Comments on: New Nahuelito Mystery Photo

By: austin_whittall

austin_whittall — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:56:53 +0000

That “More recently, in 1960, the Argentina Navy encountered in the lake an unidentified submarine object for 18 days, without being able to identify it.”
Is not correct.

The 1960 incident happened nearly 500 miles away from the lake, at Golfo Nuevo on the Atlantic Ocean coast by a main Argentine submarine base.
See the original article, “The Wily Whatzit” Newsweek magazine Feb. 22, 1960. p. 57 or http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=396.
It was surely a foreign spy submarine during the early cold war era and not “Nahuelito”.
Austin Whittall - Buenos Aires, Argentina

By: cryptomaniac

cryptomaniac — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:41:24 +0000

Looks a little prunish,like its been in the water to long. Doesn’t make sense since this supposed animal is water dwelling. The only thing I can think of is that its some sort of stationary log creature.

By: Fwooper

Fwooper — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:41:08 +0000

It has wierd eyes and looks kind of like a rock sticking up out of the water; but it looks more like a real animal now, I think I agree with Shane Durgee on this one.

By: Shane Durgee

Shane Durgee — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:34:44 +0000

The eye isn’t fake enough to throw this out entirely especially given sightings of an actual lake cryptid in the area.

I agree with sasquatch’s assessment of blessedblogger’s close-up. Even in the face of so many frauds and pranks in this field, I’d put my chips on the side of some sort of unknown reptile rather than hoax on this one.

By: karmicGypsy

karmicGypsy — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:48:04 +0000

I have no idea what it is but it looks alot like driftwood to me. If you go to Coasttocoast.com and type in driftwood there are some amazing pistures. Especially the “demon flyer” which is the first thing I thought of when I saw this.

By: sasquatch

sasquatch — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:32:34 +0000

Thanks for the updated work Blessedblogger; I’m glad to see the close-up. It actually looks more real and less like a log in close-up!
The speckely patterns on the under-side of the neck look very naturalistic. Much like many lizards, snakes, crocodillians and eels.
The areas with less detail seem to be in bright sunlight and are therefore not as easy to judge due to glare.
As far as the teeth go. with the exception of the largest fang; they don’t seem overly white to me. Check out the chicklets on a shark…pretty white; ask Bobby Darin.
Another thing I’m pretty impressed by on this critter is the slight underbite; I’ve noticed this in certain eels.
Other anatomic relationships seem to be in the right place too if it were some kind of eel -the folds that extend back from the eye toward the ear hits me as correct as well as the “grin” of the mouth corner.
I try to use intuition from animal observations when trying to figure out pictures like this but
When dealing with unknown creatures I don’t think judging them by how we THINK they should look is completely wise. For example;
If all you’d ever seen were green monkeys, spider monkeys and chimpanzees and were suddenly shown a picture of a proboscus monkey you might well have a good laugh and say; “So, did you photoshop Jimmy Durante’s nose on that monkey?”
Anyway the eye still looks suspect to me too. Thanks again

By: red_pill_junkie

red_pill_junkie — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:59:31 +0000

Brilliant detective work by Melissa a.k.a. TheBlessedBlogger. It definitely feels like someone used the photo of a floating log and combined it with some image of the raptors from Jurassic Park.

Would those kind of pupils be of any use to an aquatic creature, living in a dark environment? I doubt it.

By: bauctrian1970

bauctrian1970 — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:25:48 +0000

Looks fake
The thing that jumps out the most is how much light there is on the head. And yet there is not much of a shadow.

By: Dj Plasmic Nebula

Dj Plasmic Nebula — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 20:53:07 +0000

the more i look at the eye, the more i don’t see cartoon… i think is that the animal is unkown it may have unkown features.. remember the day when biluminesence fish were discovered lol

By: TheBlessedBlogger

TheBlessedBlogger — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:42:24 +0000

I’m posting a close-up with some notations on areas that are suspect to me. I’m not an expert in forensic photo analysis or reptiles, I’m basing my opinion on my knowledge as a photo-manipulation and graphic design artist.

The eye and teeth look to perfect to me. The eye just looks artificial and most of the aquatic reptiles I’ve seen have had round or horizontal pupils. I’m not saying there are no reptiles with eyes like this; there obviously are, it just seems odd.

The teeth are too white. I’ve never seen an animal that feeds on fish/krill/plankton etc have such naturally white teeth.

There are multiple areas where skin texture is missing as if it was accidentally blurred out. There are multiple areas where the color/saturation/luminosity seem altered. There are multiple areas where the image appears to be smudged or warped.

Is it a fake? I have no idea, but my educated guess is that it is.