Is This a Chupacabra? A Mangy Bear? Coyote? Or Werewolf?


These sportsman website are such a tease sometimes. They're click-baiting when they give their posts titles like, "'Chupacabra' just plain coyote ugly, state veterinarian says" or "Trail Cam Photo: Chupacabra? Nope, Mangy Coyote" -- even though they know exactly what it is. We admit, we are guilty of this too, but we expect more control from sites like www.louisianasportsman.com, and www.outdoorlife.com, who published this "chupacabra" photo. Really, though. Chupacabra? Really, guys? LOL. If you're still confused about the animal, the explanation is below (via www.louisianasportsman.com):

So I forwarded the photo to Dr. Jim LaCour, state wildlife veterinarian with the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, for his expert forensic diagnosis.

Drum roll please …

And the winner is?

“That’s a mangy coyote in the picture,” said LaCour, whose keen insights into the two types of mange had me itching for the rest of the day.

So it wasn’t a rare, fleeting glimpse of a chupacabra, the mythical creature supposedly first seen in Puerto Rico that sucks the blood from its victims?

“I’ve never seen or heard of a real one being documented in the scientific community,” LaCour said with a chuckle. “I kind of doubt they really exist, but I guess you never know what’s out there.

“We’ve never seen one here. I’ll put it that way.”

Comments

  1. Oh come on! COYOTES DON'T HAVE STRIPES YOU IDIOTS! It can ONLY be a thylacine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The morphology is all wrong for a thylacine and they didn't have stripes on their legs in any case. I saw two thylacines about a month ago up close (stuffed in a museum) but there's plenty of photos online if you want to check them out.

      Striped and brown hyenas have a fairly similar shape to the creature in the photo and they have stripes on their legs, but it could still be a coyote. Extreme cases of mange irritate and inflame the skin, sometimes causing it to form rolls:
      http://i.imgur.com/EZcEcol.jpg

      Delete
  2. these pics, always single pics [anything that takes a pic takes video nowadays],they don't show more than 1 or a film as it will show its cleary a coyote with mange

    Its a joke and lets footery down. We all want 2believe but there is no evidence, apart from the p/g film,for me taken by a very dubious character who was desperate to get a BF film to help him with medical expenses and cash p[rob;lems in general. these circumstances are imnportant.

    I dfont particu;lary like Bob hermous[sp] but his walk and size is uncannily like patty and he was friends/around with those 2 at the time ,plus the whole studio thing etc....


    All weve had since is blobs,leaves and identified animals like bears mostlky taken at odd angles which appear to show bipedal figures or BF on all fours,Again its always 1 shot which shows this. as the uploader doesn't show the whole series asd it will show exactly what it is IE Hoovey ,Jacobs,BF in field,all the till shots.THERE ARE ALL SINGLE SHOTS,the question has to be is WHY

    The thonpson fim is[think that was his name] is the only other film ive seen that is either a clever hoax or a bigfoot

    eitherway,we have to ask what are the chances of 10k+ 8-10ft 600pd animals living in North America undetected[that's how much trhere would have to be for unprotected animals to live and breed successfully]apen/hybrid humans of this size not having left clear evidence,bodies,HD film, DNA,evidence of forest being ripped up,have u seen the mess 1 bear kill leaves when he eats/kills a deer?! Its a bloody mess,yet thousnads of bigfoot leave no a shred and we are exoected to believe they understand what cameras are and that they have to avoid getting their poic taken so they remain protected. They know what flir,trail cams etc....are[even google earth]as they seem adapt at avoiding them. why do big hiking groups not see them,why is there not a patty 234,10 etc...

    its a myth sadly. hence why this site has included non bigfoot related film as there is simply nothing to show.thats also reflected in the comments. its been taken over by PC nerd types it appears.its a community of nerdy loners who have their in jokes and dumb non BF related comments

    all the decent commentators left after ketchum/ericksonn project results /nonresults were revealed.that was what we were putting our ho[pe in.Clearly we were let down

    In my opinion id look to the oceans as the area where we would find unknown specieds to science that are big exciting animals and NOT INSECTS/FISH ETC...WE ALL WANT THE EXCITING BIG MAMMALS TO BE FOUND.BIGFOOT AINT IT[sorry 4 caps,cant be arsed re typing]



    ReplyDelete
  3. ps
    sorry for my war n peace comment.what a bore.
    final analysis.

    bigfoot doesn't exist theres no PROOF

    ReplyDelete
  4. Replies
    1. The shape of the body and front legs (and possiblt the head)are thylacine-like but the haunches, ears, back legs and tail aren't. Plus thylacines didn't have stripes on their legs, only on their backs.

      Delete
  5. who gives a fuck ld 5o who cares have fun. i know hey man

    ReplyDelete
  6. who gives a fuck ld 5o who cares have fun. i know hey man

    ReplyDelete
  7. who gives a fuck ld 5o who cares have fun. i know hey man

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

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