+ouija ouija Posted September 17, 2016 #1 Share Posted September 17, 2016 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3793848/Is-incredible-footage-appearing-extinct-Tasmanian-Tiger-running-fields-Victoria-proof-Thylacine-exists.html New evidence of a 'sub species' of thylacine seen fairly regularly by a woman in Victoria. Video of one of the animals and an explanation of why it is definitely not a dog, dingo or fox. worth a watch. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeGorilla Posted September 17, 2016 #2 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Filmed with a potato by a chicken. Honestly, though, this is atleast mildly interesting. It also hops along like the Thylacine did, or maybe it's a dingo with an injured leg? Kinda cool, though. The thylacine is one of very few cryptids that I think might actually (still) exist somewhere. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Cooper Merrin Posted September 17, 2016 #3 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Its definitely no fox! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ouija ouija Posted September 17, 2016 Author #4 Share Posted September 17, 2016 25 minutes ago, Not Your Huckleberry said: Filmed with a potato by a chicken. Honestly, though, this is atleast mildly interesting. It also hops along like the Thylacine did, or maybe it's a dingo with an injured leg? Kinda cool, though. The thylacine is one of very few cryptids that I think might actually (still) exist somewhere. I think it's a thylacine with an injured front leg. Not a dingo because they have a slightly 'feathered', curved tail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Cooper Merrin Posted September 17, 2016 #5 Share Posted September 17, 2016 I would say you are correct, there must be a small pocket of them hiding somewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaldon Posted September 17, 2016 #6 Share Posted September 17, 2016 I don't believe my eyes! This footage is so long and so much clearer than the other dubious films where only a glimpse of a tail can be seen. I am 90% certain this is indeed a live thylacine! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dewlanna Posted September 17, 2016 #7 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Very cool! I'll be following this thread! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz_Light_Year Posted September 17, 2016 #8 Share Posted September 17, 2016 They may have a credible sighting with this one. Especially the rigid tail. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torchwood Posted September 17, 2016 #9 Share Posted September 17, 2016 I think we have a winner.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted September 17, 2016 #10 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Uh...the first "actual and real" footage of a live thylacine in modern times is on the Daily Mail? Seriously? Not at some university scientific foundation or anywhere of even slightly more repute than the Daily Mail? Really? Anyone think that through first? It appears to be a dingo, and it looks like it's injured. Poor thing. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #11 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Sorry everyone, this video has been around for years, and is definitely not of a thylacine. It's definitely a canid. The proportions of the hind limbs confirm this 100%. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #12 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said: Uh...the first "actual and real" footage of a live thylacine in modern times is on the Daily Mail? Seriously? Not at some university scientific foundation or anywhere of even slightly more repute than the Daily Mail? Really? Anyone think that through first? It appears to be a dingo, and it looks like it's injured. Poor thing. That is a little alarm bell isn't it. Personally, I'm not sure the Daily Mail is the Daily Mail, because it says so on the front. This video has been around for years though. It probably did appear in the Mail then though too. Edit: this isn't the video that's been round for years, there's another. Both feature foxes, I mean mystery animals, running about with kangaroos, or wallabies, in the background. This video is it seems new. Edited September 17, 2016 by oldrover 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted September 17, 2016 #13 Share Posted September 17, 2016 9 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said: Uh...the first "actual and real" footage of a live thylacine in modern times is on the Daily Mail? Seriously? Not at some university scientific foundation or anywhere of even slightly more repute than the Daily Mail? Really? Anyone think that through first? It appears to be a dingo, and it looks like it's injured. Poor thing. No scientific foundation or "credible" scientist or organization is going to put their names behind just a video. So yes any new discoveries made via video will most likely first be announced on what people consider less than credible sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #14 Share Posted September 17, 2016 2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: No scientific foundation or "credible" scientist or organization is going to put their names behind just a video. So yes any new discoveries made via video will most likely first be announced on what people consider less than credible sources. Thing is, I think if there ever was a video of modern living thylacine, which there sadly won't be, it'd be obvious enough to someone who knew what they were looking at. Just as this is obviously a canid. So they might. But, I don't know. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #15 Share Posted September 17, 2016 And well done to the Mail for failing to be bullied into spelling thylacine with an a. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted September 17, 2016 #16 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said: Uh...the first "actual and real" footage of a live thylacine in modern times is on the Daily Mail? Seriously? Not at some university scientific foundation or anywhere of even slightly more repute than the Daily Mail? Really? Anyone think that through first? It appears to be a dingo, and it looks like it's injured. Poor thing. That is clearly not a Dingo I'm not sure it's a thylacene either though. When you look at the video posted by Buzz of the last known thylacene above. The proportions in the legs of the animal in the OP video don't quite match up. But like they pointed out this would be a mainland thylacene rather than a Tasmanian thylacene so the legs may differ. I'm sure no one here is an authority on the subject. Edited September 17, 2016 by OverSword 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nnicolette Posted September 17, 2016 #17 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) Its pretty clear and crazy that people are still talking about sources. If you arent adept at identifying animals try comparing a picture and this video i mean its plain as day. Here is a telltale indicator... The heels are much lower than any other similar animal and always of course the obvious shapes of the haunches, tail and head. This one is pretty young. Edited September 17, 2016 by Nnicolette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #18 Share Posted September 17, 2016 27 minutes ago, OverSword said: The proportions in the legs of the animal in the OP video don't quite match up. But like they pointed out this would be a mainland thylacene rather than a Tasmanian thylacene so the legs may differ. You're absolutely right, the proportions of the legs. They really fall outside the range for a tiger. They're smack bang in what you'd expect from a canid. Obviously that's just a rough estimate, but it's definite they're too long for a thylacine. The tigers that lived in mainland Australia were the same species as those found in Tasmania. Bear in mind that Tasmania was connected to Australia by land during the last glacial maximum. Not that long ago. The above photo is of a mainland tiger, who's remains were found in a cave in the Nullabor Plain back in 1966. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ouija ouija Posted September 17, 2016 Author #19 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Farmer77 said: No scientific foundation or "credible" scientist or organization is going to put their names behind just a video. So yes any new discoveries made via video will most likely first be announced on what people consider less than credible sources. And then, presumably, one of these sub species Thylacines would have to be caught to be properly identified. Would it be lawful to simply snatch one of these animals out of the wild and into captivity? edit to say: the video mentioned in the OP is from 2008. Edited September 17, 2016 by ouija ouija 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted September 17, 2016 #20 Share Posted September 17, 2016 The sad thing is....with the interest in possible live thylacines, some trophy hunters will be out to shoot it. Then they can say....Yes...it WAS a live thylacine after all.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted September 17, 2016 #21 Share Posted September 17, 2016 4 minutes ago, ouija ouija said: And then, presumably, one of these sub species Thylacines would have to be caught to be properly identified. Would it be lawful to simply snatch one of these animals out of the wild and into captivity? No, the thylacine is still a protected species. Any attempts to trap it are illegal. All the old time Tasmanian investigators, like the late Ned Terry, had to abandon their humane traps years ago. There was talk about altering their protection status recently, which is probably a good thing, as it'll allow research material to move between institutions more freely. I don't think it's actually been changed yet though. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted September 17, 2016 #22 Share Posted September 17, 2016 oldrover, you seem to know a bit so tell me, are thylacenes not considered canids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeGorilla Posted September 17, 2016 #23 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Nope, they're marsupials. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted September 17, 2016 #24 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Now that you mention that they do have mouths really similar to opossum. interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ouija ouija Posted September 17, 2016 Author #25 Share Posted September 17, 2016 And both sexes have a pouch, apparently! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now