Hi this is my first post I just wanna say something about Bigfoot, Chupy and Nessie
Bigfoot- Some form of human that didn't evolve properly and its kind survived a long time
Chupacabra- If its real it would just be an animal just a plain animal that sucks blood and that picture of chupy that looks small and black its possibly a tasmanian devil!!!
Loch Ness Monster-It is possibly the paleosuarus a dinosaur that lived in the sea cuz by peoples thoughts it looks like it. Maybe the paleosaur lived somehow

It would also be good to post your theories about cryptoids you like

Interesting theories, I think Nessie is a species of prehistoric whale, and that theres more than one. I think Ogopogo is an aquatic rattler

I think big foot could have evolved along with humans, if it exists of course. It could be like an over developed chimpanzee.

I would go along with you on the Nessie theory, that is what makes the most sense to me, but how could one lake support that big of an animal, or a family of them for that matter?

sorry it took so long for me to reply
you know how the cavemen were way bigger than us.it could be the same for nessie... it evovled during the million of years and beacame smarter and smaller.
The reason it is smarter is cuz it lurks underwater for so long trying to hide from humans maybe

also the families of nessie's could be living in under water caves that might have formed

i dunnno about the bigfoot theory, welcome btw. and also, it's Plesiosaue, not plaeosaur.

yea im just 11 so i dont know much

monster hunter what are your cryptoid theories?

also when you look at the users names at the bottom of the screen what is the ---- under the name for?

It means they're replying

ok thanks and why is mystery man been still replying for a long time

Welcome to the forum!
Heres my feelings and theories on the cryptids you gave to us:

Bigfoot: I do believe Bigfoot/Yowie/Abdominable Snowman/etc. exists. I actually can agree with you on the fact that it is an evolving human stuck in the process from an ape or whatever family of ancestor apes we evolved from to becoming a human. We probably will never know, hopefully I'm wrong. It could be a new species of humans forming -

Chupacabra "Blood Sucking Animal": I honestly don't know what to believe based on past encounters and experiences. Some people encountered and drew it with spikes, walking upright, "red" glowing eyes. But some of the drawings based on a "chupacabra" or all so different from each other, who knows which one is real, which one is fake, which one can exist, and which one is really what people call the blood sucking animal.



Loch Ness Monster "Nessie": Anything that floats to the top of the lake such as a dead sea animal (fish) or a floating log, the audience/crowd nearby the lake (Loch [Lake] Ness, Lake Ogopogo, etc.) will come to a conclusion and assume that it was part of the lake monster. Theirs a branch that a team found in Loch Ness. < It was the exact shape of Loch Ness' head or what is to believed a plesiosaurs head. So based on that, everything people have been seeing could just be anything besides a plesiosaur. But also their are the sonar pictures taken by Rines based on the Loch Ness Monster and found these: It could be a plesiosaur, it could be a strange cryptid though not a dinosaur, and it could just be anything? We'll never know -

Thats what I believe, theirs more to it, but don't want to make it to lenghthy - just enough for you to understand. Hope you understand and agree -


Also, when your making new posts and no one has made any posts after the last post you made, you can go to edit on the bottom of your "already made" post and re-type what you want to say. Some people become angry, buts its ok - you'll learn just as I did -



The "Ogopogo" lake monster is the same as the Loch Ness Monster besides the fact that: it is a different lake and a different strange unknown monster existing or not - in it, and that it is described differently - as a snake with spikes lining its backbone -

yea i agree w/ you are you interested in other cryptoids cuz you post theories for them too

I'll tell you this, I'm not that old in age (17) and pretty much, I have a lot more years to go and I'll be studying cryptozoology for a very, very long time. Hopefully long enough where I could write my own books and have a show on television - But yes, I have many books on cryptozoology and have been studying a lot - So if you have any questions, feel free to ask me and the forum - I'll try to help you out and so will the forum...

k thanks. Do you want to start a research group on bigfoot and try to find the most believable sighting and pics and post them here?

Feel free and I'll help. You also might want to check on some past threads on the search to help you out with what your talking about but I'll make recent posts on sites, pictures, my opinions, etc. -

Here are some good sites to get it started:

http://www.bfro.net/

http://www.rfthomas.clara.net/bigfoot.html

http://theshadowlands.net/bf.htm

http://skepdic.com/bigfoot.html

http://www.texasbigfoot.com/

http://www.gcbro.com/

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/

http://www.unmuseum.org/bigfoot.htm

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt...6lr%3D%26sa%3DN

Some good pics:

If you want a cryptoid expert, go to Canadian Rottwiller.

This forums best budding cryptozoologist, no doubt about it.

I think he specalises in marine cryptids though.

Mysterey man, The patterson footage has been debunked. That movie and the images within them are prettey much a proven hoax.

True - Canadian definitly knows his stuff, I'll tell you that -

ok thanks lol

Firstly welcome weird dude .

The Patterson footage has not been proven fake, it is still the most believable piece of film around.
Consider the time it was made, who it was made by and their resources and the current examples of special effects.
Then there's the movement, the body muscle/ mass that moves etc etc.

Thanks - I take that as supporting me...or atleast backing me up =)

Sorry Mysteryman , I was replying to Walkens comment on patty being debunked.

For weird dude that's patty in Mysterymans 2nd and 3rd pics.

One of the most interesting theories I've seen is that a lot of these reports are in fact a phenomenon known as tulpas. Forgive me i"m no expert on the idea but essentially: a tulpa is a type of entity projected from the thoughts of another. Certain magicians and mystics are thought to be capable of projecting there thoughts outward with sufficent force of will that they litterally take on a life of there own. This particularly makes sense because many of these sightings are from areas where they necissary disciplines are still studied(the yeti for example is common to Tibet and to other places where Zen Buddhism is practiced one of the traditions that supposedly can produce tulpas).

In general I think a lot of them are some sort of spirit. NEssie for example is more likely a spirit more specificly a dragon(not a flying fire breathing phsyical critter a spirit). This would explain why several sonar sweeps of loch ness have turned up absolutely nothing. Also its often forgotten that the first recorded appearance of Nessie was of it attacking a swimmer and being driven back at the command of a saint(forgive me I forget which).

oh dear, look at that picture of bigfoot in mysterymans post, its such a bad fake its awful, anyway....

just curious, i hear this talk all the time, so has the patterson footage been proven fake or not?, i want evidence for both sides

Firstly, in my mind there are two kinds of cryptids, those that are probable, and those that are improbable.
Bigfoot is a Gigantopithecus blacki, if it still survives to date.

Info: According to Ciochon et al. (1990), Gigantopithecus blacki was 10 feet tall and weighed 1,200 pounds. This is speculative, since it is with some uncertainty that one reconstructs such a massive creature from a few jaw bones and teeth, however many. The way they arrived at this picture was first to estimate the size of the head from the jaw, and then to use a head/body ratio of 1:6.5 in order to determine the body size. For comparison they cite a head/body ratio of 1:8 for the Australopithecus afarensis specimen known as 'Lucy'. The more conservative ratio for Gigantopithecus was arrived at out of consideration of the massive jaw as an adaptation to the mastication of fibrous plant matter (probably bamboo). Gigantopithecus was probably proportionally a markedly big jawed creature. For the head shape they based their assumptions on the orangutan, since evolutionarily they place Gigantopithecus on the same line as the orangutan, finding a common ancestor for them both in Sivapithecus. However, the orangutan could not serve as a model for the body, since it is unlikely that a 1,200 pound ape would be as arboreal. Therefore they chose the largest primates known, the gorilla and the extinct giant baboon Theropithecus oswaldi, as their models for the body. They gave Gigantopithecus an intermembral index 108 (gorilla at 120 + Theropithecus at 95 divide by 2 = 108 rounded up - very scientific!) (Ciochon et al., 1990).

Gigantopithecus teeth have been sold in China for thosands of years as dragon's teeth.



As for the Chupacabra, I'm almost 100% sure it doesn't exist. The sightings might be of a normal creature, but it gets stranger with every telling. The best guess I have is maybe an unknown monitor lizard.

Nessie, in my opinion isn't probable, however that doesn't make it impossible, just very unlikely. My best guess here would be a plesiosaur, but earlier accounts are more varied, so it's hard to tell.
Good Luck!

Well these are the most common theories,which i believe...

Sasquatch/Bigfoot - Either an unknown ape species,or cave men that didn't die out.

Nessie - Plesiosaur.

Ogopogo - Sea serpent,like a mosiasaur maybe (i've seen him quite a few times,as i live near okanogan lake where he lives)

Chupacabra - Alien or an unknown carnivore that is nocturnal

And some pics...

Lol thanx,i like it all,but marine is my fav part

It isn't a hoax,i explained it a while back,and many agreed.It is PROVEN that the guy on the news that claimed to be that sasquatch was somewhat drunk at the time,and later patterson was asked if this was true and he said a firm 'No'...

Canadian if its okay can you take a picture of the oqopopo? (excuse the spelling)