Hi All,

I'm new to this forum and have been having a look around and can't seem to find a discussion about which cryptid people think we're most likely to discover? I've been doing some research for my young daughter who loves mystery about where we could go to go cryptid hunting and what for. I found this site Great place to Hunt for Monsters but I wanted some more thoughts about what's the most likely. I love that my daughter has this imagination but I know that some cryptids are more founded in fact than others.

Hope I'm not opening a can of worms here.

Thanks!

Hi, Welcome to the forum!
Hmmm...Based on things I've read and heard, I think maybe Bigfoot (or his kin) would be the most likely to be found...

I wouldn't be surprised if we found Bigfoot. And I don't mean Bigfoot in the fleash, I am perhaps saying that they find remains or actual evidance that a Bigfoot has lived before. Bones, dens, hair... hell - maybe even a living one.

its either bigfoot or a chupacabra if that already hasnt been discovered (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=104954&st=0)

Hey.. Welcome.. i think bigfoot would be likely found

I've just always wondered why people keep saying bigfoot exsists if a carcas hasn't been found yet since they've supposedly been around for all these years.

I read about a possible reason for that a while back. The theory is that they bury their dead kind of like we do. Of course, there still would be some that died alone or something and wouldn't be buried so who knows?

I like your banner Si***....Am I right it says,...COEXIST.

I'd like to agree with all of yous but what about Nessy? I think that would be interesting andwith all the new hi-tech gear we have these days it shouldn't be to hard as long as someone is willing to invest some time and money.

That it does! I don't know where I got it from though, I believe another forum.



The same theory goes for bears as well. Bears exist as we all know, and they die just like every other creature but finding a bear carcass is rare.

I would vote for the Giant Squid, no wait a little late arent I? Damn, ok then Ill say some form of Bigfoot may be found BUT I cant help thinking with the vast expanses of ocean some new form of sea monster may be discovered in the depths.

i say
CADBOROSAURUS
we already had a carcas
and sightings happen all the time
and also ppl who study them notice a pattern in the sightings that looks like they migrate with the local fish
and! only a few miles inward is onadoga where Ogopogo is
which has the same discription as Cadborosaurus, and the lake was open to the ocean and then got closed off

but second is Sasquatch

Hey welcome to the fourm. Not sure on the other thing, lol sorry. well good luck and have a greeeeeeeeaaaaaaat daaaaaaaaaay!!!!

Loch Ness is too cold to sustain a large reptile.... however recent
trips to Loch Ness has showen that there are animals using sonar
in the Loch .


List of the top 5 ones MOST likely to exist:

1 Thylacian
2 Ivory Billed Woodpecker
3 Bigfoot family
4 Thunder Birds (lets not have a repeat of what happend when I first joined )
5 Chupacabra (in some form; not vampiric alien form)

I think Cuppacubra has been uncovered here right at UM

Right Here - scroll down and check the post by a member called ranchero. Darn good call, and a very good chance he has solved the legend.

Real good possibles are

The Bili Ape legend says they kill Lions !

and

The Pygmy Elephant Your daughter might quite like this one Wee elephants.

Only a matter of time before thes elusive creatures join the list of catalogued extant animals You may be waiting somewhat for the likes of Ol footy, Nessie is going to be an even longer wait. Great fun to research though!

false
plesiasaurs lived in cold waters and currently the leatherback travels to colder seas

wow i would have never guessed a coati
that is a plausable therory, and a strong one at that

I never brought up plesiasaurs to be frank (that's the magic
of the mystery). Great point about the leatherback.

The Loch is too small to contain a breeding population of a abnormaly
large reptile (15 and upward feet). Even if the Loch could support a
breeding population there should be a bit more credible sightings.

Then again the Hoan Kiem Turtle can stay underwater for years...

I dont quite think its "what critter where most likely to find" more so what critter will scientists or animal experts find. There have been THOUSANDS of eye witnesses to creatures like big foot its just a matter of time till theyre recognized as a species and we have GOOD photographic evidence (though even then there will be skeptics) or find a dead one or catch a live one.
The only problem is there are very few people who will invest time and money into looking for creatures such as bigfoot and cryptzoology isn't as funded as some would like.
You must admit there are more important things to invest money into these days, cures for illnesses and the likes so money to find things like bigfoot is scarce but surley at some stage we will nab one probably by accident.
BUT is this a good thing? look at so many other creatures becoming extinct like tigers and rhinos. Think of all the hicks who will go out trying to bag them a dead rare animal.
So is it worth having its existence proved by physical evidence or better to just leave them alone?
But I think big foot would be the first
Thats my 2 cents

Sad to say, but the only way to prove it's exiestance is by "baging" one.
It's nearly (would be) impossible to catch some cryptids.

Luckly some countries and states have laws protecting cryptids.

It is hard enough to find something on land. Finding a creature in water would be even harder. I am of the firm belief that none of the Lake Monsters LIVE in the lakes where they are seen. I believe they migrate and spend most of thier time in the ocean. This is really the only way they could survive. Sasquatch would be the best bet for sure. There is likely to be one near you somewhere. My advice is to look at your local ecology and decide what would be the most likely food source for a large omnivore. Berries? Rodents? Orchards? River or lakes? Stake these out. They are intelligent enough to know where the food is and they HAVE to eat.
I really wouldn't bother with the whole chupacabra nonsense. This is obviously just a local legend that went WAY out of control. How can you POSSIBLY find something when NOBODY can decide what it looks like????? This whole thing started locally then spread like wildfire until there have been sightings everywhere. This would require a HUGE population of these things and therefore one would have been caught by now.

Sorry for the bump, but I like this post, referred to earlier in this thread:

"Have a look at this critter, Nasua Narica, coati, in Mexico called the tejon.

I ranch in a mountainous part of Mexico where we get attacks on farm animals and dogs in the area on occasion usually during the dry season and usually by the relatively rare solitary male tejones that are chased out of their family pack group and with their mountain food supplies dried up, no fruit, berries or small lizards or insects, etc, so they come into the wetter and settled valley areas to hunt and scavenge.

Male Tejones have much of the attributes of the supposed chupacabra. They spend most of their time in tree tops and prefer to leap from tree to tree rather than climbing down. They can also leap tremendous distances on the ground like a kangaroo, I've seen 25 or 30 foot jumps and as well they climb vertical stone and adobe walls both up or down like a squirrel. Their activity in lowlands is nocturnal and few people have seen them or would recognize one as they are uncommon except as the much smaller Coatimundi form.

The size of the males is large, often 15 kgs or more, almost the size of a coyote, extremely vicious and have a weird way of killing much larger animals when hunting at night. They roll on their back and act like they are injured or dead and when a dog, cow or goat comes sniffing around they grab it by the throat with their small mouth full of needle-like teeth and then stick one of their paws with about 1 inch claws in and rip out a hole along with whatever veins or trachea they can dislodge and the animal usually bleeds to death as they hang on until it stops moving. As the tejon is a carnivore I have no doubt that they suck up the blood as that is what their nose is designed to do. Sucking and gobbling insects from leaf litter and rotten logs is one of the coatis food sources and it's not a far stretch to think they enjoy the salty treat of blood as most carnivorous animals do. The coatis territorial range is also in areas where chupacabra attacks have been reported including the southern US, Mexico and South America. As they are often kept as pets until the males of the species become too large or dangerous to handle one or more of these could have been released in Puerto Rico as well.



This photo is of a coati or tejon, probably a male on all fours, but occasionaly they are seen with their tail folded under, standing upright about 3 to 4 feet tall, like a small bear. This one is in a calm state but when exited or aggressive their back hairs stand up like spikes about 4 inches or longer and they piss all over leaving a musky type odor. They are completely fearless and in the dark their eyes reflect any light like most carnivores.

Now imagine one of these nasty little buggers at night all covered in blood and muck with his back hairs standing on end running and jumping around like a demon, hissing and screaming like a miniature hyena with eyes shining...most unarmed and uneducated farmers just stay inside their houses until the dust settles
and call it work of the devil...

For many years the solitary large male Coatis and the small social Coatimundis were considered different species as the social packs of Coatimundi have completely different behavior and reject older males from the pack except during mating season, because of the male Coatis aggressive and cannibalistic actions. Solitary male Coatis behavior has been little studied due to their rarity and nocturnal habit.

Ranchero"

This is epic-connection making right here and deserves a lot more attention!

As for my personal opinion, I asumme you mean cryptids as-described, and I'm gonna say megalodon 'cause we know they actually existed at one point, unlike Bigfoot or Nessie. xD

"Then again the Hoan Kiem Turtle can stay underwater for years..."

Holy sh**, really? Years? That's a long time to hold your breath. xD

Actually that is an incorrect statement. It is possible that Dinosaurs were warm blooded, yet still classed as reptiles, though they are technically archosaurs. But crocodiles are archosaurs too, and they are reptiles. Also, some cold blooded animals raise their body temperatures through their movement. Some large sea turtles thrive in waters about as cold as Loch Ness.

Pictographs and Petroglyphs actually suggest the true "thunderbird" was not just a big condor-like featherered bird, but something more like a pterodactyl. The Piasa in fact, looks like a medieval dragon, right down to long tail, scale covered body, and bat-like membrane wings. The oaccassion big bird occassionally reported has nothing to do with the enormous thunderbirds of legend that were believed to controll the weather, exactly like the dragons of china, mesopotamia, (including Yahweh), and middle america.

Dinosaurs were considered luke-warm blooded. They had both the benefits of both warm and cold blooded creatures. Unlike cold blooded organisms today, dinosaurs could use the food they ate to grow instead of to stay warm. This is one reason why they grew so large.

I think we forget to ask, where the OP is currently living, you know, you can't tell him to go hunt for Nessie right away if he's not from Scotland or the surrounding area? So, OP, where do you live, which country and of course, welcome to UM.

I think Big Foot is just another military project. a semi-gorila-human creature.