It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


100 foot long Snake photographed in Borneo

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 07:44 AM
reply to post by Gemwolf

Anacondas are the heaviest snake in the world but the reticulated python is the longest.
15 metres is 49 feet or so.I think they average 20 feet.
Not too sure of the source but after searching this is what I found.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by DrumsRfun]

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 12:29 PM
reply to post by DrumsRfun

You are 100% spot on. The reticulated python is indeed the longest snake. It's all a matter of definition... Where the anaconda is the largest snake, the reticulated python is the longest so I suppose a more likely candidate for a 100 feet snake would be the python.

As for the snake in the article you linked to AKA Fragrant Flower... She wasn't nearly as big/long as they claimed her to be. I hate linking to Snopes, but right now they sum it up the best... Snopes

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 01:12 PM
One of the coolest large snake pictures I have ever seen was in this thread.

I could only imagine how massive a 50ft snake would be.

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 01:58 PM
reply to post by Gemwolf

They caught a regular size reticulated python by the looks of it.

Thanks for the clarification.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 12:58 PM
i think it's a fail...

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 05:03 PM

Originally posted by Chonx
...don't know if any of that is true but the dimensions do look off imho...

I agree.

Just look at the size of the trees compared to the length of the snake. Either those trees are really small, (like the size of a small bush.) or that "snake" is a lot longer than 100'.

posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 05:36 AM

Originally posted by Static Sky
I looked around a bit and was unable to confirm that the Balleh river is 500m wide at its thinnest parts but the scale of the trees which I'm assuming are full grown and average sized suggests this to be a reasonably close aproximation. For the sake of this excersize, lets assume half that, though. 250 meters.

The red circle surrounding the snake looks roughly the same size as the snake. That is, it appears that if you stretched the snake to its longest, it would fill the red circle.

Since it appears to be a perfect circle, width is the same as length. The width of the circle appears to be roughly 3 times that of the river. This would indicate the snake is roughly 750 meters long. So again roughly, 2200 feet, not the reported 100 feet.

Lets assume the snake is indeed 100 feet though. That would suggest that the river is only about 35 feet wide then. When compared to the tree tops, I find this impossible to believe.

I am forced to conclude this picture is a hoax, then. And not even a reasonably convincing one. Just my 2 cents. Cheers.

For the same reasoning I too believe this is a hoax. It's just TOO big.

posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 06:33 AM
100 ft long? Can't believe I even bothered clicking on the link... there's more chance of finding the yeti than there is a 100 ft long snake. The longest ever recorded is only 32 ft, which is pretty bloody long!

I'd be very surprised in this day and age to see even a 40 foot long python (confirmed).

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:55 PM
[edit on 13-5-2009 by Paveway27]

posted on May, 14 2009 @ 08:38 AM
id say it cant be real because why would a gient snake live in the amazon. i meen the rivers too small for one thing and what would it eat. i think it wud rather live in the sea lol

posted on May, 14 2009 @ 10:58 AM

Originally posted by karl 12

Originally posted by xXOrochimaruXx
now that one looks legit to me but the size is hard to determine by the angle unless it is supossed to be the same one as before then i am impressed and convinced
and will not be dangling my feet over a boat side any more

Neither will I

The photo does seem to be a bit more genuine but it is a shame theres no boats in the water to give it any context.

It does look to be one hmf snake though

Heres a new address for the snake photograph as the old one doesn't seem to be working anymore:

Interesting historical testimony:

"I sprang for my rifle as the creature began to make it's way up the bank and smashed a .44 bullet into its spine. At once there was a flurry of foam and several heavy thumps against the boats keel, shaking us as though we had run on a snag. We stepped ashore and approached the creature with caution. As far as it was possible to measure, a length of 45 feet lay out of the water and 17 feet lay in the water, making it a total length of 62 feet. It's body was not thick, not more than 12 inches in diameter, but it had probably been long without food."
Colonel Percy Fawcett,Officer of the Royal Engineers -Amazon Diary.

"We saw the snake asleep in a large patch of grass. We immediately opened fire upon it. It tried to make off all in convulsions but we caught up with it and finished it off. Only then did we realize how enormous it was, when we walked around the whole length of its body it seemed like it would never end. What struck me was its enormous head, a triangle about 24 inches by 20. We had no instruments to measure the beast, but we took an arms length of string and measured it about one meter by placing it on a man's shoulder and extending it to his fingertips. We measured the snake several times and each time we got a length of 25 strings. The creature was well over 23 meters (75 feet) long."
Bernard Huevelmans, the 'father of' Cryptozoology.
Encounter with a group of Frenchmen and Brazilians.

"The visible portion was at least 80 feet long and the body was as thick as an oil drum. It was throwing up a wake as large as a river.
Father Victor Heinz -whilst on the Rio Negro,Amazon River,1925.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

posted on May, 14 2009 @ 11:30 AM

Originally posted by eNumbra
This is a fake, photoshopped.

I know I've seen the first picture before, possibly years ago.

Yeah, you can tell from the pixels!

posted on May, 15 2009 @ 09:17 AM
first one is fake in so many ways

1. the dimesnions are way off, that snake would surpass 100 ft.
2. the textures are way off
3. its pretty obvious that its not real

this picture has made its way around the internet somehow, some people just dont have an eye for these things and are gullible enough to believe anything. (of course im not saying this about you)

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 08:47 PM
Poor Nessie is lost. :[

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 08:49 PM
reply to post by h1satsu


I doubt Nessie is an extraordinarily large anaconda, anyway... Scotland is too cold for tropical semi-aquatic snakes!

[edit on 5/16/2009 by ravenshadow13]

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 05:22 PM
Indeed appears to be fake.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:52 AM
Just for the purpose of perspective, and humor resulting from certain people being total idiots. I GIVE YOU THE ANACONDA BALL PIT!

Anaconda Ball Pit

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:28 AM
Yawn yawn yawn............... that its sooooo dodgy.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:58 AM
looks like a photoshopped picture of a small green snake swimming in water. the waves and wakes are too smooth to be a large object there would be a little more corseness or chop to the wake of the swimming beast. Also the thing looks too fat to be a snake. the only sake that wide in terms of the tail tapering that even gets the size of 10 feet let alone 100 is an african blood python. A pretty cool snake in it's own right.

THat being said I do believe that there are anacondas that get to be 40 feet or so. even though the largest one was around 32 feet. If this thing were for real I imagine there are lots of tropical river catfish for it to chow on, and those fish get big.

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:51 AM
I have seen both of the above pictures...what is the biggest anaconda ever recorded?

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in