It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fish, fowl, human combination

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Of course the only picture is of the creature on its back. But I'm sure one our astute members can provide an explanation. As for me, I've never seen one of these before, at least not from that angle.

"Is it fish or just foul? 'Mutant' sea creature with a nose, feet, tail and WINGS baffles Caribbean island"



www.dailymail.co.uk...




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

I thought it was already identified in the comments on the site as a type of frogfish



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

Looks like the underside of a Frogfish to me...



Why wouldn't they post a picture of the top?

If I found some amazingly weird creature, I wouldn't take one single photo of the least identifiable part.

Frogfish are extremely common in the Caribbean, and use their pectoral and pelvic fins to walk along the floor. Sorry, but this articles claims are just ridiculous.




edit on 2/2/16 by Ghost147 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

It looks to me as if the top side of the creature (the side we can't see) is a shell or is plated with some type of exoskeleton.

It does appear to have fins, and maybe "feelers" which look like actual feet.

It would be nice if we could see what the tail looked like, or any other details about its eyes, etc.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: davidchin
a reply to: UnBreakable

I thought it was already identified in the comments on the site as a type of frogfish



Ok, thanks. Didn't read the comments. I knew someone would provide an explanation.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

It's a batfish


ETA: Tried to add a link to image but on my phone and link wouldn't work, but a search in images will turn up a creature that closely resembles the photo from the article
edit on 2-2-2016 by FamCore because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: UnBreakable

It's a batfish


ETA: Tried to add a link to image but on my phone and link wouldn't work, but a search in images will turn up a creature that closely resembles the photo from the article


Yup, that could very well be it too.




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: UnBreakable

It's a batfish


ETA: Tried to add a link to image but on my phone and link wouldn't work, but a search in images will turn up a creature that closely resembles the photo from the article


Yup, that could very well be it too.


Your example is a red-lipped Galapagos Batfish.
The one in the OP, well the closest match I found is a spear-nosed batfish, but I believe it is a species of Batfish.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

"looks to me as if the top side of the creature (the side we can't see) is a shell or is plated with some type of exoskeleton. "

If we can't see it in the pic, how exactly are you telling us what it looks like to you?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

You can put lipstick on a batfish, but ...



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I'm having a hard time uploading the pic, but I believe this is the same "creature" as the OP, only from the top.

topside

there is a video at the end that looks just like the pic posted in the OP.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Quantumgamer1776

"it looks to ME as if..." - words you Quoted me on.


TO ME. I was explaining what conclusions I came to, based on my perceptions.

Not to mention, it definitely is a batfish (as I indicated with my other post) so you are nit-picking unimportant details. Contribute to the conversation, don't just throw out accusations that have no substance to them


edit on 2-2-2016 by FamCore because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2016 by FamCore because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

That seems much closer, though why they didn't show the top of the critter is a bit, well, fishie... I think they knew exactly what they had.




top topics



 
3

log in

join