Subscribe: Comments on: Top Ten Cryptozoo Mystery Pix 2006
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
cameras  cat cat  cat  debris  dog  fish  good  great  guy  horse dog  interesting  man  mystery man  mystery  people  splatter mud  time 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: Top Ten Cryptozoo Mystery Pix 2006

Comments on: Top Ten Cryptozoo Mystery Pix 2006

for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and More

Last Build Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:40:36 +0000


By: youcantryreachingme

Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:17:00 +0000

Mystery Man and Carol - my sentiments exactly. As I wrote on my site, and as Col Bailey has written years ago... it should be no surprise if the first genuine photo of a thylacine (in our case) should come from the fortunate tourist who happens to be in the right place at the right time. It's not as easy as you think. For example, I know Tiger Quolls are still prevalent on mainland Australia. I've never seen one in my life. Neither a koala in the wild. Nor a platypus. Only one wombat, and I ran over that one. Two echidnas. That's not a great record, is it? ... and there are plenty of those animals about.

By: mystery_man

Thu, 21 Dec 2006 14:48:30 +0000

I was watching the movie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" the other day and there was a great line in it concerning photos. Some government guy says that we have all these cameras out there, so why don't we have any pictures? And another guy says that even with all the cameras and camcorders out there, why is there never any footage of a car crash actually happening? It was a great exchange and it made me think. These events often happen at very inopportune times and are over very quickly, not to mention people are in a state of shock when they see them. I am not a photographer, but from what I understand, most good wildlife shots are done by pros carefully waiting for an opportune shot of a species they fully know to exist and be lurking in the area. And even then, there are a whole slew of bad shots to get just a few good ones. I was out camping once and took a digital camera picture of a bear and know what it looked like? A blobsquatch. Or blobbear. I was so shocked to come across one and by the time I could get ready for another shot, it was gone. I gather a lot of people carrying cameras out there are the same way.

By: Carol Maltby

Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:45:11 +0000

I can testify to the difficulty of trying to get good images of novel events on short notice, no matter what equipment you have. While driving through a wooded area at midnight, on our way back from July 4th fireworks, we saw what may have been a cougar, not officially acknowledged to be here in New York's Catskill Mountains. It appeared to be picking up prey from the side of the road. There was enough of a cognitive dissonance to have us keep on going for a few hundred yards, at which point my visceral reaction that this was anomalous led me to tell my husband to stop and turn around. I had a digital camera and camcorder down at my feet in a bag. It was enormously difficult to get them up, out of their cases, and set to the right settings to film in a pitchblack car, in the few seconds I had available. I found myself fumbling and nervous, like one of those nightmares where you just can't do what you need to do fast enough. The animal had gone by the time we got back, so I didn't have a second chance to try. I can see how hard it is to get any image at all under those circumstances, let alone a good one.

By: shumway10973

Tue, 19 Dec 2006 08:03:54 +0000

If memory serves me correctly, #2 was suppose to be an elk. I remember that because that was the first story I responded to here. I must have missed #9. Looks pretty big to be just a bobcat or lynx. Almost like someone crossed a lynx with a mountain lion. I absolutely love #5. It's small things such as this that makes most people think. The rest were interesting, but to me either not that important or too simple to believe people would get worked up over it (#3--it's a dog).

By: U.T. Raptor

Tue, 19 Dec 2006 01:11:28 +0000

I still say the "stegosaur" is some known animal, a rhino or pig maybe, stylized (as all the carvings look to be, for example the one at the column's base) and against a leafy background. Aside from that, the anatomy's all wrong for a stegosaur anyway.

By: Nerull

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:57:05 +0000

Just to let you guys know, the stegosaurus is fake AND old. It's got something to do with getting people to visit somewhere or other. Travel agency type scam. I will look on the other computer to see if I still have it bookmarked in my "scams" folder. Positively fake though.

By: mystery_man

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 04:35:40 +0000

Oh heck, here's my impression. 1. A known fish in such a position and photographed in such a way as to make it seem like a cryptid. 2. Blobsquatch. Could be any animal with fur. Or someone's wig. 3. Dog. Duh. 4. Hoax. 5. Interesting, but could very well be an artistic, mythical representation. 6. It's a HUMAN! Seriously, very cool pic. 7. A splatter of mud that bears a superficial resemblance to.. a splatter of mud. 8. Debris, fish, or a thousand other possible explanations other than a large underwater monster. 9. Wonder where it came from? 10. Who drives a squid to work? Honestly?

By: youcantryreachingme

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:19:38 +0000

Second guy's impression 1. Bony saltwater fish from Nicaragua 2. Deer 3. The most famous dog of modern cryptozoological times 4. Did we decide if "Inexplicata" was a real place? :D 5. New to me, looks good. Could be a pig in front of a plant. The "bony plate" pattern appears as leaves around all the other panels. 6. Fish never cease to amaze me :) 7. Ho hum. 8. Not enough resolution in the image. Why can't it just be a big fish (if not debris)? 9. A cat is a cat is a cat. 10. Where else was I supposed to park it?

By: youcantryreachingme

Sun, 17 Dec 2006 23:11:08 +0000

Of the 10 presented, my favourite one was number 2. But I'll have to do some catchup reading on some of these which I missed. The stegasaurus looks interesting! Now - what were all the options for number 2 again? Moose, horse, dog, bear, deer, bigfoot, man in a party costume? It's a shame that Johor didn't rank. I mean, the photos that were, which were not, which were illustrated, then leaked, then fake? Or was that the other way around? :D Of course Emmerichs' thylacine was another now-you-see-it, now-you-don't - but long-time readers will know that's a favourite of mine. And Loren - if you want to take up Richard's suggestion for a television show, then get in touch next time you're in Aus... we can make a documentary :)

By: MattBille

Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:31:09 +0000

OK, one guy's impressions of them, from top to bottom: 1. Intriguing, not conclusively solved. 2. Horse 3. Dog 4. Hoax 5. Intriguing, still a mystery 6. Really cool 7. Does not look primate. 8. Likely debris 9. Out of place cat, probably lynx (?) 10. "Well, officer, when the army scared Godzilla, he dropped his snack and it landed right beside my car..." Matt Bille