Cryptozoology-  is a topic of  big debate. Believed by many to be "Pseudoscience".  Much like Parapsychology it isn't real science. Why ? Well it's due to a lack of real evidence in the end, ignored or ridiculed  This would include many different reported subjects like Big Foot, elves, Chupacabras,  and plenty more!  To the one who experiences some encounter with some cryptid  that's all the proof they need! As they say. "Seeing is believing." Some would point to facts like animals thought to be long gone as found later to be alive like the coelacanth .  This one example that could be used to say science isn't always right or have all the facts correctly stated. The Panda was thought to be another product of the imagination to the West.  Bull Sharks have been found in the Mississippi  River as far upstream as Wisconsin and Minnesota in recent years. Today many would perhaps laugh at the notion of sharks in those areas not knowing the facts.   

The consideration is simple... Science isn't always right. What all could they be missing? All one has to do is question and do some in depth questioning and research. Much like the research into EVP that's swept under the rug and ridiculed by scoffers who haven't  examined the research or experimented with the subject. ( Raudives Voices) Why would a man of science and Psychology study and research the subject along with others to present their research only to be mocked if it wasn't real? Why? Ask yourself would you risk ruining your reputation over the possibility of being proven a total FRAUD and liar? Yet some have endoured and not swayed in the facts! Victor  Zammit for 25 years examined the paranormal and the after life with established facts! Even publish a "Million Dollar Challenge!"  - https://www.victorzammit.com/skeptics/challenge.html 

Considering the above what does science really know?   How much does science ignore when a subject can't be explained? Scientists have to save face perhaps by simple answers or just say, it's "Pseudoscience." After all they know, right? Or do they? 

Some scientists go against the grain risking their "standing" in the scientific community. Men Like Jeff Muldrum - https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/ who are questtioning the Big Foot phenomenon reported around the world. From foot prints to tree structures. The evidence seems to support a large bipidal animal much larger and stronger than a human who lives in very rough terrain. Foot prints with dermal ridges, and weight much more than a human could produce. The distance between  foot prints is often to long for a human!  According to some sources DNA  evidence is supressed in many cases... Why? Well what confidence would people that have been told one thing by the "Learneded " only to be told something contrary to what was stated as fact...  

Those of us who have experienced an encounter know what we saw especially when others saw it too!