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 -
Still Waters

Paw print raises fears of big cat on the loose

36 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Timothy

@Earl.Of.Trumps, I was never ‘just eff’n with’ you. I tried to clarify your posts until they were clarified or until it was futile. Then a bit of eff’n  starts. No hard feelings!

I refused the videos because they were the same videos I’d seen before, you just called them ‘cockpit videos’, which they were not. They were the same 2 Nimitz videos that had been flogged to death. It is good practice to provide links with claims, that would have clarified things 

On this topic, I didn’t say it was proof.

10 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Just because cats exist it does not prove that this cat in England exists. I thought you were a serious thinker?!

C’mon mate! Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
stereologist
On 4/9/2019 at 12:26 AM, Captain Risky said:

Sheep and other livestock would be missing or mutilated if there was a big cat in the area.

Depends on the size of the cat and its ability to hunt. Large predators habituated to humans often stay close to human habitation. That led to the failure of the red wolves introduced to the Smokies. It was a problem for the gray wolves introduced into Yellowstone. A single predator without a lot of hunting experience is more likely to go for smaller prey and hunt as an opportunist.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iilaa'mpuul'xem
On 09/04/2019 at 5:26 AM, Captain Risky said:

Sheep and other livestock would be missing or mutilated if there was a big cat in the area.

I find dead sheep all the time on the moors that the farmers didn't know about... They must have a quota that they expect to die from normal circumstances or by accident. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DanL
Posted (edited)

I am about as big a skeptic as anyone that I know.  I think that the human-caused global warming end of the world as we know it thing is the biggest hoax of ALL time. I don't take anything much at face value that anyone says. Unfortunately, most people fail to understand the difference between healthy skepticism and a paranoid refusal to even look at something and consider it. Some things I hear or see online or on TV are just silly to me. I'm not really interested in it enough to even check the facts out. HOWEVER, I also don't feel the compulsion to attack the people that are saying it. 

If I were to meet a person that really seemed to believe that they were someone that they were obviously not I would accept that they were probably a nut and mostly pity them. I really knew a homeless street lady that thought she was the b****** daughter of Jackoline Kennedy Onassis and Howard Hughs and went by the name of Symoane Hughs. She carried around a regular old cordless phone and talked to them on it all the time. Inside her delusion, she really was a very sweet person. I often gave her a ride to and from places. I knew her from my volunteer work at a mission. She took pretty good care of herself and was actually a very pretty very black lady... Obviously NOT the child of two anglos people.

My point to that story wasn't about the believability of Symoane's story, but rather that only someone more disturbed than she would feel the compulsion to berate and argue with her about it. If you think something is too silly or stupid to possibly believe why argue and berate someone about it? Most of this sort limit their research to their own belief that it is "NO WAY THAT'S REAL!!" and often end up looking to me as sillier or stupider than the person that has reported seeing a rainbow unicorn.

Which is the most reasonable in this case? Have people that lived there ever had large exotic cats as pets or in menageries?  Have any ever escaped or been just released? Could a big cat survive there? Might some of this be what has caused the reports of big cats? ... Or is it more reasonable to just say NO, not possible, and all those people are just liars!!!

I think that if a person is that threatened and frightened by those stories of cryptids that they are more troubled than the people that believe in things like Batboy the vampyre midget that The Weekly world News use to keep us updated on. Why else would they feel compelled to attack that person or belief without even researching or considering it? 

If you don't believe something that is fine but why can't people be allowed to have a reasoned discussion about something without all the endless on reasoned negative commentary? Before you say NO WAY at least try and consider it for a moment and think of why someone would report that sighting. I know that often these are people that just want some attention. Some are no doubt people misidentifying or misunderstanding what they are seeing. What is troublesome is that some of these people are trained observers and sometimes you have several people that don't know each other reporting things in the same time period. Not everyone is a pathological liar. sticking your head in the sand and screaming No NO NO isn't a sane response.

 

Back to the big cats... I know someone that owns a tiger. Every time they take it out for a romp in the fields around their place the police get a bunch of calls about a "big cat" running wild. Several times the reports were that the cat had chased them and they barely escaped alive. The cops all know about Fuzzy and have met him. He is a big gentle sweet furball and has every right to play on his owner's property.  If they had been able to see him up close they probably reported that the big cat was chasing and trying to eat a little dachshund (Weenie dog). they are inseparable buddies and Fuzzy would never hurt his best friend.  Might the big cat sightings be pets that are loose and wandering around that have homes and the owners are keeping them sort of hidden because of laws about having these sort of animals? just a thought.

I knew a person that kept a pet alligator for years while they were considered an endangered species and not legal to own. Sammy (the gator) would follow you around like a dog and was friendly even if a little on the stupid side. I also knew a man that lost his pets because they declared the Red Wolf endangered and took them away from him to be "released" in the wild. Those Red Wolves were third generation pets and thought hunting for food was carrying their food dish in their mouth and dropping it on the floor in front of their owner. If he had known that they were going to take them away he would have hidden them. Laws change and sometimes the animals become refugees.

OK, feel free the shred me but please try and do it in a thoughtful way and not a mindless rant...

Edited by DanL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abilityperson
6 minutes ago, DanL said:

I am about as big a skeptic as anyone that I know.  I think that the human-caused global warming end of the world as we know it thing is the biggest hoax of ALL time. I don't take anything much at face value that anyone says. Unfortunately, most people fail to understand the difference between healthy skepticism and a paranoid refusal to even look at something and consider it. Some things I hear or see online or on TV are just silly to me. I'm not really interested in it enough to even check the facts out. HOWEVER, I also don't feel the compulsion to attack the people that are saying it. 

If I were to meet a person that really seemed to believe that they were someone that they were obviously not I would accept that they were probably a nut and mostly pity them. I really knew a homeless street lady that thought she was the b****** daughter of Jackoline Kennedy Onassis and Howard Hughs and went by the name of Symoane Hughs. She carried around a regular old cordless phone and talked to them on it all the time. Inside her delusion, she really was a very sweet person. I often gave her a ride to and from places. I knew her from my volunteer work at a mission. She took pretty good care of herself and was actually a very pretty very black lady... Obviously NOT the child of two anglos people.

My point to that story wasn't about the believability of Symoane's story, but rather that only someone more disturbed than she would feel the compulsion to berate and argue with her about it. If you think something is too silly or stupid to possibly believe why argue and berate someone about it? Most of this sort limit their research to their own belief that it is "NO WAY THAT'S REAL!!" and often end up looking to me as sillier or stupider than the person that has reported seeing a rainbow unicorn.

Which is the most reasonable in this case? Have people that lived there ever had large exotic cats as pets or in menageries?  Have any ever escaped or been just released? Could a big cat survive there? Might some of this be what has caused the reports of big cats? ... Or is it more reasonable to just say NO, not possible, and all those people are just liars!!!

I think that if a person is that threatened and frightened by those stories of cryptids that they are more troubled than the people that believe in things like Batboy the vampyre midget that The Weekly world News use to keep us updated on. Why else would they feel compelled to attack that person or belief without even researching or considering it? 

If you don't believe something that is fine but why can't people be allowed to have a reasoned discussion about something without all the endless on reasoned negative commentary? Before you say NO WAY at least try and consider it for a moment and think of why someone would report that sighting. I know that often these are people that just want some attention. Some are no doubt people misidentifying or misunderstanding what they are seeing. What is troublesome is that some of these people are trained observers and sometimes you have several people that don't know each other reporting things in the same time period. Not everyone is a pathological liar. sticking your head in the sand and screaming No NO NO isn't a sane response.

 

Back to the big cats... I know someone that owns a tiger. Every time they take it out for a romp in the fields around their place the police get a bunch of calls about a "big cat" running wild. Several times the reports were that the cat had chased them and they barely escaped alive. The cops all know about Fuzzy and have met him. He is a big gentle sweet furball and has every right to play on his owner's property.  If they had been able to see him up close they probably reported that the big cat was chasing and trying to eat a little dachshund (Weenie dog). they are inseparable buddies and Fuzzy would never hurt his best friend.  Might the big cat sightings be pets that are loose and wandering around that have homes and the owners are keeping them sort of hidden because of laws about having these sort of animals? just a thought.

I knew a person that kept a pet alligator for years while they were considered an endangered species and not legal to own. Sammy (the gator) would follow you around like a dog and was friendly even if a little on the stupid side. I also knew a man that lost his pets because they declared the Red Wolf endangered and took them away from him to be "released" in the wild. Those Red Wolves were third generation pets and thought hunting for food was carrying their food dish in their mouth and dropping it on the floor in front of their owner. If he had known that they were going to take them away he would have hidden them. Laws change and sometimes the animals become refugees.

OK, feel free the shred me but please do it with in a thoughtful way and not a mindless rant...

Thank you for admitting that you are a skeptic, and that you don't go off on ppl by saying lies wrong or show proof.

Thank you for being honest and telling how it is. Just because some ppl don't believe and others do don't make either wrong. I found this site and thought it was interesting, tell your stories or you encounters.

And most of the time I see ppl making fun starting arguments because they think they are right, or want proof of this or that. Not everyone has proof. If something happens to you fast or seen something that was out of the ordinary your not gonna think of oh better get proof. Not everyone can do that. But that is imo most likely get backlash also

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The simple fact is that big cats have been found in the UK. I provided the evidence for that. Other posters have provided evidence for that.

Here is another case in which the UK has possibly detected evidence for large cats.

Maybe we need to review the evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_big_cats

Quote

There have been some incidents of recovered individual animals, often medium-sized species such as the Eurasian lynx but in one 1980 case a puma, which was captured alive in Scotland.

The evidence is without question. Large cats have been found in the UK.

The question is whether or not there is a large cat on the loose in this case.

1. Large cats are well documented

2. Large cats int he UK is well documented

3. This case involves some evidence: a mauled dog, missing cats, a paw print

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saru

Thread cleaned

Keep it civil please.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The story is spreading with slightly different information.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6889991/Panther-fears-RSPCA-confirms-paw-prints-Cornwall-village-pads-large-cat.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490

Quote

'It's on a stone wall, often carrying something the size of a lamb. Whatever it's been carrying is about a foot off the ground so it's very big.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-47827786

Quote

A Freedom of Information request last year revealed that Devon and Cornwall Police have been called 55 times since the start of 2011 to sightings of big cats in the wild.

This last fact does not tell us how they were dispersed over time, but tells us that reports happen about 8 times a year on average. Farmers are not reporting lost livestock. Maybe this is a recent release or escapee.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Arguments from personal ignorance are pretty funny. Addressing the claim of "We know the cat does not exist because ..."

Not even sure who this is being addressed to. Let's examine this claim.

1. No scat. Not sure where this comes from since that was not discussed in the article. This must just be an unsupported guess.

2. No DNA. True at the moment.

3. Guy writing a book. No evidence presented. Will have to file this under anecdote. 

4. "proof right there that he's a liar because he's a book promoter. " Never heard a skeptic say that. Scoffers do that all of the time.

5. No skeletal remains. Not expecting skeletal remains from a live cat. Will have to file this under illogical idea.

6. "no grainy blurry photos" That is incorrect. A video was made. The original article had photos. Will file this under falsehood.

7. "no witnesses". That is incorrect. There are several witnesses in the linked to articles. Will file this under falsehood.

8. "no voice recordings" Will file this under not important. The only ones playing with recordings are those that want to pretend that their ignorance leads to some conclusion.

 

So let's get to the actual facts and not rantings which are seen to be in fact wrong and of little to no use.

1. Dog was mauled. The dog's injuries are well described in the articles. The injuries were inspected by a number of people. Are they from a large predator? Were they life threatening?

2. Missing animals. Are they related to the dog mauling? Were they taken by small predators, hit by cars, or some other cause?

3. Witnesses of a large cat. A few. Was the animal as large as they think? Was it a large house cat or some other animal?

4. Paw print. Definitely a cat print. Not a dog or fox or other type of animal. Was it a real print or was this a hoax?

5. Is it even possible for large cats to be found in the UK? Definitely. 

6. Are there photos or videos? Yes. Does it match the paw print? Probably not.

7. Does the police warning to be wary of the possibility of a large cat make sense? It certainly wouldn't hurt.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
Quote

7. "no witnesses". That is incorrect. There are several witnesses in the linked to articles. Will file this under falsehood.

Let's take a bigger look at this claim which we already know is a falsehood, the no witnesses claim.

Maybe there were witnesses before the dog was mauled.

That seems to be the case.

https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2019-01-18/man-swiped-at-by-panther-like-big-cat-in-cornwall/

Quote

Matthew Wild said he was visiting his girlfriend’s house in Porthleven when he spotted a large feline pressed against one of the windows.

Are these stories related? Is it possible that a dog that was torn up stuck in a fence or other constraining object became a dog injured by a large predator because of this story?

That still does not explain the paw print.

Then again there was the leopard that attacked sheep in Cornwall.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-42706812

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy

I can't see what the big deal is about,I've seen a puma near Lithgow here in Oz.That size big cat would have no trouble finding food in most countries and are very elusive and intelligent.They could hardly be called a cryptid.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.