UM-Bot Posted November 21, 2020 #1 Share Posted November 21, 2020 A genetic science company in Australia has developed a way to detect the presence of thylacines out in the wild. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/341060/firm-develops-tasmanian-tiger-dna-detector 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted November 21, 2020 #2 Share Posted November 21, 2020 How long a sample would be tested positive ? Thylacine presence was not that far ago... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seti42 Posted November 21, 2020 #3 Share Posted November 21, 2020 Unlike Bigfoot, Nessie, Chupacabra, etc. Thylacines were/are actually real. I hope we can find out they're still around, but I won't hold my breath... 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted November 21, 2020 #4 Share Posted November 21, 2020 4 hours ago, Jon the frog said: How long a sample would be tested positive ? Thylacine presence was not that far ago... Last definite evidence of a thylacine in the wild was betwen August the 3rd and 9th 1930. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted November 21, 2020 #5 Share Posted November 21, 2020 7 hours ago, UM-Bot said: A genetic science company in Australia has developed a way to detect the presence of thylacines out in the wild. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/341060/firm-develops-tasmanian-tiger-dna-detector I wonder: would a bloodhound, or better, an American vulture (with the most impressive sense of smell) not do a better job? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted November 21, 2020 #6 Share Posted November 21, 2020 2 hours ago, oldrover said: Last definite evidence of a thylacine in the wild was betwen August the 3rd and 9th 1930. Theres 80% chance of finding DNA after 30 days of presence, it decline probly faster with time passing, so false positive is more or less impossible, nice. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200115093439.htm 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted November 21, 2020 #7 Share Posted November 21, 2020 3 hours ago, Abramelin said: I wonder: would a bloodhound, or better, an American vulture (with the most impressive sense of smell) not do a better job? A scent hound would find one if it's out there, or at least scat.Problem is you need fresh skin or scent to train a dog to run straight on a certain scent. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted November 23, 2020 #8 Share Posted November 23, 2020 On 11/21/2020 at 8:35 PM, Jon the frog said: Theres 80% chance of finding DNA after 30 days of presence, it decline probly faster with time passing, so false positive is more or less impossible, nice. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200115093439.htm I'm afraid a genuine positive is even more so in my opinion. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuriousEye Posted January 13, 2021 #9 Share Posted January 13, 2021 On 11/21/2020 at 7:30 AM, UM-Bot said: A genetic science company in Australia has developed a way to detect the presence of thylacines out in the wild. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/341060/firm-develops-tasmanian-tiger-dna-detector The military and intelligence services of all superpowers are going to adore this discovery... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuriousEye Posted January 13, 2021 #10 Share Posted January 13, 2021 Yes, @Jon the frog ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted January 13, 2021 #11 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, CuriousEye said: Yes, @Jon the frog ? Not a new thing. Used for fishes survey for a time now. A bit less in land habitat, a first for thylacine or ''extinct'' animal tho. Not good to find a single individual if it's what you are implying. Edited January 13, 2021 by Jon the frog 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuriousEye Posted January 13, 2021 #12 Share Posted January 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, Jon the frog said: Not a new thing. Used for fishes survey for a time now. A bit less in land habitat, a first for thylacine or ''extinct'' animal tho. Not good to find a single individual if it's what you are implying. How efficient this genomic detecting process can be? What I mean is, how much time does it take to genetic data from deteriorating in land habitat and whether the possibility to use it to improve manhunts of incriminated suspects, wanted persons, military assets or targets can be approchable for now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted January 13, 2021 #13 Share Posted January 13, 2021 On 11/21/2020 at 6:56 AM, Seti42 said: Unlike Bigfoot, Nessie, Chupacabra, etc. Thylacines were/are actually real. I hope we can find out they're still around, but I won't hold my breath... The chupacabra is actually confirmed and a lady in Texas has one prepped and mounted in her living room. https://www.texasobserver.org/chupacabra-legends-texas/ 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted January 13, 2021 #14 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 51 minutes ago, CuriousEye said: How efficient this genomic detecting process can be? What I mean is, how much time does it take to genetic data from deteriorating in land habitat and whether the possibility to use it to improve manhunts of incriminated suspects, wanted persons, military assets or targets can be approchable for now? Like cited above, there's 80% chance of finding a species DNA after 30 days of presence. It continue to going down quite fast. It's not like testing a leftover (hair, tissue, fluid) with enormous quantity of DNA, it's testing the habitat for a trace presence. What little DNA found in an open habitat cannot identify an individual but it can give you a list of species occuring tin the habitat if you have identification tracers for these species. Right now, the firm have made a identification tracer for thylacines, si they can use it to see if it'S present or not in samples. It's quite cool. Edited January 13, 2021 by Jon the frog 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuriousEye Posted January 13, 2021 #15 Share Posted January 13, 2021 10 minutes ago, Jon the frog said: Like cited above, there's 80% chance of finding a species DNA after 30 days of presence. It continue to going down quite fast. It's not like testing a leftover (hair, tissue, fluid) with enormous quantity of DNA, it's testing the habitat for a trace presence. What little DNA found in an open habitat cannot identify an individual but it can give you a list of species occuring tin the habitat if you have identification tracers for these species. Right now, the firm have made a identification tracer for thylacines, si they can use it to see if it'S present or not in samples. It's quite cool. Quite cool, indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seti42 Posted January 16, 2021 #16 Share Posted January 16, 2021 On 1/13/2021 at 9:07 AM, Guyver said: The chupacabra is actually confirmed and a lady in Texas has one prepped and mounted in her living room. https://www.texasobserver.org/chupacabra-legends-texas/ It's a dog. This has been debunked ages ago. I believe the specific breed is called a Mexican Hairless. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted January 16, 2021 #17 Share Posted January 16, 2021 On 1/13/2021 at 11:07 AM, Guyver said: The chupacabra is actually confirmed and a lady in Texas has one prepped and mounted in her living room. https://www.texasobserver.org/chupacabra-legends-texas/ so: 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted January 16, 2021 #18 Share Posted January 16, 2021 1 hour ago, Seti42 said: It's a dog. This has been debunked ages ago. I believe the specific breed is called a Mexican Hairless. No. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seti42 Posted January 16, 2021 #19 Share Posted January 16, 2021 3 hours ago, Guyver said: No. Yes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted January 17, 2021 #20 Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Seti42 said: Yes. No. You said it was a dog. Livescience said it was a raccoon with mange, the dna says something different. https://www.txstate.edu/news/news_releases/news_archive/2007/11/Chupacabra110107.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jethrofloyd Posted June 5, 2022 #21 Share Posted June 5, 2022 Have there ever been any new updates for this news? Have they ever detect a free thylacine DNA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted June 5, 2022 #22 Share Posted June 5, 2022 On 1/13/2021 at 11:07 AM, Guyver said: The chupacabra is actually confirmed and a lady in Texas has one prepped and mounted in her living room. https://www.texasobserver.org/chupacabra-legends-texas/ Love your humor. This is a type 3 chupacabra. Tere are so many goofballs out there and you have shined the light on yet another 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted June 6, 2022 #23 Share Posted June 6, 2022 (edited) 8 hours ago, stereologist said: Love your humor. This is a type 3 chupacabra. Tere are so many goofballs out there and you have shined the light on yet another Funny how 13 bats laughed at that post I believe? Anyway, the facts are the facts and it’s funny how peoples preconceived opinions can keep them from seeing them, like that person in the thread who tried to claim the chupacabra issue had been debunked decades ago. Well, that’s just ignorance and confusion now isn’t it? To be polite. Yeah, what I posted was real, and it has been confirmed. It’s a perfect example of how some cryptids are actually based on fact. That is the legends are frequently born from some kind of fact. Edited June 6, 2022 by Guyver 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted June 6, 2022 #24 Share Posted June 6, 2022 On 1/17/2021 at 10:03 AM, Guyver said: No. You said it was a dog. Livescience said it was a raccoon with mange, the dna says something different. https://www.txstate.edu/news/news_releases/news_archive/2007/11/Chupacabra110107.htm From the link: CUERO RANCHER PHYLIS CANION INSISTS THIS STUFFED SPECIMEN — WHICH EXPERTS SAY IS A COYOTE — IS AN AUTHENTIC TEXAS CHUPACABRA. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseraul Posted June 6, 2022 #25 Share Posted June 6, 2022 Can the Thylacine and Chupacabra have a baby? A Thylacabra, if you will? 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