Comments on: Chilean Winged Wonder

by: Grant

Sun, 27 Apr 2008 03:25:35 +0000

Whatever it was, I think a hoax (at least, a hoax by the witness himself) can be ruled out, for one small reason. Maybe people like bathroom humor now more than they ever have before, but I don’t think he would freely admit to losing that particular kind of control (or claim that he did), just to make the story more dramatic. Somehow that convinces me that SOMETHING happened.

by: sschaper

Sat, 26 Apr 2008 15:48:05 +0000

Great horned owl, or maybe a fruit bat (which would be quite the discovery in South America!). Size and distance are notoriously hard to gauge.

by: jocen79

Sat, 26 Apr 2008 05:04:16 +0000

No wait let’s be sensible about this. If i’m not mistaken it could be a ropen and the fact that it landed near a pile of dirt it could have mistaked it for a tomb. These animals are known to feed off of carcasses. And because this event is in the southern hemisphere makes more sense that with that wingspan it could travel thousands of miles via the air currents in search of food.

by: flame821

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:55:16 +0000

What about a large owl (keeping in mind that darkness and surprise can exaggerate certain aspects of a sighting) or a flying fox? I would expect the flying fox to be fairly light (I believe most bats are lightweight for their sizes) but a large owl might fit the bill.

The ear tuffs, strange call, silent flight….those ‘three thin holes’ could be from talons.

by: mantis

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:33:29 +0000

Clear case of mistaken avian identity. Everything looks bigger and more threatening when you’re scared. I wouldn’t doubt that it was a vulture. Perhaps a search of the area would have found a dead animal nearby; like next to those nearby rails.

by: rl_esteves

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:35:18 +0000

Another paranormal flesh and blood creature?

by: red_pill_junkie

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:30:14 +0000

Very interesting, more “fortean” than “cryptozoological” if you ask me.

What would the needed wingspan for a 40-kg being be? 4 meters? more?

There’s also nothing related to the eyes of the being, but I’m willing to bet they were glowing red, as it is customary in such encounters.

by: Craig York

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:23:20 +0000

Whoa, there, fellas-given that the face was indistinct, isn’t it at least possible that the “stubby arms” were a mis-identification of some other anatomical feature? I’m at least intrigued-and I’ll suspend any judgment until some further reports come in, hopefully from the “five or six young men”. I would point out two other things missing from the report: any estimate of the creature’s wingspan, and any mention of time of day and lighting conditions.

by: MayLady

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:44:00 +0000

I suppose it is possible what the man saw were not arms, but something else. Possibly a thumb-like appendage on coming from the top of the wings?

by: MattBille

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:25:43 +0000

Given there’s not a six-limbed vertebrate in the entire fossil record, this one goes on the trash heap.