a propensity to stay safe in their own little worlds.

    It's time these people were forced out into the open. It's time someone questioned their "evidence" and their "motives".

    Because to be honest, looking at all the people searching for cryptids, everyone one of them failing to find proof of their quarry, the current state of play hasn't worked too well has it.

  4. You are very correct here HT in your latest response. It is my view that the current state of cryptozoology is just as damaged (if not more) by the money grabbers and let's face it, people who just want to do this rather than pay the bills any other way as the inner fighting or personal vendetta's that Tabitca mentions. Your survey of where donations and money are spent without asking financials is ground breaking and I wish you all the best. It may take some a while to respond so I would not be quick to judge but the list is something that every crypto enthusiast should read before considering a donation. Great job!

  5. Well Lindsay, the hair thing was a glass house statement. I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that. Nobody "HAS" to prove anything to anybody. But instead of throwing mindless insults as Mr. Arnold did, ignore the obvious, and keep quiet.....or show some pride in your profession....or hobby. After reading the Semantics post at CFZ....arrogance must be a large part of it as well.

  6. Lyndsey, why single the BCIB out, what is your reason for this. Donations to the group are made from time to time, everything is spent on the group and much more besides out of my pocket. We now have our own bank account and all money that comes in (which is very, very little) is all accounted for and tracable. The BCIB do this for the love of the subject, it is most certainly not a way to gain extra money. And if you are mentioning the BCIB for the fact that you think this Highland Tiger is something to do with us, I should think again. If I have anything to say I will say it out in the open to anyones face. But one thing I do agree with is that why should we not be accountable for the money that comes into us, what is wrong with that. It is a fact that I have only just become aware of this site and the Highland Tiger due to an email sent to me a couple of days ago. If people want to bicker, and side with an imaginary feud then that is up to the individual, but leave the BCIB out of it please. We have much, much better things to do.

  7. I will support the accountability of donations recieved to the BCIB and quite happy to ask any questions. Let us hope that everybody involved in the subject will do so also. Let us face it anyone who does donate, and does so because they love the subject, really should have a right to see where their money has been spent.

  8. Wow, that's what I was seeking for, what a data! existing here at this weblog, thanks admin of this site.

    Feel free to surf to my web site garbage disposal disposer insinkerator installation