CryptoZoo > Sightings!
Russian Soldiers find Unknown creature
Kadesh:
Doing a little picture surfing... and I came up with this...
To: Maceman
Although sharks are cartilaginous they have backbones made from it. I didn't see any ribs near the backbone and sharks don't have ribs likd other fish. Just speculation on my part since I have never seen a backbone from a basker but have seen them from other sharks.
Probably the first thing they will do is have someone familiar with baskers look at the backbone since several of these recent sea monster discoveries turned out to be baskers. Here is a recent example
Abstract
A decayed carcass accidentally netted by a Japanese trawler near New Zealand in 1977 has often been claimed by creationists and others to be a likely plesiosaur or prehistoric "sea-monster." Plesiosaurs were a group of long-necked, predatory marine reptiles with four paddle-like limbs, thought to have gone extinct with the dinosaurs about 65 million years ago.
However, several lines of evidence, including lab results from tissue samples taken from the carcass before it was discarded, strongly point to the specimen being a shark, and most likely a basking shark. This should not be surprising, since basking sharks are known to decompose into "pseudoplesiosaur" forms, and their carcasses have been mistaken for "sea-monsters" many times in the past.
42 posted on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 4:08:41 PM by Capt. Tom
From: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/846940/posts
Interesting theory... maybe we've solved the Russian creature...
Kadesh:
(I hate to keep posting, but my edit button does not work!)
Here's another theory I've found while surfing for answers. Possibly an Orca whale?
http://static.flickr.com/4/7962515_47657a6895.jpg?v=0
http://csiwhalesalive.org/csi65430OoSkull.jpg
ImmortalKain:
The Japanese fisherman one is the article I was referring to. The conclusive evidence however, is to be questioned as no one made sure it was the same sample that was tested and the immediately discredited the fisherman's measurements and observations. Also this specimine in particular had clearly defined dorsal flippers, not fins. No known livling shark has dorsal fins that large and articulately developed. They discredited this also, saying, it was a trick of the camera angle, though 2 other pictures showed the same thing and all on board the ship verified rear flippers. I guess without a body, it all comes down to hearsay, which is very disappointing for us believers :spy:
sasquatch:
that was either a prehestoric whale that survived extinction and lived in the oceans depths or a tasmanian sea monster with mold (which explain the fur) <^>
sasquatch:
im a genius
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version