Comments on: Australian Mystery Cat

By: Upnorth

Upnorth — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:50:10 +0000

This is an easy one. Please look at the photo and the position of the feline in front of the hunter. It is closer to the camera than the hunter and bike. Using the principles of perspective, that would make the feline larger, closer bigger concept. I’ve run across photos like this before and the word is simple “hoax” at the moment until more testing is completed. If the feline was in the same plane, different story, different length.

Note: I would use PhotoModler instead of the CAD program. It is designed to work with photos.

Right now….camera perspective would put this suspect, at least the photo.

By: shumway10973

shumway10973 — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 03:14:19 +0000

hey, I don’t care how it was cared for, dressed, or anything. It is true that getting a clear sense of size is difficult in this picture except to say that if this is just a feral cat, whoa! If that was my pet, I would start getting concerned. Any hunter knows to cut the tail off at the rump. Cut from anywhere else and it will easily be known by anyone examining it. From the true beginning of the tail to the tip, the vertebrae will be completely surrounded by skin and fur. Anything before the rump won’t have skin all around.

By: Ruby Lang

Ruby Lang — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 03:22:13 +0000

>Hopefully, my lack of qualifications >will ensure that I won’t be further
>bothered by you
Your lack of qualifications or knowledge didnt stop you popping up on chat boards like yahoobigcats and implying I was involved in a hoax for fame or that I may have swapped material.
>and my failure to answer your >questions indicate that I
>don’t intend to.
You never intended too Ben.
How could you. game set and match

MikeW

By: Ben Willis

Ben Willis — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:29:09 +0000

Hopefully, my lack of qualifications will ensure that I won’t be further
bothered by you, and my failure to answer your questions indicate that I
don’t intend to.

By: Ruby Lang

Ruby Lang — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 01:58:04 +0000

“Mike has been so persistent for a response that he’s taken to e-mailing me privately.”

Hi Ben. I was just prodding you to show some manners.
I am mean you have no skills as a researcher, nor manners it seems.
I corrected all your mis-statements, pointed out your mendaciously shifting “requirements” and asked you for your qualifications/evidence of anything you have collected.
You “forgot” again to answer anything, just changed your position, again.
Now, in the email you sent me, you imply you may accept the word of the biologist if he is quoted in the paper, which is another little semantic game isnt it.
You will not Ben.
Are you always this dishonest?

“A number of feline naturalists”

You are not a “naturalist” for a start, you are a collector of sightings/theories with no hard evidence of any sort.

“that he make a retraction on the misleading statement “A mysterious cat shot in Gippsland was a giagantic feral domestic cat” contained in his article. While DNA analysis may reveal a species, it cannot determine it’s size or whether it was in fact feral.”

No Ben, the photos, the observations by the hunter and the tail do that!

“and that evidence is reported by a reliable source, then it may be worth pursuing. Meanwhile, in my view this is nothing more than a hoax, and not even a good one at that.”

Thats funny, you said on the Scottish Bigcats board it was a good hoax and I was doing it for fame.
Make up your mind Ben!
But Ben, err Mr President, you have no qualifications to judge a case 3,ooo miles from you.
You don’t accept the word of scientists who have examined the evidence and you mendaciously kept on chopping and changing your requirements for proof as if you word was worth anything.
Mike

By: Ben Willis

Ben Willis — Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:25:46 +0000

Mike has been so persistent for a response that he’s taken to e-mailing me privately.

I’ve explained that I’m un-interested in keeping this farce alive by further pondering it.

A number of feline naturalists, including myself, have written Kelvin Healey with the Herald Sun requesting that he make a retraction on the misleading statement “A mysterious cat shot in Gippsland was a giagantic feral domestic cat” contained in his article. While DNA analysis may reveal a species, it cannot determine it’s size or whether it was in fact feral.

As I’ve said, if any reasonable evidence exists for a giant Austrailian cat, and that evidence is reported by a reliable source, then it may be worth pursuing. Meanwhile, in my view this is nothing more than a hoax, and not even a good one at that.

By: ozestrange

ozestrange — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 21:27:30 +0000

Ben, you first stated
“Once a qualified spokesperson for those organizations is quoted or provides that information”
I then provided some information from an interview with a government biologist who examined the original tail with some vertebrae intact and his conclusion.
Instead of accepting what you asked for you remained silent about that.
You then changed your criteria that you required 24 hours before and said.
“If a section of vertebra does still exist for this animal, and may be examined by a qualified zoologist or veterinary surgeon, the opinion would be likely accepted.”
Why is a government biologist not qualified now.???
What happened in 24 hours Ben.?
Its not because your mind was made up before you knew about the biologist is it Ben, of course not. And what would the next group prove that we dont know already.
The tail was real and not a trick, it came from a cat according to DNA extracted by Melbourne University.
The tail was examined by the Dept of Primary Industries/Melbourne Zoo/Melbourne Museum.
The only people who dont accept the tail as being real are people with no qualifications who never examined the original tail.
Which isnt science is it Ben.?
“Meanwhile, the ambiguities surrounding whatever evidence remains causes more skepticism than the evidence itself.”
What “evidence”, you dont accept any evidence in this case.?
What “ambiguities” ?
Shot cat/photographed it/cut tail/disposed of animal very foolishly/tail examinedby DPI/Zoo?Museum/Bernie Mace/cynical reporters/myself.Dna extracted from the tail=cat.
“yet I remain skeptical until proof is shown.”
And your qualifications in this Ben are…?.
Real tail-real photos-honest witness-real dna.
Which is a thousand times the normal amount of “proof” that most crypto cases have isnt it Ben.?
If you have any great cases with photos with material evidence like fur,tail,dna then we would love to have a good look at it.
I know you must have something more than a mere hypothesis and a couple of sighting reports so lets see it..

Mike

By: Ben Willis

Ben Willis — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 16:57:09 +0000

If a section of vertebra does still exist for this animal, and may be examined by a qualified zoologist or veterinary surgeon, the opinion would be likely accepted. Meanwhile, the ambiguities surrounding whatever evidence remains causes more skepticism than the evidence itself.

To answer your question, I’ve theorized for sometime that exceptionally large feral cats account for panther sightings worldwide. Whether these are merely large domestics or a hybridized wild species is questionable, however the idea of leopards and pumas being released following 1976 becomes less plausibe. Reliable reports suggest a smaller and elusive feline more similar to the American eastern bobcats.

In any case, when the Melbourne cat was first reported, I considered that it may confirm my own theory, however the circumstances surrounding the case appeared more suspect as the story unfolded. I would be pleased to learn that the cat was in fact genuine, yet I remain skeptical until proof is shown.

By: Ruby Lang

Ruby Lang — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 09:40:27 +0000

Ben, I don’t think having “a qualified spokesperson” speak out favourably “in some reliable media” would necessarily satisfy any skeptics anywhere. In Australia, we have had experts speak out favourably in all kinds of media, but that has not caused any skeptics to change their tune that I am aware. It is a well-accepted fact that many government departments here are sitting on information that supports what many researchers are saying - and no, this is not the stuff of conspiracies (or maybe it is! :)).

By: ozestrange

ozestrange — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 08:55:56 +0000

Damn, I wish there was a typo fixer on this blog.I meant to say with some of the original vertebrae column still intact.
>Once a qualified spokesperson for >those organizations is quoted
Great stuff.
Here is the direct quote from Biologist Rory o`Brien, Melbourne Museum.
When I said “could it have been cut up the back to make it look longer” he replied “no…the tail appeared to be real”.
He had no problems with it at all. Neither did Adrien Howard at Melbourne
zoo or The Department of Primary Industries.
The direct quote from O`Brien will be printed in the Australian Sporting Shooters magazine,with his permission.
> the skeptics may be willing to >concede
Never.
I am sure they will bring up something else Ben or just remain silent.
Which do you think.? I have been sent another photo of a monster feral cat hanging up next dingoes that measured 1080 mm from ears to the base of tail according to the trapper who sent the photo.
A recent 2 minute video I have also obtained shows a black felid the size of a large German Shepherd, but the animal does not have the build of a Leopard/jaguar.I believe it is another one of this monster feral cats which I would not want to corner.
We are aslo waiting for the dna results from a large,interesting scat.
Ben, I believe you are the president of the scottish bigcat society have you had any cases like this of monster ferals.

Mike