Comments on: Mystery Photo: Arkansas Mystery Critter: Name That Skeleton

By: bobbed wire

bobbed wire — Thu, 14 May 2009 02:33:51 +0000

I would say to check out the book “Follow The Signs” by Dayne Chastain ISBN
0-9660797-0-1

It has a pretty good account of this creature. The hair is one of the
things that got me. Aluminum, Silicone, Calcium, and Copper!! and no DNA

By: BudoMan

BudoMan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 01:35:53 +0000

To: holysmokedc

So what is the status of RALPH at present? Or can you not discuss it?

From BudoMan
Another Hometown Boy living South ?????

By: bobbed wire

bobbed wire — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:20:24 +0000

Arkansas Mystery Creature

As far as I know, it was removed from Jack Glovers place and taken back to the finders place. The last “viewing” of the E.T. was suspended in an acrylic case (aprox 4′X30″X30″) with formaldehyde like humidity. Jack said to many people were snooping around.

I saw it about 4 years ago, and it’s nothing that I can ID. NO DNA! Jack had it billed as “The Alien” and later said it was a Chupacabra. It had two legs and walked upright and had two short arms. The person that found it had file boxes (many) full of test reports done on it. ie.. X-rays, DNA, etc…

By: kilted

kilted — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:08:23 +0000

I don’t know if this blog is still active at all, I have always just called it the critter. I saw this when I was going to school in Ada at ECU, from everything I have seen it and it was real. I watched him pull it out of a 5 gallon bucket of formaldehyde, when it still had meat on it. There was a ridge of bones with connective tissue along the spine that raised up like a fan. It is the spookiest thing I have ever seen, and I will never forget it as long as I live. It was not anything known at least not to the general public. I saw it probably around 13 or 14 years ago so that is about when the pic above was taken. I will have a serious discussion with anybody truly interested.

By: redneck rick

redneck rick — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 20:25:44 +0000

cant be sure from the pic, could be one of many of ar. native critters. somthing dies in the wild and other animal are going to maul it and scatter bones, you guys know were not looking at the whole skeleton. I think the picture taker knew what he was looking at but when the pic hit the internet just the viewer doesnt know.

By: Arkady

Arkady — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:41:19 +0000

It’s just a dead sheep with the nose broken off.

By: anthrocrypto

anthrocrypto — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 20:56:15 +0000

It’s a seal, mandible and all extremities are missing including thoracic girdle (hence the neck looks ‘long’). Pelvis is still in place. Skeleton is unfossilised, still has putrefied flesh hanging off it. DNA testing would, I think be possible, it’s not old. Then again why would the skeleton’s owners do that, it would raise questions of why exactly they have a rotten seal carcass in Arkansas…

By: CryptoInformant

CryptoInformant — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:36:58 +0000

Speaking of mysterious bone finds, I once found a qauadrate (part of a bird skull) that, when compared to the same bone on a crow, shows that the bird the quadrate came from had a head the size of a horse’s head. It was not a fossil, as there were still bits of bird skin on it. (ewww) Even more curious is that it was buried in a small pit along with assorted bits of an unidentified carnivorous mammal and smaller birds. This means that something must have killed or scavenged off of these animals and buried parts of them in a hole, possibly for food storage.

By: CryptoInformant

CryptoInformant — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:31:55 +0000

This skeleton is highly fragged, but what is there suggests an omnivorous creodont. They were highly successful in their time, but would be quite rare now.

By: Sam

Sam — Mon, 21 May 2007 22:43:24 +0000

I will stake my life’s fortune (which is very small and probably not worth your contesting my claim) that this is a DEER SKELETON. The reasons that lead me to believe this are

1) the teeth are correct and the roof of the mouth is the correct width and

2) the hip is correctly constructed for a deer.

The reason the skull looks human is because the muzzle is broken off. The processis on the tops of the thoraic vertebrea are too long and thick to be those of a cat or human or ape or any predator for that mater. The entire structure is the correct size for a deer. And I have a deer skeleton that is currently partially articulated, and I am looking at it RIGHT NOW. In conclusion, this is not a cat, bear, ape, human, or any kind of ferocious monster. it is a FEMALE DEER WITH A BROKEN MUZZLE.