Yowie Researcher Trail Cam takes picture of extinct Marsupial Tiger?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
Its a Fox people, I've shot more of them than I can remember.

Although it would be cool to find a Thylacoleo, I'm afraid this is nothing more than a farming pest.




posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:25 AM
link   
It's a fox.




posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Versa

I've grabbed another foxes nose and popped it in to show the hidden nose.

edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)


Good stuff.


That's a fox alright.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   
its a fox simple as. This should be thrown in Hoax bin.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by polarwarrior
 


Makes you wonder how they're going to spot a Yowie if they cant even recognise a fox
edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Versa
reply to post by polarwarrior
 


Makes you wonder how they're going to spot a Yowie if they cant even recognise a fox
edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)


Very, very true



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Yeah, red fox, considered a pest in Aus, as was the thylacine, which is part of the reason it is now extinct.
By the way, a thylacine, although called tasmanian tiger is not related to tigers, that was just the name given for the dark stripy pattern.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchthemfly
This is simply a fox.....the black lower half of the legs the big pointed ears the orange eyes....down to the white "masking" on the face, its a fox no doubt about it.......lol just go google wild fox in google images and look for yourself......its not a cryptoid of any sort. case closed


It doesn't look like any fox I've ever seen.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Versa
 


I'd like to believe you - but the body shape is still wrong for any fox I've seen. Colouration isn't a good indication of species identification - analogues are common. A fox with a pervasive physical deformity if it is a fox. Its front end is all wrong. Its stance is very odd for a fox too.

edit on 2011/3/5 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Versa
 


I'd like to believe you - but the body shape is still wrong for any fox I've seen. Colouration isn't a good indication of species identification - analogues are common. A fox with a pervasive physical deformity if it is a fox. Its front end is all wrong. Its stance is very odd for a fox too.

edit on 2011/3/5 by Aeons because: (no reason given)


How and where is its 'front end all wrong'? I dont see anything wrong at all, it looks like a big healthy fox. Its a fat healthy fox getting ready for winter probably. its fur is thick and he has some extra weight.

eta pic of a fox.... in the image we are debating the fox has his head down and is stalking hence his shoulder blades are raised. What are you seeing that indicates its anything other than a healthy thick furred fox?

edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)


and a pic of one stalking to show the shoulder blades

edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-3-2011 by Versa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
It doesn't look like a fox to me. Never seen a fox with no obvious tail before, they don't tend to curl their tail around when they're just strolling along. In fact I've never seen a fox curl its tail around (except when sitting or sleeping), can they even do that? This picture was taken in summer so the long/winter fur argument doesn't hold any water and it is obviously way chunkier in physique than a fox. Compared to the stalking picture of a fox, the high shoulder is still in a line with the backbone, not sticking up as in the unidentified animal pic. And finally, how many blades of grass do you need to change a stumpy face into a pointy one? There aren't that many!
edit on 5-3-2011 by heffo7 because: for clarity
edit on 5-3-2011 by heffo7 because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-3-2011 by heffo7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Here's the two side by side for comparison. They look similar, but NOT the same.







posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Versa
 


I've seen foxes. Lots of them.

I've never seen a fox that stands like that, or has a wide rounded arch between the right and left legs in the front (or the back). The entire under carriage and axel looks like its been bent out of shape.


The way the front haunches are put together is just plain odd. Too humped, too wide, the shoulder blade looks too wide, and there is more muscles along the back and top side of the haunches than I would expect and it is ....bunched I guess, whereas a fox is learn and strong.

If it is a fox, it certainly is not healthy.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Versa
 


I've seen foxes. Lots of them.

I've never seen a fox that stands like that, or has a wide rounded arch between the right and left legs in the front (or the back). The entire under carriage and axel looks like its been bent out of shape.


The way the front haunches are put together is just plain odd. Too humped, too wide, the shoulder blade looks too wide, and there is more muscles along the back and top side of the haunches than I would expect and it is ....bunched I guess, whereas a fox is learn and strong.

If it is a fox, it certainly is not healthy.




The shoulders aren't wide or overly muscled the fox has a thick coat. like the one in this picture.



Foxes stand in many positions.



foxes come in many shapes and sizes and some have mange, some have thick winter coats, some are young and some are old.





Can you point out what your seeing that seems odd to you because I'm just seeing a normal fox



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by heffo7
It doesn't look like a fox to me. Never seen a fox with no obvious tail before


He has a tail behind him where its meant to be




posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Versa
 


I've seen foxes. Lots of them.

I've never seen a fox that stands like that, or has a wide rounded arch between the right and left legs in the front (or the back). The entire under carriage and axel looks like its been bent out of shape.


The way the front haunches are put together is just plain odd. Too humped, too wide, the shoulder blade looks too wide, and there is more muscles along the back and top side of the haunches than I would expect and it is ....bunched I guess, whereas a fox is learn and strong.

If it is a fox, it certainly is not healthy.


Agreed! Foxes are lithe, strong and very streamlined animals, the animal in the pic is not. Period!!



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Versa:

The shoulders aren't wide or overly muscled the fox has a thick coat. like the one in this picture.





Reply to Versa:

And I'll repeat it again... it isn't winter. There is no thick winter coat because it wasn't winter when the picture was taken. It was summer in Australia!
edit on 7-3-2011 by heffo7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by heffo7
 


A thick coat doesn't mean it has to be winter but it does mean that the fox has a thick healthy coat. Many foxes that people see have some degree of mange making their coats appears thinner and many foxes don't have the nice weight that the one we are debating does. There was a thread here a while back about a very large dog fox, still a fox but a big one. They do vary in size, colour and condition.

If people cant see that this is a fox I can't continue pointing it out as its tantamount to banging my head against a brick wall. If you really believe its an extinct animal despite all evidence pointing towards it being a fox then ok.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Versa
 



A thick coat doesn't mean it has to be winter but it does mean that the fox has a thick healthy coat.


Well I had a Fox Skin wholesaler in the factory next to mine..
I have seen literally hundreds of thousands of Fox skins..

Australian Foxes do NOT get much in the way of a winter coat..
The climate is too mild for that..
Our foxes all look mange compared to their European brothers..
It's why Australian fox skins are used mainly in cuffs, collars and cheap coats etc..

I spoke to the owners there quite a bit..



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Versa
 


Is it an extinct species? I have no idea.

It simply isn't put together the way I would expect a fox to be put together. And I am familiar with foxes. Several species of them even. Mind you, the foxes I've seen are North American foxes.

Is it absolutely not a fox? I can't say that.

I can say, that you telling me over and over that it looks exactly like a fox when I've never seen a torso shaped that way, or its stance wide like that, or its haunches with muscle across the back of the shoulder blade pop- up like it takes steroids (and that's not fur).

I am merely pointing out that it has things wrong with it to fit what I have seen of foxes.

Frankly, it doesn't look anything like the films of the Marsupial Tiger which exist from the last one in captivity either.
edit on 2011/3/7 by Aeons because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join