Page 5 of 6

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:01 pm
by Palladiamorsdeus
It's still general best to respect other's beliefs though, even if you can't understand or don't like them. After all, the world would be a pretty boring place if we all thought the exact same way.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:02 pm
by Saturo
Yes, yes. I didn't mean it that way. I'm just touchy on the subject.

I apologize, Rubybeam.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:05 pm
by rubybeam
Saturo wrote:Yes, yes. I didn't mean it that way. I'm just touchy on the subject.

I apologize, Rubybeam.
ah it's okay everyone has a right to what they believe in after all it's just seems to be a human habit to complain at what you think is rubbish and we are all humans right

even if one of us just turn out to be a werewolve or a vampire not the one's from twlight either.

EDIT: to even calm myself paranormal talking self down I went and joined a new forums site don't worry i'll never wuit you guys

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:50 pm
by Mania
When I was an adolescent I had a friend -- well, actually he was a friend of my parents' and later I realized he was having an affair with my mother, but I often hung out with him on my own since he was a herpetologist -- who had a subscription to the Skeptical Inquirer, a magazine about debunking. The actual debunking was often very cool, especially when they debunked actual con artists who were making money off their lies. But a lot of the magazine was focused on how stupid people who believed anything were, and that just turned me off.

Aside: My favorite fiction story about debunking is Connie Willis' Inside Job. It's short, but well worth the read. Unfortunately it's also rather expensive.

I was raised as a strict atheist, and most people who know me would still describe me as an atheist today because I don't worship any gods. I do believe in them, I just don't think that most of them are worthy of worship. And they only get my respect when they've earned it. (I have a real soft spot for Eris, Loki, Coyote, Kali and Shiva, though. Go figure.)

I'm willing to take most claims -- of anything, including scientific research, and man do you know how shoddy and thin most research is when you start poking at it? -- at face value unless that belief is doing some real harm. (Thus my frequent rants about obesity research. Don't get me started.)

Regardless, I find the whole of cryptozoology and indeed a lot of New Age spirituality just fascinating: cryptids because I love critters and spirituality because I love people.

Wow, that went way off track. Sorry about that. I'm in a manic phase today and thankfully it's a good manic phase and not an angry manic phase and you can tell, can't you?

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 5:58 pm
by Vephriel
Ooh yes, I love watching debunking documentaries as much as I love watching 'proof' ones. I'm just wholly fascinated by unexplainable subjects on either side. :D I used to record all of those programs on TV, and I would go to the library and get a plethora of books about mysteries, cryptids, supernatural occurrences. It's always appealed to me, and even if some things aren't true they're too much fun to think about regardless. :)

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:07 pm
by Palladiamorsdeus
*Laughs* Yes Mania, we can tell.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:18 pm
by Teigan
.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:20 pm
by cowmuflage
Unless it involves hateing gays then it's not good but thats another topic lol

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:29 pm
by Vephriel
On the topic of hoaxes, I often find myself just as fascinated with the false videos/pictures/etc as I would be with the real thing. Sometimes the fakes are done so well that it's a lot of fun watching them be pulled apart and debunked.

One that I really enjoyed was the Gable Film, I remember when that whole thing came into existence. Cryptozoology and mystery forums were exploding due to it. It was actually only proven to be fake early this year, but regardless I think it was pretty well done and a fun ride nonetheless.
In 2004 a film surfaced on the internet, supposedly made in the 1970's. It became known as the Gable film because of a paper label affixed to the box. The film, just over 3 minutes long, shows at first what looks like simple home movies; kids riding snowmobiles, a family dog, a man repairing his truck. Near the end of the film, the person filming is riding down a remote dirt road, when he stops and goes out to check what looks to be a huge bulky creature on all fours. There is a section of about 24 seconds in which it appears the cameraman is in pursuit of the creature. When it is located, it is perched on all fours on a ridge, about 50 yards from the camera. The creature suddenly charges the cameraman, and appears to morph its shape and leap in a superhuman fashion. The cameraman tries to run away, then there is rustling and a brief shot of teeth and fangs before the camera falls to the ground.

In 2009, a second film was uploaded to YouTube by user QuinlanR12, and appeared to show a police investigation after the cameraman in the first film is found dead. The police camera pans over to two officers examining the body, which is revealed to have been torn in half by whatever attacked the victim. In posts to several cryptozoology and related forums, a user identified as Don Coyote stated that he knew a relative of the dead body in the film. The relative said that the officer saw something that was apparently very traumatic. The officer lost his mind and began rambling "Dogs have four toes, People have five."

For years, the debate raged about whether the films were real or not. Finally in 2010, on the History Channel program Monster Quest it was revealed that both films were fake, made in 2002 by Mike Agrusa. Both films were shot using period correct cameras and props. The original Gable Film was produced on vintage Kodak 8mm stock, and Gable Film 2 was shot on 16mm. The "creature" in the first film was actually Agrusa running on all fours dressed in a Ghillie suit, a type of camouflage used by hunters. The body in the second film was created by digging a chest-deep hole in which the "victim" stood, while the lower torso that emerged from the bottom of the shirt was a prop made of painted foam rubber.
Link to the Gable Film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fDeT8H2CwQ

Link to the second film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uJ0X_2E ... re=related

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:47 pm
by Teigan
.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:13 pm
by Gimlion
All I've got to say about people claiming "A huge animal couldn't go undocumented for this long by scientists" GIANT SQUID. people thought that bitch was just a made up story. Bullshit it's a made up story, I watched the Discovery Channel showing of it being first discovered. And Also, I love Monster quest. I also love Ghost Hunters, mainly because they aren't looking to prove ghosts are real, they are looking to debunk ghosts being somewhere. I don't think ghosts in the general senses are real, but there are def. weird things we can't explain otherwise that happen.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:15 pm
by Saturo
Well, the oceans aren't land. Pretty much anything could be hiding out in the oceans, land is a different thing. We live on land.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:32 pm
by Pawtrack
Saturo wrote:
Razzy wrote:
Vespias wrote:The history of the discovery of the mountain gorilla demonstrates that a large ape can elude detection for decades, and that native tales of such creatures can be based in fact. Likewise for the Giant Panda. It took sixty-seven years from the time the Giant Panda was "discovered" by Westerners until its live capture. During this period twelve well staffed and equipped professional expeditions failed to collect a single live specimen of this large bear. It took over twenty years to collect a living specimen of the Congo Peacock once it became known to Westerners from feathers and oral descriptions by natives of the Congo River basin.
Thisthisthis.

Elaboration is pointless, though. You can't enlighten someone who shuts their mind off from the possibilities.
That's not what I said. If you show me a live specimen, or some other overwhelming evidence, I'll believe you. But a low quality video of a brown blur isn't evidence. Same for the supernatural stuff, there hasn't been a single case where it has been CONFIRMED, just people that clam they can read minds.
...but... if an octopus can tell the future...?

I am really interested in this stuff (even thinking of writing a series of mysteries about creatures like this), I think it's just awesome, and the Chupacabra is my favorite - mainly because it's existence can be confirmed and explained. I've heard people say that they think it is a cyote with mange... explaining the hairlessness, an iron deficioncy... explaining the drinking blood and all that, and apparently they might have milky blue eyes that reflect red in some light, explaining why some people say they have red eyes.

Either way, it's really cool. Sure, it maybe a species of cyote with mange and a tendancy to drink blood because of an old habit started by their lack of iron, but it is still really cool and I think they almost qualify as their own species. :D

Edit: also, with all these ghost stories, I'd thought I'd add mine.
I've had a few, I'll start with the famed "Haunted spa"

We used to live in california, and my mom was a massage therapist. One time she got hired at a spa, and said that there was a weird feeling about it but didn't tell anyone about it. My dad said he was a little creeped out, too, but was quiet. See, apparently weird things were happening - strange smells of sulfur in the bathroom, the lights flicking on and off on occasion, and my mom would sometimes have to go outside and sit in the car and calm down. So she was talking to a freind about it once, and the freind said "didn't [name of person who owned spa, i forget] tell you? The workers making this place unearthed human bones.". Apparently the strip mall (recently built) that the spa was in was an anceint indian burrial ground. So, anyway. Kinda creepy.

Also, when we were looking at houses out her in colorado, we came across a few very spooky ones. There was one I was in, it was the basement that freaked me out mainly, like you just wanted to GET THE HELL OUT RIGHT NOW. There was one other I think.

...eh, but anyway...

since I'm apparently in a rambling mood, wanna hear about the time we saw an emu running across the road in the middle of the california desert? Just kidding (though it did happen)

So, beleive what you will, but I swear I'm not making anything up. If I was, it'd be much more dramatic. ;)

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:20 pm
by Redith
WTF? I just posted that some farmers think that this sick coyyote was a chupicabra...how the hell did it turn into auras and invisibility? (trips over invisible gnome)

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:17 pm
by Vephriel
I think it's just fun to move onto the topic of cryptids and supernatural occurrences in general since it's a fun subject (in my opinion). :)

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:02 am
by Valashe
Teigan wrote:
Believing in god/gods/goddess/hyperintelligent shades of blue is not going to hurt anyone. Unless you are harassing people or sacrificing toads to them. Then, I would have a problem.
Image

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:15 am
by Teigan
.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:21 am
by cowmuflage
Well Gimlion your argument is kinda wrong as the hole "A huge animal couldn't go undocumented for this long by scientists" IS MANY FOR LAND BASED ANIMALS. It's ALOT harder to hide spmething huge on dry land than it is in the ocean jezzzz.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:40 am
by Teigan
.

Re: Chupacabra,,,again

Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:41 am
by cowmuflage
Yeah thats true but when it comes to things bigfoot size even those places are kinda too small ya know what i mean?