New Footage of Possible Tasmanian Tiger

originally posted by: theantediluvian
However, it seems far more likely that even with tens of million of years in between, what we're actually seeing is that because they started with a common form, branches in the separate lineages responded to similar selective pressures with similar adaptations.

Exactly, which is why I mentioned convergent evolution.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
That would be a wild and outlandish assumption without a single drop of empirical evidence and huge amounts of faith

What? Evolution? You one of those 'I donts believe in no evolution because Jesus' people?

a reply to: Kandinsky

Here's the thing, this was on the mainland. Tigers weren't just on Tasmania, and the mainland has a lot of area most people just plain don't go to. There's tons of places for species to hide.

Here's another thing, despite being declared extinct, sightings of them never actually stopped. They became very sparse, but as the years have gone on, sightings have actually increased. This hints at a recovering population of Tigers out in the bush. It may be nothing, but it also may be what it seems.

So now we have an urban sighting. You sound skeptical because of that, but in a way, considering what I previously mentioned, it may not only be possible but a very GOOD sign. Keep in mind even in the US, it doesn't take too long to go from urban to wilderness. Urban areas are really small concrete jungles or oasis in a giant wilderness setting. People actually literally LIVE on a very very small portion of the planet. We're just spread out in little pockets all over. So it's never really that surprising an animal gets found in an urban setting, cause getting to one doesn't require that much travel. Even animals can get lost and confused.

Not to mention as pointed out, this was an urban setting with lots of wilderness within and around it, making it even easier for a creature to find it's way in. But I digress continuing my chain of events. So we have potentially, if eye witness testimony is accepted, and let's be fair this is a creature that went "extinct" not long ago, so recently we have videos of it, so it's not like it's Nessie or Bigfoot or Flying Saucers with little grey aliens, so I think we can give eye witness testimony a bit more credence in this case. Some of the people who've had sightings of Tigers look old enough that they may have alive been when Tigers weren't considered extinct. That's only 80 years ago by the way. Let's also not forget the sightings never stopped so many of the older sighting were by people that knew damn well what a tiger looked like.

But once again, I digress, if we give eye witness testimony more credence than normal for the reason I mentioned above, here's a very, very plausible story based on the evidence presented. Mankind hunts the tigers for all the stupid reasons we did, we chase the species deep into the bush, where man rarely treads, those that survive are the ones most skittish of man, the one's that have developed as many of man's prey have, an instinctual fear of man.

So man stops hunting tigers, we stop seeing them, they stop going into areas where we are common, and we don't go that deep into the bush where the surviving populations are hidden. For several years no real sightings occur. But they start up again. A few Tigers from these populations possibly have wandered out of their territories, or a few people have gone further into the bush than normal. Now I could be wrong, but I think a lot of the earlier sightings were more from people that went out into the bush than people in more civilized areas, but don't quote me on that. So time continues to pass. As it does, these surviving tigers, no longer hunted begin to make a come back. This means they need to explore out and acquire new territory to maintain a growing population.

This growth results in more run ins with mankind. Still not many, remember these creatures are now very skittish when it comes to us. So these encounters are short lived mistakes on their part. But as a result sightings go up. Some even on farmland. Now we get more to nowish, we'll assume for arguments sake, the population has grown even more, on top of that, it's been many generations, by this time it's possible not only they need to expand even further but some tigers have started being born without that instinctual fear of man that have kept them alive for so long.

From my understanding, it's getting to the point where sightings of tigers is somewhat common. Enough so, that people somewhat near the areas they might still exist have all had a sighting that may have have been a tiger. Think about your own life, think about all the animals you know live in the wilderness around the places you've been. Surely there's some that even though you know are there, you could count sightings of on one hand.

So now we have some tigers that are not as fearful of man, a population causing some to move outside said territories, and eyewitness accounts that are growing at a pace that fits a story of a reclusive species making a come back. With all this in mind. Are you really so certain they've all been killed off and this wasn't a Tiger?

I'm almost convinced it's more plausible they are out there than I am that we killed them all off. There's a lot of bush and remote wilderness in Australia. Also to me the evidence lines up to perfectly with a realistic picture that they're alive, as it fits what that would look like if true.

If you want to continue believing they are all dead and we killed them all, that's your prerogative, but in the case of the Tiger I don't think them still being alive is so easily dismissed as that. So I'm saying, keep an open mind, don't rule them out just yet. A tiger may still surprise you one day.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Sugar gliders and flying squirrels are one particular example of convergent evolution that I find remarkable in how similar two unrelated species can become in filling an evolutionary niche.

oops, wrong thread.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Are you in the wrong thread or something?

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Are you in the wrong thread or something?

Ya man, I was. got six pages open here and trying to multi task...Fail obviously.

It would be awesome if the Tazzi Tiger had made such a comeback! I've seen some other pretty convincing videos too. One was of a possible tiger runing next to and in front of a vehicle... Very cool!

a reply to: Menrva

I remember seeing that video... dammit where was that?

a reply to: Kandinsky


SSHHH Australia's secret....go to Melbourne or Sydney or Brisvegas.


Image looks like adolescent grey kangaroo.

No Tassie tigers would be found here.

originally posted by: BladeGlint
a reply to: Kandinsky


SSHHH Australia's secret....go to Melbourne or Sydney or Brisvegas.


Image looks like adolescent grey kangaroo.

No Tassie tigers would be found here.

It's hard to say for sure, but it looks like it walks, back legs one before the other, where as a roo would lever off its front legs and move it's rear legs in unison. or hop.

a reply to: Puppylove

I don't know.. I cannot find it now.. Ugh...

I don't see any distinctive patterns on it's hind quarters.

it should have stripes.

a reply to: grey580

It's a crappy video with crazy amounts of sun glare. Which sucks because if we could actually see the fur and not just sun glare it would tell us a lot.

originally posted by: grey580
I don't see any distinctive patterns on it's hind quarters.

it should have stripes.

I was watching the stripes in the old 1930's film of the last tiger. When it turns away from the camera, they disappear.
I am not saying that is the answer to the missing stripes in the OP video, just noticed it and found it interesting.

I believe that this could possibly be a young Dingo. Dingos are an indigenous wild dog of Australia and occasionally domesticated and even used as cattle dogs. They are not always overly skittish of people either. The video quality is poor though and I can't say with any degree of certainty, but a Dingo is a valid possibility. The Dingo is thought by many naturalists to have been a big factor in the Thylacine going extinct on the Australian mainland.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Kind of looks like a fat wallaby or something

a reply to: Puppylove

While you make some good points about the prevalence of wildlife in urban settings, there are a few issues with your logic--

Sightings of thylacine aren't commonly reported in urban/suburban areas. This is the first one to my knowledge that isn't an obvious hoax. (but it's pretty close to an obvious mis-identification). Even if the population has grown enough to sprawl into suburban areas, this wouldn't be the only individual doing so. Given the fact that this one was observed and caught on film, it's likely that if it were a thylacine, there would be many, many more.

The biggest issue with your logic is that while it's true these hypothetical suburban thylacine would be less wary/more habituated with humans, that means that... they're more habituated. They'd be eating suburban food (cat food that people put out, trash), they'd be going after small outdoor pets. This is the chain of events with predator species that do rebound and enter into areas where people live.

If that were what's happening with thylacines, I would expect far, far more high-quality reports (images, videos, specimens) of thylacine. They'd be easier to capture on film and in real life, and the evidence wouldn't be a questionable video.

Also, if there were that many that they're sprawling into suburban areas, there would be such a high population in the uninhabited areas that they would likely have been found on field camera traps or in other survey techniques that people use all the time.

If you are right, it should only be a matter of time (like, days, maybe a couple weeks) before they are able to nab better pictures of this one, or a body from it going after someone's dog. Because it will inevitably become habituated and will be eating all sorts of treats found in that neighborhood.

Remember that unfortunately now the thylacine is being removed from protective wildlife law under the premise that it is extinct, which is dumb, and makes the market for crypto-poachers much more detrimental than it otherwise might be.

Generally, the way it goes with grainy/inconclusive evidence is that there's a reason it's grainy/inconclusive... if it were conclusive, it would be clear that it's not a story.

I do believe there are some very, very small population pockets, but probably not on the mainland. It's just an ecological issue with the concept of them showing up in a suburban setting. Not impossible, but I would expect to see some other signatures of presence before it would get to that point, and I'd be expecting to see frequent, mainstream, irrefutable reports of presence at this point.

a reply to: ravenshadow13

Always the possibility of a sick, lost or confused individual as well. Anomalies do occur. Only problem with that theory is one would think it would have died and a body been found. But then again that depends on where it died.

a reply to: theantediluvian

This is the thread that brought me to this site. Very cool. I don't think its a roo since it walks by placing one foot infront of the other instead of pushing off. It also doesn't look like a dingo since the tail is so long. Wish the image was better, the thylacine is my favorite cryptid.