MrBene Posted February 24, 2021 #26 Share Posted February 24, 2021 I was following /highstrangeness subreddit too and yeah, chances are almost non-existant but I still want to see the photos because I'm curious how someone who had been around Tasmania for a long while and it is educated in local fauna can confuse a regular local animal with a thylacine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted February 24, 2021 #27 Share Posted February 24, 2021 1 hour ago, MrBene said: I'm curious how someone who had been around Tasmania for a long while and it is educated in local fauna can confuse a regular local animal with a thylacine. Have enough of those James Squire draughts and you'll confuse it for a beluga 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted February 24, 2021 #28 Share Posted February 24, 2021 On 2/23/2021 at 1:02 AM, Carnoferox said: Nick Mooney of the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery has confirmed that the photos are pademelons and not thylacines. Who could’ve guessed that Neil would make the same mistake again? So he plans on a March 1st release, but he shows people and lets them discredit them? he not a very good con artist. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted February 24, 2021 #29 Share Posted February 24, 2021 6 hours ago, Myles said: So he plans on a March 1st release, but he shows people and lets them discredit them? he not a very good con artist. Ah, but perhaps not. If someone got a hell of a lot of attention (Christ alone knows why) by being able to claim they'd handed photos of whatever to the experts for scrutiny, whatever those experts said they couldn't release them without the owner's permission. If they were so inclined I'm sure the owner could string it out under some tawdry little conspiracy angle for a very long time to come. Especially if they had an especially 'trusting' following. Or perhaps it'd just be a plain old stupid move. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted February 24, 2021 #30 Share Posted February 24, 2021 1 hour ago, oldrover said: Or perhaps it'd just be a plain old stupid move. It is Tasmania, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted February 25, 2021 #31 Share Posted February 25, 2021 12 hours ago, oldrover said: Ah, but perhaps not. If someone got a hell of a lot of attention (Christ alone knows why) by being able to claim they'd handed photos of whatever to the experts for scrutiny, whatever those experts said they couldn't release them without the owner's permission. If they were so inclined I'm sure the owner could string it out under some tawdry little conspiracy angle for a very long time to come. Especially if they had an especially 'trusting' following. Or perhaps it'd just be a plain old stupid move. Scratch that. He's apparently going to go public. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted February 25, 2021 #32 Share Posted February 25, 2021 On 2/23/2021 at 5:12 AM, Carnoferox said: A pademelon tis what the experts have said.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 25, 2021 #33 Share Posted February 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, DingoLingo said: tis what the experts have said.. They haven't investigated my Thylacine yet. I've also spotted a rare black kangaroo. I should probably call Mr. Waters, what do you reckon? 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted February 25, 2021 #34 Share Posted February 25, 2021 9 hours ago, psyche101 said: They haven't investigated my Thylacine yet. I've also spotted a rare black kangaroo. I should probably call Mr. Waters, what do you reckon? Toiga! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperionxvii Posted February 26, 2021 #35 Share Posted February 26, 2021 On 2/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, Twin said: These are excellent photos, compared to most bigfoot photos I've seen. Agreed. Excellent photos of marsupial rodents. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldorado Posted February 26, 2021 #36 Share Posted February 26, 2021 What makes people so fixated on trying to prove the thylacine – also known as the Tasmanian tiger and last spotted in 1936 – isn’t extinct? Guardian article at MSN: Link 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted February 26, 2021 #37 Share Posted February 26, 2021 3 hours ago, Eldorado said: What makes people so fixated on trying to prove the thylacine – also known as the Tasmanian tiger and last spotted in 1936 – isn’t extinct? Guardian article at MSN: Link As said in the link it's all about ego mainly. On the slim chance the tiger still survives they should just leave it alone to breed up instead of interfering. Animals will come back naturally if they still exist and left undisturbed, even in adverse conditions such as in Chernobyl. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 27, 2021 #38 Share Posted February 27, 2021 4 hours ago, openozy said: As said in the link it's all about ego mainly. On the slim chance the tiger still survives they should just leave it alone to breed up instead of interfering. Animals will come back naturally if they still exist and left undisturbed, even in adverse conditions such as in Chernobyl. It's a realistic cryptid. It's not like Nessie or Bigfoot. It actually existed until very recently. I'd say that's what fired people up. Ive always felt it's possible although extremely unlikely. That hairs and paw tracks were identified by David Flaey in the 50s, no specimens or photos though. He knew the animal quite well, so it seems a legitimate claim. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted February 27, 2021 #39 Share Posted February 27, 2021 16 minutes ago, psyche101 said: It's a realistic cryptid. It's not like Nessie or Bigfoot. It actually existed until very recently I realise that, I just think the search for it is fueled by people's ego's, wanting their name up in lights more than anything else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted February 27, 2021 #40 Share Posted February 27, 2021 8 hours ago, psyche101 said: It's a realistic cryptid. It's not like Nessie or Bigfoot. It actually existed until very recently. I'd say that's what fired people up. Ive always felt it's possible although extremely unlikely. That hairs and paw tracks were identified by David Flaey in the 50s, no specimens or photos though. He knew the animal quite well, so it seems a legitimate claim. I've got nothing but respect for David Fleay, his observations are the gold standard as regards the last captive and had he secured a pair back in 1934 he was probably the only one who might have bred them, he didn't have very much contact with the species though. The hairs and scat were identified at the time by Joseph Pearson, director of the Tasmanian Museum, unfortunately when the hair samples were rediscovered recently they turned out not to be a match, I think they were wombat but I'm not sure. As to the scat it would have just been Pearson's opinion, and he didn't arrive in Tasmania until 1934 by which time the only known tiger was the one in Beaumaris. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 28, 2021 #41 Share Posted February 28, 2021 12 hours ago, oldrover said: I've got nothing but respect for David Fleay, his observations are the gold standard as regards the last captive and had he secured a pair back in 1934 he was probably the only one who might have bred them, he didn't have very much contact with the species though. The hairs and scat were identified at the time by Joseph Pearson, director of the Tasmanian Museum, unfortunately when the hair samples were rediscovered recently they turned out not to be a match, I think they were wombat but I'm not sure. As to the scat it would have just been Pearson's opinion, and he didn't arrive in Tasmania until 1934 by which time the only known tiger was the one in Beaumaris. Is that from the 1950s expedition? I didn't realise samples had been returned. A great man, there is a wildlife park in his honour fairly close to me. His life in pictures and exhibits. Quite a great place, but surprising at how few locals know about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted February 28, 2021 #42 Share Posted February 28, 2021 9 hours ago, psyche101 said: Is that from the 1950s expedition? I didn't realise samples had been returned. A great man, there is a wildlife park in his honour fairly close to me. His life in pictures and exhibits. Quite a great place, but surprising at how few locals know about it. That'd be from the 1945/46 West-Coast expedition. I'm not sure how many times he went but he was there at least once during the war too. He was a great guy no doubt about it. Didn't get on with management either. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnoferox Posted February 28, 2021 Author #43 Share Posted February 28, 2021 The photos have now been released, and they are just as disappointing as I expected. 4 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted March 1, 2021 #44 Share Posted March 1, 2021 One pic looks like a cat eating a marsupial, what they say is the tail is its ear and it's facing the camera. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jethrofloyd Posted March 1, 2021 #45 Share Posted March 1, 2021 These pictures are too much blurry. They could likewise say that these are pictues of bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 1, 2021 #46 Share Posted March 1, 2021 how am I disappointed when I expected the pics to be bad? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 1, 2021 #47 Share Posted March 1, 2021 18 hours ago, Carnoferox said: The photos have now been released, and they are just as disappointing as I expected. That's a cat isn't it? What a joke... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted March 1, 2021 #48 Share Posted March 1, 2021 2 hours ago, Myles said: how am I disappointed when I expected the pics to be bad? Troublesome to have a blurred picture of his cat... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 1, 2021 #49 Share Posted March 1, 2021 I have no respect for the man or his organization. To market such a lousy video and pics as something conclusive is a major flaw in his character. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted March 1, 2021 #50 Share Posted March 1, 2021 very disappointing. 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