• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Chupacabras

First Chupa Attack on Human

http://www.rense.com/general23/chup.htm
Click to expand...

Whoever wrote this page certainly never hear of correct/proper grammar!!!
Since -chupacabra- is a spanish word....plural would be cupacabros or los cupacaramos.
Not cupacabras!!!!!

"Its feet had some kind of hooves, but with a ram
behind them. We are in alert", they said. "

What-the-fuck?
Somebody needs to invent a grammmatical proofreader for this fellow.

I'm sorry guys,I'm ranting.
No one seems to care whether or not anything is spelled right any more.
Or spoken right.

Garrrrr!!!!!! What is up with me today???
 
I thought chupacabra was portuguese for goat sucker.

menino pequeno silly, você confunde o espanhol e o português. Você faz-me o riso :D
 
aak so theyre a lot alike.

I thouht it was spanish.

Don't piss off the cat or he'll trash the furniture.....
 
I wonder ifthe same thing will happen to the chupacabra as the lions of africa. In the 50s/60s labourers were creating railway lines through the savannah. An old lion ate a dead human body. The lion then developed a taste for human flesh. He taught others to hunt humans. In the end they were eradicated. I wonder if the same thing will happen to chupa?
 
I think Chupacabra has been used enough in context with english language that it is alright using s as plural.
 
Aliant said:
Whoever wrote this page certainly never hear of correct/proper grammar!!!
Since -chupacabra- is a spanish word....plural would be cupacabros or los cupacaramos.
Not cupacabras!!!!!
Click to expand...
http://world.altavista.com/sites/gben/pos/babelfish/trns

Neither of those translate as anything according to mr. babelfish.

However:

English to Spanish:
goat sucker --> lechón de la cabra

More importantly:

Spanish to English:
chupa cabras --> it absorbs goats
:D

Therefore, it should be chupa-cabras for both the singular as well as the plural. 'It absorbs goat' doesn't make sense, does it?
 
chup in portuguese means to suck something and eat it, thats why the famous lolly pops are called chupa chups, get it?. Also cabra is how you say goat in portuguese and spanish. Chupacabra (not chupa cabra) basically means goat sucker.
 
Chupacabra in Jail?

has anyone heard anything else about this story?
it would be interesting to see if they have captured 2 of these chupacabras and what they are.

At this time, it has been brought to my attention that at least two of these creatures have been captured(!) by Government officers, both from the U.S. Federal Government, and the Puertorican Government. They were captured before the 6 and 7th of November, one of them in the town of San Lorenzo, in the centre-east of Puerto Rico; the other in the National Carribean Rain Forest in El Yunque, to the east. Both were alive and allegedly taken to the United States by special personnel. Our government keeps denying the facts, yet our people perceive they are being lied to. The killings and encounters with these creatures continue. It is probably due to the fact that the incidents are associated with UFOs, that the government continues to cover- up the facts.
Click to expand...

http://www.princeton.edu/~accion/chupa13.html
 
I do remember something on TV last year about a number of chupacabras being captured (not sure where). There were a couple of sightings and some soldiers were alledged to have found one/two in the woods, possibly after a crash of a UFO. I remember something about a local hospital and three girls walking home from work/school and seeing a creature that they described as looking like the devil. Is this the same one?
 
I dont know if it is Jima, ive been looking into the subject and i have found there are a few different storys but the one i read earlier seems to be the less dramatic out of the bunch.

check out this page

http://www.clydelewis.com/invest/chupa/chupa.html

it has pictures of a supposid dead chupacabra that was shot by a farmer and then left for the vultures, below are links to the pics of its skeleton and the webpage talks about the possibility that chupacabra could be a relative of the thrinaxodon.

http://www.clydelewis.com/invest/chupa/pics/chupa-3.jpg

http://www.clydelewis.com/invest/chupa/pics/chupa-4.jpg
 
Hmmm, you're right Tang. Eyes are a) too small, and b) too high on the head to be a cat or dog. It reminds me of summat, though, I can't put my finger on it.
 
i dont think its reptilian either, reptiles usually have large eye sockets but i guess if it has become a nocturnal animal its eyes may have adapted and became smaller.

I think the key to what ever this is lies with the skull, in my opinion it looks like the skull has been added on to another creatures carcas which by the looks of its spine is a lot longer than it looks in the pic, its spine is just to thick at the end.

heres an interesting site full of reptile skull pics.I havent looked at them all yet to see if there is a match, ill let u know if i find anything

http://www.d91.k12.id.us/www/skyline/teachers/robertsd/reptile1.htm
 
tang-malow said:
i dont think its reptilian either, reptiles usually have large eye sockets but i guess if it has become a nocturnal animal its eyes may have adapted and became smaller.
http://www.d91.k12.id.us/www/skyline/teachers/robertsd/reptile1.htm
Click to expand...

Wouldn't a nocturnal animal have bigger eyes, to help it see in the dark? I'm thinking bushbabies, tarsiers etc here. Small eyes tend to evolve in an animal that exists in such darkness that its eyes had evolved as vetigal organs.
 
Ok i just came to the conclusion its a fake, why? well for one thing the chupacabra is a nocturnal animal and this is why it has evaded capture for so long so why does it have such small eye sockets in its skull? why does it have no nasal sockets at the tip of its skull? a creature that would heavilly rely on smell would need to have huge nasal sockets whereas this creature seems to have none. Also it would have to rely on sound to, where is its ear sockets? seems there are no skull that remotely ressembles this creatures. If you ask me it looks like something out of the dark crystal puppet movie. :D
 
Evilsprout said:
Wouldn't a nocturnal animal have bigger eyes, to help it see in the dark? I'm thinking bushbabies, tarsiers etc here. Small eyes tend to evolve in an animal that exists in such darkness that its eyes had evolved as vetigal organs.
Click to expand...


heheh bet me to the eye conclusion there mate :)
 
Come to the fake conclusion myself, from looking at a few animal skull sites. Even mammals and reptiles which appear to have small eyes have large eye sockets... the position and size of the eye socket on the photographed creature just doesn't tally with a real animal.

Plus, as you quite rightly say, a carnivore's best sense is sight, which these small eyes don't suggest. Plus, this animal doesn't have binocular vision - its eyes are on the side of its head. This feature tends to be found in animals that are traditional prey, such as wading birds like the snipe and woodcock, and hares, rather than predators, as a defence to see as far round the body as they can. A hunter needs to see in 3D to make an accurate kill.

Yup, it's a fake. It looks like a small dinosaur creature HEAD would look like, not what the SKULL would actually look like inside.
 
tang this has been an interesting thread mate. just goes to show when your not being attacked by the other two you can come up with some good stuff.

as for my opinion it doesn't look like anything ive seen before the dog/cat skeletons are almost similar so maybe it has just evolved or it could just be fake, as i cant really understand why anyone would have good reason to cover up anythins like this, i could sea good enough reason to cover up things like UFO'S aliens, and things such as the mothman. but not interesting 'animals'.

just because we cant prove there exhistence it doesnt mean they dont exhist, just like every animal in the world has been 'undiscoverd' till found and then experimented on and eaten etc over the years. i do think these such unexplained animals do exhist and one day when they are discoverd will just end up being 'another animal' just like previous discoverys.
 
Evilsprout said:
Yup, it's a fake. It looks like a small dinosaur creature HEAD would look like, not what the SKULL would actually look like inside.
Click to expand...

Im actually starting to think that its kermit the frogs remains. He went missing a few years back and it kinda looks like him, perhaps the thick spine at the bottom is the remains of Jim hensons arm? :D
 
mrchopper said:
tang this has been an interesting thread mate. just goes to show when your not being attacked by the other two you can come up with some good stuff.
Click to expand...

thanks for that mate, but dont count your chickens as im sure there will be an attack on my thread somewhere along the lines, perhaps a spelling mistake or something.

mrchopper said:
i cant really understand why anyone would have good reason to cover up anythins like this, i could sea good enough reason to cover up things like UFO'S aliens, and things such as the mothman. but not interesting 'animals'.
Click to expand...

the locals think that the government is trying to cover the chupacabra up because it is an escaped science experiment. This claim seems far fetched but when you consider that genetically modified killer bees somehow escaped a lab in brazil and are now widespread over south america it makes you wonder if there is some truth to the story.

mrchopper said:
just because we cant prove there exhistence it doesnt mean they dont exhist, just like every animal in the world has been 'undiscoverd' till found and then experimented on and eaten etc over the years. i do think these such unexplained animals do exhist and one day when they are discoverd will just end up being 'another animal' just like previous discoverys.
Click to expand...

Yes Mrchopper just like the gorilla that was considered to be mumbo jumbo and too outragious to be taken seriouusly. Im pretty sure once fabled creatures are found and studied most of their mystery will turn out to be rumour and exagerations. For instance the Orang-Pendek, is it so hard to believe that there is a unique sub-species of Orangutang? not really but because of the legend behind these creatures people dismiss them and once they are found and considered real what do all the skeptics do? they retract their earlier claims that such an animal cant and doesnt exist and the next thing we know well have steve irwin pulling their legs and annoying them.
Lastly i watched lonely planet on the travel channel a few days ago and the girl in the program was in Brazil at a large fish market on the Amazon river. She went on to tell that only 70% of the fish sold at the market has been identified by western scientists, crazy considering some people think that we have discovered all of this worlds mysteries and we are the supreme masters of earth.
 
Justin Anstey said:
http://translator.dictionary.com/text.html
http://world.altavista.com/sites/gben/pos/babelfish/trns

Nah, the word 'chup' doesn't appear to translate as anything, whereas 'chupa' turns up only as 'it absorbs'.

Chupacabra would appear to literally be 'it absorbs goat'.

It might not be grammatically correct but it is funny.

And that's what really counts.
Click to expand...

chup was a typo, i meant chupa. Yeah it might translate to absorbs but believe me in Brazil the word is associated with sucking, just like you would do to a lolly pop.

That translator thing you are looking at isnt 100% accurate.
 
Evilsprout said:
And, btw, it doesn't look much like a thrinaxodon either.
Click to expand...

yeah i know, lol

i was wondering why the guy would compare the two as they have totally different skulls.
I doubt the skull is real but if it is it would have to be some sort of unique species that has a very unique skull as i cant find one animal that looks like it. I mean where is the nasal cavity? doesnt this creature smell at all? strange for a noturnal animal which obviously doesnt rely on sight much :D
 
Didujo del pequeno basically means a drawing of a small creature in spanish.
 
I sadly can't see the pictures due to my companies seemingly random blocking of internet pages. So I am just going to say something that I thought when I saw a picture of a dead chupacabra. Could it be a hyena?

Also a predators most important sense isn't necessarily sight. For dogs for example I think smell is a lot more important. For bats it's hearing and such. But you're right, it should have forwarded eyes.

I remember a story where a chupa skeleton had been brought to a laboratory for investigation. Some time later you heard that they had found it wasn't a dog. But then I didn't hear anymore. Does anyone have an update on that one?
 
?

Remember reading an article which featured the pics of the "chupa" skeletons, think it may have been in ufomag(the british one).
 
The animals have been found with many small - perfect circular holes about 1/4" - 1/2" in diameter arranged in pairs of triangular fashion. These penetrate deep into the neck of lower jaws of the victims [see photographs]. Dr. Carlos Soto, a qualified veterinary, states the wounds have a regular pattern in many of the cases - into the head of the animal - a hole penetrating through the right jaw bone, muscle and tissue, and straight into the brain: more specifically directly to the cerebellum, puncturing it and causing instant death to the animal. This regular type of wound, and the path followed by whatever intrudes into the body, indicates premeditation - and intelligence.
Click to expand...
Could cucacabra be one of the larger cats, who has somehow lost one of it's canines by recklessly biting victims on the head,and now that he only has three canines is forced to prey upon small aminmals?

They often lap up the blood of thier victims while the flesh is still hot. if it were a juvenile wiht poor hunting techniques, then it may have developed he habit of killing it's victims with a bite to the skull.it may have broken off one of it's canines and is tender with that section of it's jaw,resulting in the triangular bite. it may have always preyed on small creatures or only done this since it's injury.

Just an idea...but could it be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top