Comments for Cryptomundo

Comment on Josh Gates Responds To Cryptomundo by springheeledjack

springheeledjack — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:49:31 +0000

DT is one of those shows that one minute I’m thinking, this could be good, and the next minute I’m shaking my head.

I believe the crypto-crowd gets excited because this is a show that pertains to cryptozoology. To that end, I think it is good…yeah it’s coming from Sci-Fy, and yeah, it’s hokey (sorry man, but it is what it is), but for better or worse, it’s cryptozoology television, and me being a junkie, I go to the dealer for a fix.

On the other hand, I think people (and I’ll include myself here, because I’ve been a dissenter on more than one occasion) who support cryptozoology get bunged up about it because most of the episodes end up with them crawling through the woods in the dark with their cameras, and the minute they encounter noises and rustling brush, they run (and seriously, hunting for a raptor in the Alaskan wilderness at night…). I just think cryptozoologists, the field people and the armchair fanatics just want a show that validates their passions–and a lot of times DT falls short.

I don’t think this show does a ton for Cryptozoology, other than advertise that it’s out there…but maybe that’s all it should be…or at least maybe that’s all we should expect from it.

As for me…I’m taking c.stark’s advice…

Comment on Normandy Nessie by springheeledjack

springheeledjack — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:28:39 +0000

My thoughts exactly…since it seems to keep coming back, keep the camera going…and maybe see if we can get a betterrrrrrrrr photo or closer for a more distinct shot…this one’s not so good…:)

Comment on Identify The Mystery Tracks by erinmar13

erinmar13 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:40:12 +0000

i agree that if they are indeed real prints and not fake, then they are probably rabbit tracks.

Comment on Yeti Hair Sample by Ferret

Ferret — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:24:20 +0000

I’d also like to see a comparison between the DNA test results and those found by MonsterQuest in Canada. Even though I doubt that Yeti and Bigfoot are the same species (assuming one or both exist of course), I feel that due to the morphological similarities we might see some similarities in the DNA.

Comment on Identify The Mystery Tracks by Steleheart

Steleheart — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:41:16 +0000

They look to me like overlapping deer tracks made by a running deer. The last view shows this most clearly. The anterior portion of the front hoof being obliterated by the hind hoof and pushing sand forward, making it appear to be seperate ‘toes’.

Comment on Yeti Hair Sample by Va-Bigfoot

Va-Bigfoot — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:25:51 +0000

The hair DNA testing results must be verified by other accredited laboratories before they start celebrating. If they need an internationally acclaimed laboratory to conduct the DNA testing for free, tell them to give me a call.

Comment on Yeti Hair Sample by SOCALcryptid

SOCALcryptid — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:01:38 +0000

AWESOME
It looks like something new is yet to be discovered. What, well we will have to wait and see.
Thanks for the info Loren. This is why I visit Cryptomundo on a daily basis.

Comment on Yeti Hair Sample by ParticleNoun

ParticleNoun — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:20:43 +0000

I wonder about the color, actually. We only see in under Night Vision filming, where dark hair can look very very light. I don’t think we ever got to see the actual color of the hair, so it may not be white at all.

Comment on Identify The Mystery Tracks by Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:07:56 +0000

Not sure what the tracks (one complete, the other smeared) are of, although the following came to mind…

a tool

human hand, partial

hare track, partial

It was found near the construction of a patio in Devon, UK, and thus I imagined near a proper English garden, known for its bunnies.

But it could be anything. Although I doubt it is a tapir.

Comment on Identify The Mystery Tracks by Fhqwhgads

Fhqwhgads — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:56:17 +0000

What do you mean “tracks”? These are all pictures of one “footprint” from different angles. In once case the brick has been removed, but details such as the leaf just to the left of the “footprint” show that they all show the same thing. Without more than one print, it’s really hard to justify the interpretation of this as a footprint.

For what I know, the 3 “toes” might be the three legs of a tripod that has not been folded out. The rest of the “print” then looks remarkably rectangular, consistent with it being from something man-made.

In other words, this could be a chance association of impressions that are being misinterpreted as a footprint, the way “ghost photographs” often involve the mind’s tendency to see faces everywhere.

That’s the nice interpretation. Otherwise, I’d agree with Bishop: It’s too clean to be real.