Comments on: Beast of Balbirnie

By: Ben Willis

Ben Willis — Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:14:29 +0000

In the Gippsland Australia case, DNA only confirmed that the material submitted was that of a domestic cat.
It did not prove the size of the animal in question or even the specific material which was submitted.

By: shovethenos

shovethenos — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:33:22 +0000

I don’t know, if it’s only “almost three times bigger” than a domestic cat it could still be a freakishly large domestic cat, like that one in Australia that was allegedly proven by DNA to be a domestic cat. If domestic cats really can get much bigger than commonly thought that opens up a lot more alternatives. And hybridization is also a possibility.

By: Stosh

Stosh — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:38:47 +0000

FYI to all interested, forteantimes.com also has a report from the BBC with pictures of the paw print casts.