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.

 

New animal discovered in N. Carolina.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:09 AM
link   
yea, your mom is photoshoped. it could also be some sort of exotic animal that has escaped captivity from some rich dudes house in cali. the world is full of crazy lookin' creatures, MANY yet to be discovered. time and time again the dumb arss scientists have discredited locals stories of bizarre animals to mere myth and legend and then in this century big ass creatures are claimed to be discovered. this pisses me off. they weren't just discovered. they locals and natives have known about them forever.
they don't need jackoff mainstream science to discover of proove to them
WTF they have seen.

a prime example is the okapi the president of their african country did not
even believe the tales of its existance. and till low and behod it was "discovered"
by a western "scientist"

www.danger-island.com...

[Edited on 6/4/2004 by panchovilla]




posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by panchovilla
it could also be some sort of exotic animal that has escaped captivity from some rich dudes house in cali.


Yeah, I think it's one of the most probable possibility. Hell, I once found a paon in my backyard (I'm not kidding). I live in Canada, how likely was it that I founded that? We kept it for a while, we had chickens at that time, so he lived with them for a while and then died one morning, don't know why, maybe he was attacked by a local animal, we live right next to a forest and a river. Maybe the chickens where jealous of it's beauty and killed it lol... (that is even more unlikely them me actually finding this thing)



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I think it is quite apparent that this is just a Sasquatch's pet dog.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Pancho,

Yeah dude, a friggin deer. Thats what I said. I grew up around them.
I see them nearly every day, in fact I was raised....never mind..
Actually, it's the hindquarters that I thought were deerlike.

Morbid.
Photoshopping YEAH!, if those are a deers hindquarters, of course!
unless we're talking......"FRANKENPUP"!

Otherwise, I'm not really sure..I'm not convinced of the Fox/Dog hybrid thing. There's a gene problem there..

space



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Why does it have to be a hybrid? Why can't it be a rare sub sepcies of a fox that was thought to be extinct? Or even a new sub species that was previously unidentified. We humans haven't found and recorded all animals there are.


TPL

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
It cant be a hybrid between a fox and a dog, they have a different number of chromosones, and their not part of the cat family as someone said.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Spacedoubt, that is exactly my first impression too when i saw the photo. The hindquarters look very much like a deer. The fur also looks like that of a deer. Strange that is what we see.
Though I don't dought that it is some sort of dog. Very interesting.


[Edited on 4-6-2004 by earthmagick12]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 01:26 PM
link   
The definition of 'species' is a group of organisms which can
interbreed to produce fertile offspring. A horse and a donkey can breed to produce a mule. The mule is not a species because they are infertle therefore they cannot reproduce on there own.

All dogs, wolves, jackals, and coyotes have 78 chromosomes. The only thing that might stop them from inbreeding is their size or behaviour. Dogs are pack natured and so are wolves hence no problem.

Foxes have 34 chromosomes and are generally solitary.

I find it highly unlikely a fox could interbreed with a dog or wolf. The sequence divergence, 34 vs. 78 chromosomes is simply too great. When this difference is compared to humans with 46 chromosomes and apes with 48 chromosomes, the difference between foxes and dogs becomes easily seen. When you add the difference in behaviour, dogs with their pack lifestyle and the loner fox, it just doesn't seem possible.

I would have to agree with others here that have said it is an as yet undiscovered spieces. I don't think it is photo shopped. New species of mammals are still found as we move into their territory.

I figure it wont be long before we stumble accross a bigfoot walking through somebodys front yard of their new home they built in the woods.

As far as a Dox goes, I think that's like our Jackalope. That's Texas' cross between a jack rabbit and a pygmy-deer. You can see one mounted above the bar at the general store in Luckenbach or you can go here for the Wyoming version:

www.sudftw.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 02:16 PM
link   
It reminds me of 2 different animals. Oddly, they are 2 completely different species. The first is an African Serval


The second is the African Wild Dog




It doesn't have any markings so it seems unlikely that it is one of these 2, but it does have some striking similarities.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Man it would be awesome if that was a genetic experiment that got loose.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by m0rbid
I think it's funny to see how quick people are to jump in with phrase like "Maybe it's photoshoped?" or "If it's photoshopped, it's a good one", etc...


You have to admit, though, that there are a huge number of photoshopped fakes running around the Internet. Hell, the recently mentioned Something Awful runs a "Photoshop Phriday" feature every week of doctored pics. Going on averages, it's usually safe to at least ask, when you see a strange picture on the 'net, "is it photoshopped."

The answer may be "no," but it is always worth asking.

As to the deer-like look to the pic, I noticed that as well. I think it's the fact that, in the image, the left rear leg is slightly raised, but the end of the toes are still hidden in the top of the grass. This makes the shin look more horizontal and the foot look longer than is normal on dogs or cats, more like what you find on a deer. If you look at the right rear leg, however, it looks less like a deer's.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
hmm

the more I look, the more I see a deer body.

Check out this pic

deer pic

Notice the White coloring along the front edge of the rear legs.

[Edited on 4-6-2004 by spacedoubt]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:29 PM
link   
It was in North Carolina, not California.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 06:48 PM
link   
i dont belive it's a dog and it's too tall to be a fox but it still look like a fox...

i dont know what lives in california but i think its a new kind of Fox...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I sent an e-mail to the author of the Newspaper Story.
Asking for more info.
Let's see what we get back..

space



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy
It was in North Carolina, not California.


Was it really? I read the entire article, and could have sworn it was California.. though I was very tired at the time of posting and that could have contributed to the mix up I suppose. And I know I could just click the article and read it again, but.. no.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 07:24 PM
link   
It cant be a deer hindquarters because deers have hooves, K-9's have paws.
I think its just a yet unknown species. Like the Gorrila. Either that or a mountain l;ion with a dogs head



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Vegemite,

I can't see paws, or feet of any kind in the photo..

space



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greys
it's too tall to be a fox but it still look like a fox...



Funny you can see that only by looking at the pic, especially if you took time to read the article, you'd notice the author said the animal was about the same size as a fox.


Originally posted by Whiskey Jack
You have to admit, though, that there are a huge number of photoshopped fakes running around the Internet.


I know, but nowadays, it's like people assume that if a pic is posted on the internet, it's automaticly a fake.

That's what is kinda bugging me.*

You have to ask your self, even if we know there's people with WAY TOO MUCH time on their hands, what would Joe Somebody's pleasure be thinking "Yeah, I bunch of conspiracies theorist believe that the animal I made in Photoshop out of (boredom) 4 differents animals is actually only one animal, and they believe it's real." I really don't see how anyone, even the weakest most low-life jerk with no self-esteem, would get a kick out of it. As I said before, it's not even like if it was some really impressive or crazy creature, it looks just like another boring animal to me.

Just my opinion...

*Explanation: I visit a computer discussion forum regularly, and people can post pictures of their setups, of cool hardware, their desktops, etc etc...

At one time, as the board grew, more and more people started saying stuff like "it's a fake pic" or "it's photoshoped" etc... At one point, people were posting stuff like that even when

a. it was obvious the pic was real

b. there would have been absolutly no point in photoshopping the pic

It became so terrible, we kinda turned it into a joke, now whenever someone post a picture, there's always someone saying "IT'S FAKE!!!" It was funny at first, but it got boring quick.

[Edited on 4-6-2004 by m0rbid]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Wow that looks cool. When I first saw it i thought it was a deer too. I wonder how long it will take to find out what it is. I bet ATS is first site to have a guess correctly on it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join