Peru "giant snake" pictures released

[UM-Bot]

Cryptozoology Jon Downes takes a look at photographs sent to the Center for Fortean Zoology from a recent expedition in the Peruvian rainforest by Mike and Greg Warner that show what they believe to be a giant anaconda at the side of a river.

"Jon Downes: After a week of negotiations with Mike and Greg Warner, the CFZ has the exclusive rights to release all the pictures from their Peruvian expedition. Greg sent these with the following message: "These are the two shots we got that we believe is Yacumama or giant anaconda. It looks like the head to me and part of the body surfacing at the other side of the channel.""

View: Full Article | Source: Cryptozoology Online

Official Site: Bigsnakes.net

[Blueguardian]

I dunno about you guys, but that evidence is sketchy at best. Looks like a sandbar to me, but that 'snake head' does look interesting, but it could just be nothing, which it probably is.

[Stormcrow]

I dunno about you guys, but that evidence is sketchy at best. Looks like a sandbar to me, but that 'snake head' does look interesting, but it could just be nothing, which it probably is.

That's definitely the river bank. I can't even make out the shape of a snake in all of that mess, even with the help of that awful red text. :[

Edited June 13, 2009 by Ebonykrow

[AROCES]

I see nothing but river bank mud.

[Wreck7]

It's just another giant terd.

[Cookes453]

Looks like mud.

[Leonardo]

Could whoever writes the UM preamble for these News posts please check their facts before writing the blurb?

CFZ did not report this photo as being of a giant anaconda - in fact CFZ categorically states the picture is of a mud or sand bank. The two reporters (independent, I presume, as CFZ had to negotiate rights to the pictures and story) are of the opinion it is a giant snake, no-one else is.

[shadowsoftears]

Leonardo, it was just quoting the top portion of the CFZ page.

One thing I find interesting is that the person who took the pictures says the river was flooded at the time, so it couldn't possibly be a sand bar. Looking a little closer at the pictures, I would have to say mud is more likely considering the vegetation in it. I'm not sure how a snake would have vegetation IN its body, but hey..maybe the snake is related to the fir tree guy. In any case, if you look closely, it looks like the mud could have slid down the little hill along with a few trees where the "body" of the "snake" is.

[Blueguardian]

I think its meant to be one of those optical illusion things, the idea is to stare at it until you see something, just keep staring, it will come .

[Ashyne]

i dont see any snake

[Leonardo]

Leonardo, it was just quoting the top portion of the CFZ page.

Hi shadowsoft,

I may be wrong, but this blurb...

- Removed old quote -

...I could not find on any of the CFZ web-pages. This is from the top of the OP here on UM and distinctly says CFZ are reporting this photograph to be a giant snake. CFZ do not, but the reporters-photographers/bloggers do.

If the opening sentence I find inaccurate was not written by someone at UM and is on the CFZ website, then please accept my apologies, but as far as I can tell, it is UM written - and wrong at that.

[Saru]

The opening blurb has now been changed, apologies for the inaccuracy.

[Lady Amethyst]

I'm only seeing water reflecting the trees and a huge area of mud.

[Queen in the North]

Nope, I even fiddled around with the picture for a bit, and I still can't see anything of worth. Except a river and some jungle.

[Kratology]

says they have video too? i'd like to see that....

[JBflorida]

I was looking at these pictures and the way the pointed it out it seems like they are looking at the wrong side of the bank. Check out the part that I outlined in red and tell me that isn't what actually looks like a snake.

[jesspy]

all i see is apic of a river or creek where is the "snake"

[Juanita Rose Violini]

In 1906 Colonel Percy Fawcett, an adventurer who was searching for the Lost City of Gold, reported encountering a giant anaconda in the Brazilian Jungle.

Whether this current report has substance or not, there have been enough accounts throughout history to think that there must be truth to them.

[Queen in the North]

I was looking at these pictures and the way the pointed it out it seems like they are looking at the wrong side of the bank. Check out the part that I outlined in red and tell me that isn't what actually looks like a snake.

'That isn't what actually looks like a snake.'

If it was a snake partially in the water, you wouldn't see the section of it that was in the water. Also, there are similar 'squiggly bits' (for want of a better word) on other areas of the picture. And no, the area is not infested with giant snakes, before anyone tries to explain that.

[jesspy]

In 1906 Colonel Percy Fawcett, an adventurer who was searching for the Lost City of Gold, reported encountering a giant anaconda in the Brazilian Jungle.

Whether this current report has substance or not, there have been enough accounts throughout history to think that there must be truth to them.

I must admit this looks like a fake. Trick of camera. I think the camera has been placed on the ground in front of a dead snake of average size and the two men are far off in the background

Edited June 15, 2009 by jesspy

[Mac E]

Sand bars and mud banks can be verified. They should get on Google and check it out since they know the coordinates. From the photo itself, it is hard to tell if there is anyhting there.

[jesspy]

Sand bars and mud banks can be verified. They should get on Google and check it out since they know the coordinates. From the photo itself, it is hard to tell if there is anyhting there.

but the sanke would have disappeared by the time the satellites are in position

[CausticGnostic]

I like JessSpy's pictures a lot more than the one at the site the OP referenced.

And, yes, there have been presistent rumors of giant snakes, not only in the Amazon but in Africa, too. I'm reminded of the photograph taken by a Belgian pilot in the Congo, a picture purporting to show a 50-foot-long python with a head the size of a horse's head. Arthur C. Clarke's old TV program showed that picture many years ago. I've got it on video somewhere around here. I also remember an account in Seutonius's "Live of the Caesars" of a 50-foot-long python from Africa that was displayed, live, at a triumph for one of the Caesar's. Supposedly it was later killed in the "beast fights" at the Colosseum. Of course, Suetonius is notorious for including every little rumor in his "histories". . . .

I just don't know about giant snakes. One part of me says they might be out there, that there's no telling how big an anaconda might get living deep in the Amazonian rain forest, or in the African jungle. But another part of me wants to see the body--stretched out, weighed, and measured, with a person standing beside it for comparison. Until somebody can physically prove that a snake of any kind can exceed 25 feet in length, these stories will remain just that.

Edited June 16, 2009 by CausticGnostic

[Mac E]

but the sanke would have disappeared by the time the satellites are in position

Exactly, if there is nothing there, it was a snake (or some other animal). If the structure is still similar to the photo it would be a sand/mudbar.

[louie]

Oh come on there is nothing there. amazing this even made it to front page news.