Chupacabra: What are you?

I have been frustrated lately with the amount of reports concerning Chupacabra sightings. Most, if not all, have been describing a dog-like creature. The most recent video of this creature can be found here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now my question is this....

Why has this creature evolved from this...



To this sorry looking creature?





How can something with glowing red eyes, turn into just a mangy dog?

I mean, chupacabra of the past was more monster-alien hybrid type.

Now, we have an overwhelming sighting database that includes these stupid looking dogs. Meanwhile, the legendary chupacabra image is slowly becoming degraded.

Where did this crypto go wrong?

Who is to blame for turning the classic image of the chupacabra into this annoying hairless dog-creature?

Whats the deal?

Chupacabra, what the heck are ya?

Thanks

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


Chupacabra means goatsucker. The two creatures shown are different entities. The "dog" has been DNA tested in an episode of "Monster Quest" and shown to be a canine, or common dog. The one most of us are familiar with is the upright walking one from Puerto Rico. The only thing that is mysterious about the dog is why its skin and teeth are different. Could it be a new or mutant breed?

I would like them to capture the PR chupacabra and do a DNA study on that more fascinating creature.

In conclusion, two seperate creatures that hunt the same way, hence the sharing of the name.

The dogs aren't draining the blood though!

There are complete differences between the two. The fabled chupa with glowing red eyes drains the carcass of blood, leaving witnesses baffled.

This dog, cant possibly drain the victims blood, because its simply a dog.

I am so confused it hurts......

Why throw this mangy dog into chupacabra legend?

Makes no sense at all!!

reply to post by kidflash2008


Exactly. The "true chupacabra" is from Puerto Rico. The countless "chupacrabras" we see on the telly is in most cases mistaken identity - and coyote/fox/dog with mange. Personally I don't really believe in Chupacabra due to the lack of evidence, although no-one can deny that there was something eerie in Puerto Rico in the early 90's.

As to what the Chupacabra is (if it exists)... It's nearly impossible to say for sure, because of the inconsistencies in reported sightings, and as I just said, mistaken identity. In certain cultures people see something they don't recognise and immediately rubberstamp it "Chupa"...


Edit: Speeling

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Gemwolf]

That's just uber-stupid.

My mom came from Baja, and they told stories about the Chupacabre, and it didn't look like a damn mangy dog.

That's just retarded. People make such gay claims just based on the location of the creature. Like, just because that dead dog thing was found near a goat farm or if it were in Central America, that means it's a freakin Chupacabre? It looks like a mutated version of the world's ugliest dog!

The original Chupacabre looked like a lizard of some sort. This is ridiculous.

reply to post by ParaFreaky


Vulgarity aside, I agree!

Who is responsible for dog = chupa???

I want names!

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN

Sorry if I offended you. It just makes me mad that people mislead and further conceal the truth like this...

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


The Texas dog attacked livestock and chickens similar to the Puerto Rican chupacabra, hence the name sharing.
I think the dog is still interesting since it does have a different skull than most canines. The lack of fur is strange, since most wild animals need fur to protect themselves from the elements.
At least the Texas chupacabra has been identified as a dog to solve the main part of the mystery.

Hey ImaDamnAlien, i can answer that question for you but you won't like the answer. This is a photograph of a chupacabra in a tree, it is like the initial drawing you posted. Complete with teeth and spines down it's back. Like a person with a split personality, it also has a "hidden" side that can't be seen, but it can be revealed (bottom enhanced version of chupacabra.) Compare this photograph with the two larger "pixilated" photo's of chupacabra you posted. Examine thos supposed "pixilations", what if they are really something else? It is. Allow your mind to see their faces and ask yourself, what are they doing there? Forget about the mangy dog, you have already seen it, improve the pixilations. Darken, lighten or colorize, whatever it takes to clarify their image. see the supernatural, or aliens, or whatever label you care to hang on them.

It's frustrating to me too. Why can't I ever find anything that agrees about what exactly the dog type is? It seems clear that at the very least it's not really been seen before. There's been lots of corpses as proof of what happened, but did the dog things really do it? And why is the lizard-chupa thing at a standstill?

reply to post by Orion Crystal Ice


The DNA of the "dog" in Texas was tested and found to be a canine/domestic dog. Dogs can look completely different from breeding. Basset hounds and German shepherds look completely different, but they have the same DNA. Chihuahuas and Great Danes also are completely different in size, and yet they too have the same DNA. The chupacabra dog looks different from other dogs. The question is whether it was bred to look like that purposely, or is there a mutated gene out there causing some changes.

i first heard the legend of the chupacabra when i was a small boy.

i must of been around 8-10, we were on holiday somewhere in england and my father started talking about the sightings of them in this paticular place...

ofcoarse back then i believed him but now. considering the location i find it abit of a wild claim.

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


Some will say the chupacabra is a coyote, a dog, a cat(???!), etc.
When you see something standing over 7-8 feet tall with red glowing eyes, long fingers, long tail, dinosaurish legs, possible wings, and a long face that can't be explained in normal everyday reality-you might have seen a chupacabra.
The Chupacabra name has been thrown around loosely by the press and those who can't identify an animal with mange.
I think their may be some variations of this creature based on self-report and other factors. Some versions may have wings or more spines on their body. I can speculate why this is so but you can come up with your own conclusions.