Saturday, April 20, 2024
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries
You are viewing: Home > News > Creatures, Myths & Legends > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Creatures, Myths & Legends

Live thylacine allegedly caught on camera

By T.K. Randall
September 6, 2016 · Comment icon 129 comments

The video is difficult to make out. Image Credit: YouTube / Thylacine Awareness Group of Australia
A rather shaky video filmed in Adelaide Hills earlier this year allegedly shows a live Tasmanian tiger.
Believed to have been wiped out by intensive hunting practices, this shy, nocturnal animal, which looks a bit like a dog, has long remained a topic of debate and intrigue thanks to unconfirmed sightings across Australia of what some believe to be Tasmanian tigers still surviving in the wild.

The last known thylacine in captivity was an individual named Benjamin which died of neglect 80 years ago at Hobart Zoo in Tasmania, Australia after being held captive there for three years.

Although it was thought that some thylacines may have managed to survive in the wild for several decades afterwards, by 1982 authorities had declared the species officially extinct.

This hasn't stopped people from continuing to report sightings of the animals, however.
The latest such report, which hails from Adelaide Hills on the Australian mainland, centers around video footage of a dog-like animal with black stripes which was spotted outside some houses.

"We believe our footage to be footage of a small thylacine moving around through the Adelaide Hills," said amateur researcher Neil Water of the Thylacine Awareness Group.

"You can see the body of the animal, it does appear to have some sort dark discolouration which may or may not be stripes. It has a long, stiff, pointy tail."

"Where the tail connects to the body is very wide at the base which is typical of the thylacine."



Source: 9news.com.au | Comments (129)




Other news and articles
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #120 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
Firstly, thanks for the welcome. Cheers mate. And I do intend to stay here for a while. I came to join this site a few months ago, only to find I'd already joined in 2013 to post about the tiger, but had forgotten.  I think a certain amount of colour variation would been inevitable, but I doubt the sandy beige idea was ever real. So far, the only good evidence I know about is for grey. Certainly the ones passing through Hobart Zoo seem to have been. I think they were probably a good representative sample.  The only source we have apart from, as far as I know sparse, eye witness deions are t... [More]
Comment icon #121 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
Firstly, thanks for the welcome. Cheers mate. And I do intend to stay here for a while. I came to join this site a few months ago, only to find I'd already joined in 2013 to post about the tiger, but had forgotten.  I think a certain amount of colour variation would been inevitable, but I doubt the sandy beige idea was ever real. So far, the only good evidence I know about is for grey. Certainly the ones passing through Hobart Zoo seem to have been. I think they were probably a good representative sample.  The only source we have apart from, as far as I know sparse, eye witness deions are t... [More]
Comment icon #122 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
Cheers, I have no idea about photo let alone video analysis. Only, that I've been caught out by it before over the Doyle footage.  It is obvious, as you say, that you couldn't hope to get a sensible range of any sort from that. I don't know the guy who's pushing the video, but I know of him. He posts over on another site. Everything about this clearly mad though. And has nothing to do with tigers. Even Col Bailey is sceptical. 
Comment icon #123 Posted by Zalmoxis 8 years ago
I don't even know what the subject matter is but your words sort of jump out of the screen mint style.
Comment icon #124 Posted by cyclopes500 8 years ago
I'm wondering if someone trimmed down a fluffy dog of the right size and shape and then did a hair dyeing job.
Comment icon #125 Posted by OptimisticSkeptic 8 years ago
1.  There is some variation in tail length among individual dingos, so this claim is meaningless. 2.  As oldrover mentioned, motion compression artefacts plus unknown source combined plus unknown image processing algorithms plus unknown extra compression for web streaming readiness mean that this video as presented is worthless as evidence to support anything except that someone posted a video online. 3.  If it is not possible to use this video to make accurate measurements of the subject, then it is meaningless claim that this is a modern living thylacine. But in spite of all this, I'll co... [More]
Comment icon #126 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
I think to some people, the tiger is basically just a stripey dog. Without any history, without being unique and without representing a novel example of a mid sized mammalian predator, without any living comparison outside of Metatheria.  I wonder sometimes if they think the fact that it's a marsupial is a bit of an affectation. Rather than being a fundamental difference, which means that it had evolved for tens of millions of years independently of the ancestors of canids.  Hardly anyone bothers to look at it beyond a couple of Youtube videos and maybe a quick skim through Wikipedia.   
Comment icon #127 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
The third video by the 'Thylacine Awareness Group of Australia'. It doesn't feature any new fox footage, instead it deals with supposed footprint casts. There's not much to say about it really. The tag on Youtube says that it's a witness explaining the difference between dog, fox and tiger footprints.  The witness isn't identified, there's nothing to say whether she's qualified to give the explanation she does. Neither does it give any context for any of the casts.  It is pointless. 
Comment icon #128 Posted by Deyve 8 years ago
Well folks I have to disappoint you, I am a retired professional shootter (60 years bush and shooting experience). I started hunting at 8 years of age and only retired a few years ago at 68. I am now 71. Have hunted and trapped in every state of Australia and can tell you, that is definitely a fox. FYI - the fox population in cities is greater than in the country so seeing a fox in urban surrounds is really not uncommon
Comment icon #129 Posted by oldrover 8 years ago
Yes, I think almost all of us here have the same opinion. In Wales, urban foxes are really common. I'm sure it's the same everywhere. I can't comment on the prints there though, other than to say that I don't have the experience to say anything useful about them.  The last video these people released was obviously a fox. 


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles