Comments on: New Mystery Cat Photos

By: DWA

DWA — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:32:08 +0000

Although sure those shots could be something other than domestic cats, that’s what I’d bet they are.

The big one looks like it wants to be a leopard when it grows up, or maybe one of those legendary black mountain lions. But the tail gives it away.

Meow.

By: DWA

DWA — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:29:36 +0000

grafikman: leave it to you to say what I would say and make it more fun to read.

I am - as my kids would once have said - beyond tired times a billion plus a hundred times a million billion, plus one plus a hundred hundred, of the Photoshop debunk crowd.

If you say it, you MUST SHOW IT. Grow up if you believe otherwise. This is about evidence, not about idiots awed and cowed by electronic city-man magic. If you need to roast a missionary, don’t bring it here, please. Thank you.

By: grafikman

grafikman — Sat, 16 May 2009 10:01:00 +0000

Y’know, I am *so* tired of people bleating “Photoshop” whenever they run into a pic that challenges them. Most people couldn’t tell what a Photoshopped image was if it came stomping out of the forest and shook their trailer.

I’m also a graphic designer, and I don’t see evidence of fakery here. When you place (import) a graphic (such as the implied cat) into another file, there are telltale signs of blurring, sharpening, cloning (copying one part of a picture to another area) that would have to be performed to edit the cat into the picture. Those signs are just not there.

Whatever that creature is, it’s part of the original picture.

Oh, it still *possibly* *might* have been done by a master Photoshop expert, but frankly I don’t think somebody that could get one by me would spend all the time necessary to edit a low res pic to make it *look* like a low res pic without leaving telltale digital artifacts (please, if someone has the original pic without the cat, post it here and prove me wrong, I dare ya).

By: kittenz

kittenz — Sat, 16 May 2009 02:40:34 +0000

“I would like to know who on here has a black housecat that big to compare with.”

I have Halloween and Jinx, both large cats, mother and daughter, and Gonzo, a male. Jinx is shiny jet black, Halloween is velvety inky black. Gonzo is sooty color. All three have been mistaken for panthers by bikers, hikers, and passers-by. People who had to get right up close to them before they coiuld accept that they are house cats. Another of my cats, Buster, a cinnamon-cream color tabby, has sometimes been seriously mistaken for a cougar.

Cats look bigger than they really are, when you see them outside hunting. Especially seen from a distance, or without a clearly visible nearby object for reference.

By: jennife0

jennife0 — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:20:30 +0000

Reading all these comments I can’t believe that people see anything other then a large black cat. Of course it can’t be confirmed that these are panthers, but really people, A dog?!? Really?!? Amazing that we can all look at the same photo and see completely different things. Someone captures actual pictures and it’s still not enough proof. This is a big world we live in and we are discovering new species of animals, insects, plant life…all the time, yet there are so many non believers…even when photo’s are produced! What is the point of even trying to capture photo’s when people won’t believe anyway. Why is it so far of a stretch to just believe? More people believe in God with no proof of existence (anyone capture a pic of God yet?), then they do of things that have a higher probability of existing. Even if these are “housecats” like some seem to think…those are 2 rather large housecats that I wouldn’t want to be around. I would like to know who on here has a black housecat that big to compare with.

By: kittenz

kittenz — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:26:08 +0000

The proportions are not the same as a jaguarundi’s. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that jaguarundis (or some similar, previously undescribed species) are at the root of some “black panther” sightings, though. Cats are very adaptable and the woods in the eastern US are thick and extensive. So, while I feel sure that this photo is contrived, I wouldn’t bet against jaguarundis living wild in North Carolina.

By: maeko

maeko — Thu, 14 May 2009 20:52:38 +0000

They both look like house cats to me.

By: Steleheart

Steleheart — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:51:48 +0000

On the other hand…how about this?

but I still don’t like the lighting.

By: Steleheart

Steleheart — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:37:04 +0000

Something is wrong with the lighting here. In the top photo the light is falling on the tree - nice detail in the bark. So why is there not more detail in the fur? Even black shows light and dark, reflections, ripples, etc., when the light is shining on it.

That snout is way too long for a cat. I’m no expert but doesn’t it look like a dog with his ears pinned back? And the tail…seems wrong on all counts.

By: jrock74

jrock74 — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:05:15 +0000

I live in the tri-state area of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio. The Ohio Valley. We have some pretty thick woods and most is still virgin forest. I have seen an animal that looked exactly like the first picture. It was near West Alexander, PA. It crossed the road as I was driving to work. It was an eery sight to say the least. I didn’t know if black panthers inhabited our forests, but I am a believer now. We do have mountain lions and some other smaller wild cats, but this was a much larger cat than I have ever seen in this region.