There is a reason it's called the Tasmanian tiger. And Tasmania is ,last time a checked, temperate/tropical forest. I think that could hide a coyote sized animal for 36 years.
which cryptid could exist?
- Thread starter Akuma
- Start date
Sorry. My mistake: I had mistaken the thylacine (Tasmanian tiger) for the thylacoleo. :banghead: I agree, the Tasmanian tiger could still exist, especially since a large part of south-west Tasmania is unoccupied by humans.
If a cryptid is simply by definition an animal who's existence has been suggested but not proven, of course I believe in them. There are all sorts of animals we have seen signs of that havent been catalogued yet. Now do I believe Im going to see a scuba diving sasquatch battle a plesiosaur in an antarctic lake filled with martian bacteria? No not really
I remember reading about a documentary where a bunch of Western or European researchers showed some African tribal fisherman a chart of African fauna, and they all pointed to the Rhinoceros and yelled "Mokele-mbembe!"
There is no way a large Sauropod in breeding numbers could go undetected, anywhere.
North America has more wilderness than most European countries have land, altogether. Someone on a Bigfoot site I frequent did a calculation on how many individuals of a breeding population would be needed, to how much wilderness there is in North America, and they came up with one individual per 319 square miles. Primates are decent and going unnoticed, if they want.
Just saying.
I dont bank on Bigfoot being real, but I wouldnt bet on it being not real, either.
And anyone who says we have no DNA evidence for Bigfoot hasnt done their homework. They have found Primate DNA in parts of North America that wasnt human, it just couldnt be placed to one thing or another. The problem with the Bigfoot community is that some of the biggest names are either hoaxers, like Rick Dyer and Tim Fasano, or gullible and willing to call "legit" on anything, like MK Davis. Jeff Meldrum is the only legit Bigfoot scientist, IMO.
Just saying.
I dont bank on Bigfoot being real, but I wouldnt bet on it being not real, either.
And anyone who says we have no DNA evidence for Bigfoot hasnt done their homework. They have found Primate DNA in parts of North America that wasnt human, it just couldnt be placed to one thing or another. The problem with the Bigfoot community is that some of the biggest names are either hoaxers, like Rick Dyer and Tim Fasano, or gullible and willing to call "legit" on anything, like MK Davis. Jeff Meldrum is the only legit Bigfoot scientist, IMO.
No offense but Bigfoot isn't real and yes there are lot of wilderness in North America but that doesn't mean it is remote and off limits to the humans. As I am saying there is lack of SOLID evidence of Bigfoot being real, considering that there are no bodies or bone fragments have found. We managed to find feces from super rare endangered/threatened animal species out in the wilderness. As for the "non human" DNA, it failed to settle the big questions and that it was rejected by the scientific peers. Interestingly, there are some Bigfoot "studies" that Bigfoot DNA is very similar to us so how could you saying that it wasn't human yet it is similar to the human DNA? There is some studies that suggested that Bigfoot is just a hairy subspecies of the humans.
Two I really want to still be alive is a Megaladon or Loch Ness Monster. Both massive and majestic things which would be literally unreal to see in real life
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
