Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Texas family capture alleged 'chupacabra'


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

"Only one way to find out for sure. DNA"

or they could get a goat and see if it'll suck it

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

or they could get a goat and see if it'll suck it

That may be the best line I read today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a bit of a swim from [TA]Z to TX.

Explains what it's been doing since 1936, though. :P

Edited by PersonFromPorlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw this on IFLS today, and I almost fell over laughing. Though it is a pretty sad commentary on how detached some folks have gotten to the "wilds" that a hairless coon can be so mis-identified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I read the thread and see the case is closed. But I watched the video before reading the thread and could clearly see this was a raccoon without any special training. How this makes the news is beyond my understanding.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How this makes the news is beyond my understanding.

THAT is the real mystery here.....mwahahahaha....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been said many times but this is another case of cryptid hunters 'moving the goalpost'.

Originally chupacabras were described as being an insect-reptile type creature, with fangs that could drain (suck) the blood out of an animal (goat).

So now the story has changed to a mangy looking dog. Because mangy dogs do exist and can be filmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops. My bad. My terrible, terrible bad. I didn't even catch this after rereading it for spelling errors. That'll learn me.

Ha, ha, no worries!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the family is going to euthanize it.

So, at least the coon wont have to deal w/ this bullsh** anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rare that I am reassured of humanity by comments threads, but I'm really glad I wasn't the first to notice that was a shaved raccoon. How the hell did the journalists not notice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rare that I am reassured of humanity by comments threads, but I'm really glad I wasn't the first to notice that was a shaved raccoon. How the hell did the journalists not notice?

Because they're journalists. It wouldn't have been a story if they had noticed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rare that I am reassured of humanity by comments threads, but I'm really glad I wasn't the first to notice that was a shaved raccoon. How the hell did the journalists not notice?

As someone who has had an interest in plants and animals since childhood I can tell you most "journalists" wouldn't know an anteater from an antelope. I have see so many misidentification of wildlife reported in news stories that it makes me cringe. Basic biology and characteristics of well known animals is completely foreign to them. And what is worse, with the internet you can generally find information about most creatures if you do a bit of searching, and if not, consult a zoo or a vet and very likely you can get some information. They would rather sensationalize a story and say that because "Bubba," a long time hunter and local "expert," doesn't know what something is, then it must be a cryptid? Please......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is clearly raccoon. I am familiar with their features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that the same one they spotted on the side of the road or something...? There was a story about how these people were driving and they saw this thing walking along side the road. They pull out their camera and taped it. The creature in that video looks a lot like that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there will be an update on this creature to verify what it is or like some of these stories you never hear anymore about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its dead now. The fish and game said it was a racoon, and gave them a few days to either release it, or have it euthinized. They chose the euthinization.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like a hyena with mange

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A house cat sized hyena??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Only one way to find out for sure. DNA"

or they could get a goat and see if it'll suck it

The goat might like it. :w00t:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its dead now. The fish and game said it was a racoon, and gave them a few days to either release it, or have it euthinized. They chose the euthinization.

No DNA test? Just the word of Fish & Game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No DNA test? Just the word of Fish & Game?

Yes, because they have every reason to lie. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, because they have every reason to lie. :cry:

I never said that. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said that. :rolleyes:

Then to answer.

Yes, fish and wildlife confirmed it to be a raccoon with bad mange. No need to spend tax payers money on a DNA test, as they have seen numerous animals with mange, and have plenty of experience to identify them.

After all, that is what they get paid to do.

I just do not get why they did not release it, and decided to kill it. Sick people.

I never said that. :rolleyes:

Then to answer.

Yes, fish and wildlife confirmed it to be a raccoon with bad mange. No need to spend tax payers money on a DNA test, as they have seen numerous animals with mange, and have plenty of experience to identify them.

After all, that is what they get paid to do.

I just do not get why they did not release it, and decided to kill it. Sick people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then to answer.

Yes, fish and wildlife confirmed it to be a raccoon with bad mange. No need to spend tax payers money on a DNA test, as they have seen numerous animals with mange, and have plenty of experience to identify them.

After all, that is what they get paid to do.

I just do not get why they did not release it, and decided to kill it. Sick people.

Then to answer.

Yes, fish and wildlife confirmed it to be a raccoon with bad mange. No need to spend tax payers money on a DNA test, as they have seen numerous animals with mange, and have plenty of experience to identify them.

After all, that is what they get paid to do.

I just do not get why they did not release it, and decided to kill it. Sick people.

I figured by getting DNA it would verify the animal and prevent conspiracy. I see your point when they killed it.

But maybe mange is contagious (don't know for sure) and they didn't want it to affect the other Raccoon population.

Taking it to a vet would have cost money also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.