Holy Balls! Is The Virginia Trail Cam Animal a Ground Sloth?


The Journal of The Bizarre blog just posted an interesting theory suggesting our cryptozoologist friend Jay Cooney's assumption might be wrong about the creature above being a bear. They believe the animal might be a ground sloth. Could this explain the fingers that some are be pointing out? Here's an excerpt:

Cooney's analysis has been echoed by several other researchers, who also tend to favor the theory that the Viginia trail cam creature is a quadruped. We at Journal of the Bizarre also agree with this fact; however, we believe that the creature in question is not a bear, but a ground sloth- an extinct quadruped mammal which last roamed North America 11,000 years ago.

Read the rest of their theory here: http://journalofthebizarre.blogspot.com/2013/08/stunning-bigfoot-breakthrough.html



Comments

  1. Replies
    1. From the article:
      "One critical aspect which researchers seem to have overlooked is the enormous tail, which has apparently been mistaken as the creature's hind leg. However, a close look of the photo reveals that the creature's left hind leg is in front of the tree limb on the ground."

      For a start the photo is pixellated all to hell and is so grainy that there's hardly any point having 'a close look' since there's no fine details to see. Secondly, the "left leg" they've identified apparently has a different colour and texture to the rest of the creature. It's smooth and light brown rather than being dark and hairy. The 'leg' is the stump that the creature is digging at.

      "Once this distinct anatomical feature [the supposed long tail] has been recognized, the pool of possible 'suspects' shrinks considerably, so considerably, in fact, that the ground sloth is the only possibility."

      Assuming that the creature *does* have a long bushy tail (a dumb assumption but let's play along for the moment) there's plenty of possibilities for what it might be. Maybe a tamandua or some other species of anteater? A coati? A wolverine? A lemur? A tree kangaroo? There's absolutely no indicator of size in the actual photo or even which country it was taken in so there's literally dozens and dozens of different animals that would fit the description. Leaping to the conclusion that it must be a giant prehistoric animal which is thought to have gone extinct 11,000 years ago is embarrassingly premature. (Premature speculation is always embarrassing but I suspect these guys have a terminal case.)

      "Another tell-tale clue is provided by Rick Jacobs himself, who states that the creature appears to have fingers, which are grasping the base of the tree limb."

      There's not enough detail in the photo to tell whether it has fingers or not.

      "The final giveaway is the animal's fur, which appears to be more "shaggy" than that of a bear or a primate. Of all the possible 'suspects', the fur most closely resembles that of living species of tree sloths"

      These guys don't even know what a bear looks like. Do a google image search for "bear shedding coat" or "bear with mange" and you'll find dozens of photos of bears with coats that are just as shaggy as the creature in the photo. Primates such as orangutans or gorillas are also extremely shaggy and I'm amazed that these guys were unaware of this. If someone wanted to be seen as an 'expert' in identifying cryptids you'd think they would have looked at a few good pictures of bears and gorillas other than the picture books they read in kindergarten but I guess these guys slept in on Research Day when they were studying Cryptozoology 101 at their local community college.

      These guys put up a really weak argument. It's so weak that my granny could beat it at armwrestling and she's been dead for 36 years. For shame.

      Delete
    2. We could do without the attitude.

      Delete
    3. We could do without the stupidity.

      Delete
    4. A tone argument is pretty much a tacit admission of defeat so thanks for agreeing with my points, I guess.

      Delete
  2. leave that poor bear alone he tryiing to find a well needed meal

    ReplyDelete
  3. Replies
    1. You can say it's a chimp all you want. It doesn't make it true though.

      Delete
    2. It's a turtle without a shell that's wearing a ghillie suit for warmth. Happens all the time.
      It's not digging for food, it's scooping out a hole so it can lay its eggs.

      Delete
  4. Looks like a dwarf with werewolf disease?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Looks like a dwarf with werewolf disease?

    ReplyDelete
  6. And now we know, because VaJayJay says so and he knows everything, just like yesterday when he said it was a bear

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This wasn't jay saying sloth, learn to read.

      Delete
    2. ^ curiously obsessed with a teenage boy

      Delete
  7. The physiques and appearances of bears spans a broad spectrum and are capable of posing in unexpected ways..Coupling this with the fact a photo is a projection onto 2 space of a 3-dimensional scene and the result is misleading pics like this and the Jacob photos...

    ReplyDelete
  8. I looked at the photo close up. It doesn't look like the extinct sloth, nor a regular sloth. Sloths have claws instead of fingers from the pictures I have seen of them. That is not a bear either.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is a bear that has been altered via Photoshop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it is. Why does anyone believe this hoaxed crap shows an actual animal that hasn't been altered via Photoshop?

      Delete
  10. it's most likely a bear with mange

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks so much. I've been looking everywhere for my dog Mr. Snookums. Please feed him well and don't mistreat him.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's facing the camera with head down. Massive upper w/body tapering down to longer legs. Just like bigfoot...


    roll one

    ReplyDelete
  13. Looks like Tina Turner to me.
    Eggs.

    ReplyDelete
  14. jacobs creature,what a pointless senationlized title that is,its a bear sme as this one. that's why its 1 shot from the back,they r part of a series,think about it. the people r deliberately not showing u the others in series as it will show a bear

    why I bother I don't know

    ok it 1 bigfoot taken from back,with the rest mysteriously gone,probaly men in blak but this 1 got out. they r part of the tens of thousands 8ft 600pd apemen ambling about our national arks.
    is this some special needs site im unaware off?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Is this some special needs site i'm unaware off? You could say that, but your spelling and writing skills are probably more retarded.

      Delete
  15. My friends that is a large howler monkey.
    I don't think that picture is in North America.
    Certain localities the howlers have heavier coats and thicker tails.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?