QuiteContrary, on 17 November 2012 - 07:43 AM, said:
However, I had noticed in the OP, something a tad odd about the stance, body posture of the animal for a cat, but dismissed it.
Perhaps the witnesses, too, saw something odd/ambiguous about stance/posture/gait of the cat that made them think "not cat" and then perceived it to be a "monkey". It is similar to the recent "Essex Lion" case which resulted in an intensive police search when 6 people saw a house cat across a field but perceived it to be a lion or some lion-sized cat. What is triggering that response?
Could cases like the "Darwin Monkey" and "Essex Lion", in which the objective evidence is at odds with the subjective evidence, account for other alleged sightings of cryptids and out-of-place-animals in which there is no objective evidence?
Are such misperceptions more common than they are usually considered to be?
As we are continually taught from a young age to trust our senses, could our (misplaced) confidence in our own perceptions and experiences contribute to the discrepancies between what we perceive/experience and what is actually there?
After all, when it comes to cryptids and out-of-place-animals, many witnesses are certain they know what they saw and that alone can be very compelling...