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

The Amarillo Zoo Cryptid

IbisNibs said:
To me it looks like one of countless individuals who have lost the means of maintaining a stable way of life, and may be stuck living outdoors as outcasts and pariahs until they OD or die of exposure. I've seen so many people who resemble this silhouette, and they look miserable and vulnerable.
Click to expand...

I, too, am a philosophy graduate.
 
Sharon Hill said:
First, why was it called a "cryptid"? (Not just here, but lots of places.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I copied the term over from the source; perhaps I should have placed it in inverted commas.
 
Sharon Hill said:
I'm going to start calling these events where everyone wildly guesses about what an obscure, distorted object is "mass opinionation events". It seems to be an internet phenomenon that gets the attention of even mainstream news outlets. (We love distractions these days!)

First, why was it called a "cryptid"? (Not just here, but lots of places. It's not hidden, we have no information to be able to make any determination of whether it's a normal animal or a person.) People readily jump to mysterious conclusions without any thought about the situation. Unfortunately, I don't think they are at all interested in what it really is. They just want to have some fun speculating and making goofy comments. The sillier comments, the better.

I got a laugh out of the very serious discussion on Reddit about how it can't be a dogman because of the legs (not digitigrade) and then the subsequent discussions about what "real" dogman legs supposedly look like (because let's apply fake logic to a fantastical creature).

I have a game camera like this in my yard and I have gotten dozens of really weird, distorted animal pics. Do I assume they are a supernatural creature, or manifestations from another dimension? No. The blurring and lack of detail is a product of how the machine captures the image in low light. The speed is slow and any movement results in this distortion - that should be a primary consideration but it's hardly mentioned in the comments and news stories. Because, again, no one wants to really know what it is, especially the Amarillo zoo who is getting beaucoup publicity for this silly non-story.

Why assume it's even a person who deliberately dressed as a furry? That's a big assumption. It's far more likely to be a regular animal (like a jackrabbit) whose movement is blurred by the camera. Yet, here we all are, engrossed in wild-ass guessing. I think that's the bigger story here.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much what I said. Title whipping people into a frenzy, ordinary picture distorted by movement in the dark.

Oh, and I don't mean Yith's title, I mean the whole 'is it a chupacabra' thing in the article itself.
 
Vardoger said:
Looks like it is looking at the camera. Is it carrying something in the left hand? Is it someone in a furry costume? :chuckle:

View attachment 56059
Click to expand...
The 'lady in the radiator' from Eraserhead?!

radiator-lady.jpg
 
Sharon Hill said:
Yet, here we all are, engrossed in wild-ass guessing. I think that's the bigger story here.
Click to expand...
So you think it was a wild ass?

Seriously, I both agree and disagree with you. The media - and as in this case, organizations that put out press releases - often tell us sensational things when there's really no there there. The usual reaction of members of the public is either to dismiss anomalous things altogether (the very thing our beloved Mr. Fort rebelled against) or to accept that something very weird is going on, and swallow any old "supernatural" explanation. This is why any media coverage of UFOs, ghosts, Bigfoot, carcasses found on the shore, etc. is usually quite infantile and unscientific.

The serious interpretations in this thread have tended to lean towards a human or known animal, not a chupacabra(s) or evil spirit. There has been discussion of how the camera works and if anyone has done the relatively simple task of working out the size of the figure. While figuring out this particular mystery is just for fun, these are attitudes that should prevail when a truly anomalous image turns up in the media, and the usual suspects will try to convince us it's a velociraptor or grey alien.

Yithian said:
I, too, am a philosophy graduate.
Click to expand...
As am I. You could probably tell from my posts and my bank account.
 
ChasFink said:
So you think it was a wild ass?

Seriously, I both agree and disagree with you. The media - and as in this case, organizations that put out press releases - often tell us sensational things when there's really no there there. The usual reaction of members of the public is either to dismiss anomalous things altogether (the very thing our beloved Mr. Fort rebelled against) or to accept that something very weird is going on, and swallow any old "supernatural" explanation. This is why any media coverage of UFOs, ghosts, Bigfoot, carcasses found on the shore, etc. is usually quite infantile and unscientific.

The serious interpretations in this thread have tended to lean towards a human or known animal, not a chupacabra(s) or evil spirit. There has been discussion of how the camera works and if anyone has done the relatively simple task of working out the size of the figure. While figuring out this particular mystery is just for fun, these are attitudes that should prevail when a truly anomalous image turns up in the media, and the usual suspects will try to convince us it's a velociraptor or grey alien.


As am I. You could probably tell from my posts and my bank account.
Click to expand...
Good post.

The reason I visit and participate in this forum and not any other paranormal discussion site is that it is a place to present unusual, paranormal and just plain weird experiences and have a mature and insightful discussion as to its nature. Okay, sometimes posters can be a little dismissive and this can offend the OP but that is about it. The IHTM and other first-hand accounts posted are overwhelmingly original content and not fictional, unlike so much I have found on Reddit and other sites.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
This photo is not unlike the Ilkley Moor Alien photo - blurry, out of focus, something is there but no real details.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Almost as though someone selected a picture that could be of anything and put it out there with a 'well then. what do you think of THIS?' Those who are predisposed to believe that every second encounter they have is with something supernatural will 'read' one thing into the picture, and those who tend towards the sceptical, will read something else in.

It's a bit like a Rorschach test for the Forteans.
 
This highlights what I and others have been asking elsewhere, do all these TV programmes on Fortean subjects help the cause or not? In this case it’s the internet not the TV.

On the plus side the image is out there with a location and a time, there is a chance to track down witnesses, measure fences, etc., etc. that may not be there if it turned up in a book after a few months or years. This must give a better chance of finding an explanation, mundane or otherwise.

The downside is sensationalism; but this forum is thankfully not prone to the:
“OMG!! It’s Totes a werewolf, hope it doesn’t want my breakfast – pictured below”; type of response.

Another downside of any discussion is the human need to classify things and put labels on them; again as I’ve said elsewhere –light in the sky = aliens, light in a house = ghost. Only high strangeness issues escape sort of by being classified, well, high strangeness.

Do people report dogmen because they think they’ve seen one or because it is a category that most fits what they have witnessed – misperceived or not? Do they give it a label because they need it to be something?

If even obvious misperceptions/fakes don’t get put on here or on the net we’re in real danger of missing something really good.

Unfortunately, we don’t have a clear category for explained because it rarely is 100% - 99.999% maybe. Perhaps we should have threads for “mostly solved” to paraphrase Douglas Adams?

FWIW, IMHO, guy in suit or flappy clothing captured in blurry photo.
 
I copied the original image into BeFunky where I increased the contrast and brightness, and then used the 'clarity' and 'sharpen' tools.

It shows that the chain link fence between the camera and the figure is causing an interference pattern of shadow which is slightly distorting the bright points reflecting off the figure.
There appears to be an object in the left hand.
It is an unusual stance to be in - if standing still you would expect the legs to be straighter. If walking then one leg would be in front of the other, they wouldn't be both bent to the same angle.
The legs look very bright and reflective, like a shiny plastic surface.
It appears to be wearing some kind of head-dress, or elaborate mask/hat made out of an animal head, possibly a 'fancy dress' costume.

I question why there is only the one picture of it when it is supposed to be from a security video camera?
The original article gives a part-answer to this claiming it is from some kind of 'trail camera' which only takes a single image when movement is detected.
This does not appear to have movement.

I suspect it is some kind of hoax, perpetrated using some kind of stationary model, possibly to generate some interest in the zoo.
Would they have access to such an item? Maybe a display mannequin of an Apache/Sioux etc from a historical display?

1655058905268.png
 
If the leg on the right is a leg behind the other leg, then it could be straight, but just made to look at an odd 'bent' angle by the leg in front, and the line of trousers. So it could be a normal walking gait, just caught oddly.
 
Just to be clear—and with full acknowledgement of the 'face in a cloud' element here—are most of you perceiving a canine figure facing along the fence (i.e. head is viewed from the left side) or one moving parallel along the fence but turning to its left to look through the fence towards the camera?

Screenshot_20220613-081013_Samsung Internet.jpg
Screenshot_20220613-080906_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
From the image itself, the camera used appears to have been a Spypoint Link-Micro-S-LTE.

For anyone out there with better knowledge than me about trail cams - and that’s everybody - its specs are here.

lts trigger speed is listed as 0.4 of a second, suggesting that the flash fires to obtain an image 0.4 seconds after the IR sensor picks up the target’s body heat.

The user seems to be able to select whether the unit takes continuous images, a two-shot “burst” or - presumably - single shots per activation.

l wonder if other shots exist?

maximus otter
 
At first glance, I saw something vaguely like a badly drawn werewolf. The balance is all wrong and it appears to be leaning backwards. However, this is partly camera angle: the fence posts are also at a crazy angle.

Some posters above have zoomed in to various degrees. I can see different images depending on the magnification and sharpness. I can see, for example, one that looks like a koala on a tree stump, and in another, I see a person either carrying their dog, or with their dog jumping up. You may see other things. I think it's just pareidolia.

My best guess is it is someone walking and vaping, with the cloud of vapour blowing towards the camera and obscuring the person's head and upper body.
 
Yithian said:
are most of you perceiving a canine figure facing along the fence
Click to expand...
What I'm seeing is a figure outside the fence, posed to look like it is moving from the right of frame to the left of frame, even though the position of the legs would not support that movement.
The figure has some kind of elaborate headdress similar to the wolfskin I pictured above.
The headdress is looking to the left of frame too.
I am suspicious of the fact that the feet cannot be seen, conveniently masked by a small bush, which would suggest to me that it is fixed to a stand.
maximus otter said:
the flash fires to obtain an image 0.4 seconds after the IR sensor picks up the target’s body heat.
Click to expand...
Which again draws my suspicion - how did the figure reach the middle of the frame before the flash was triggered? Why is the figure not pictured as being at the extreme right of the frame where it would have presumably been first picked up?
Any security camera would surely be set in such a way that it ignores anything outside the compound?
Mikefule said:
The balance is all wrong and it appears to be leaning backwards. However, this is partly camera angle: the fence posts are also at a crazy angle.
Click to expand...
Indeed. The google streetview along the roads around Amarillo Zoo show an area that has very little development, being mainly flat, open land with few trees and/or bushes.
The fences you can see extend around the site with some car parking outside, but otherwise flat dusty grassland.
The image would appear to have been taken from one of the cameras fixed to the front of the building looking out toward their western car parking area.
 
Yithian said:
Just to be clear—and with full acknowledgement of the 'face in a cloud' element here—are most of you perceiving a canine figure facing along the fence (i.e. head is viewed from the left side) or one moving parallel along the fence but turning to its left to look through the fence towards the camera?

View attachment 56119View attachment 56120
Click to expand...
Initially, a canine figure facing along the fence (i.e. head is viewed from the left side) Then, one moving parallel along the fence but turning to its left to look through the fence towards the camera. Now I can see both! This means IMO a fair degree of pareidolia involved in whatever we're looking at.
 
Rather strange bend to those legs, looks very animal-like, and a tail appendage appearing in the back of the form.
 
Yithian said:
Just to be clear—and with full acknowledgement of the 'face in a cloud' element here—are most of you perceiving a canine figure facing along the fence (i.e. head is viewed from the left side) or one moving parallel along the fence but turning to its left to look through the fence towards the camera?
Click to expand...
I'm seeing someone wearing an animal skin like the one in Trevp666's post, walking from our right to left and somewhat away from the camera, facing forward. The turned-to-the-left-facing-the-camera perception is, in my opinion, an illusion caused in part by the chain link fence.

By the way, if we assume the fence poles are upright with respect to gravity and the camera is a bit rotated clockwise, we can straighten the image to show a more balanced stance:

22E99F51-C601-455E-8F61-E4E638BA2141upright.jpg


Edit: Changed "perpendicular to the ground" to "upright with respect to gravity". The ground seems to slope a bit.
 
ChasFink said:
I'm seeing someone wearing an animal skin like the one in Trevp666's post, walking from our right to left and somewhat away from the camera, facing forward. The turned-to-the-left-facing-the-camera perception is, in my opinion, an illusion caused in part by the chain link fence.

By the way, if we assume the fence poles are upright with respect to gravity and the camera is a bit rotated clockwise, we can straighten the image to show a more balanced stance:

View attachment 56146

Edit: Changed "perpendicular to the ground" to "upright with respect to gravity". The ground seems to slope a bit.
Click to expand...
Yes, now I see it facing away but looking back in a copy of the iconic Patty pose. Or preparing to moon the security camera. Face it, it's so bloody indistinct it could be a bit of blanket caught in the breeze.
 
And could be related to this one:

1655142538697.png


Why is it these photos are so elusive - is it the dim lighting, the blurriness, being so out of focus, taken at a distance with the wrong settings?
All one can really 'see' is perhaps some legs and arms, everything else is just guesswork.
And they always seem to be carrying something, just adding to the confusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
ChasFink said:
The ground seems to slope a bit.
Click to expand...
The area around the zoo appears to be very flat and level - I can't discern any slope.
The image appears to have been captured from a camera fixed to a building.
Where I have shown a yellow star and the two yellow lines is where I am guesstimating the placement of the camera and the area it covers.
In the lower picture I show that same green-roof building (which is apparently fairly new - it doesn't show on all the pictures taken from the road), also with a yellow star to show where I reckon the camera to be (ish).

1655142674202.png
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
And could be related to this one:

View attachment 56152

Why is it these photos are so elusive - is it the dim lighting, the blurriness, being so out of focus, taken at a distance with the wrong settings?
All one can really 'see' is perhaps some legs and arms, everything else is just guesswork.
And they always seem to be carrying something, just adding to the confusion.
Click to expand...
I guess because if they weren't elusive, ie if the lighting was good, the image was crisp and in focus...we'd be able to see exactly what it is and there would be no mystery. And I think the 'carrying something' is what confuses our pareidolia and stops us seeing a normal human shape - because the balance and therefore stance is 'wrong' and our brain fails to match it to human.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top