blessmycottonsocks
Antediluvian
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2014
- Messages
- 9,722
- Location
- Wessex and Mercia
This is (IMHO) the most convincing photo:
I generally don't watch videos that are linked, but in this case it looks intriguing.
It will be interesting to follow the story and see how the photos stand up to scrutiny,the weak link is the story and fine detail.There are enough resources online for a smart person to create these images and concoct this story, but it's very compelling, and I'd really like this to be true. Years of deeply held scepticism about thylacine survival isn't going to be overturned with a few pics and a sketchy anonamous story. But, I hope this prompts some proper investigation.
Yeah, it makes sense to me he's quite awkward and self conscious and doesn't want to be seeing images of himself online connected to what, if true, would be a major story. However, do not underestimate the ability of some people to concoct just such apparently self consistent personas when practicing devious antics such as faking cryptids. To my mind, it just as likely backs the story that it hangs together he's the sort of person who wouldn't want the attention, as it weakens his story that he's conveniently someone who wouldn't want the attention.The fact that the eye-witness was quite reluctant to share and seemed very socially awkward was a plus point for authenticity I thought. Not sure what to make of him getting his airports mixed up though.
If it is a hoax then this is either a digitally manipulated still from the old zoo footage or a taxidermists handiwork. Something about the eyes doesn't look right to me in these shots, they don't seem alive.
There’s eye shine,when your lamping an animal there’s always eye shine reflecting back,however there’s something offish about the story.Something about the eyes doesn't look right to me, they don't seem alive.
Yes.I generally find Galante's TV persona a tad annoying although he appears a bit more measured in this.
Is the guy's annonymity there so that if the questions get too difficult he can just vanish from the scene? Or alternatively if there is any credit taken for a hoax, he can take it but if it generates a lot of unpleasantness he can vanish?
I'd love it to be real but if the image is manipulated it should be easy to prove and the altenative is some sort of model/stuffed Thylacine. The open jaw pic worries me, it is one thing that would be very characteristic of a Thylacine and maybe one a faker would chose.
I'm more inclined towards hoax but I'm going to sit on the fence for a while until the experts get to it.
Is the guy's annonymity there so that if the questions get too difficult he can just vanish from the scene? Or alternatively if there is any credit taken for a hoax, he can take it but if it generates a lot of unpleasantness he can vanish?
Do tell, if you're able. I'd be genuinely interested.Believe me when I say, no one is interested enough to ask this guy any questions. Anyone with any knowledge of the species can see straight through these pictures. Whether they're manipulated from an original image or created by AI (in which case they're closer than I've seen before) there are screaming anatomical cues that at least two of the images were based on a dog, or based on something that was.
OK, I'll try be as concise as possible.Do tell, if you're able. I'd be genuinely interested.
Be as verbose as you like. I love an anatomical analysis.
I can't give you one of those as I'm not qualified, all I can say is why it doesn't match a confirmed thylacine image.
That's very kind of you to say.Well I'll take what I can get. It's not like I've been frequently checking the forum throughout the day hoping you'd give us your opinion or anything (I have, though).
But, I wasn't disappointed. That all makes sense. But someone clearly knows enough about thylacines to have done a reasonable job on these pictures, all the same.
I've never paid much attention to the guy but that's partly because the first I heard about him was in the context of criticism and that's pretty much the only time I ever hear anything about him. Probably, I should give him a chance instead of listening just to his critics, but there's only so much time in the world.That's very kind of you to say.
We've been aware for a while that AI was a potential problem, so experiments have been going (not by me I'm useless) to see what it can do, so far only rather unearthly images have resulted. So, if this AI it's better than what we've seen. But to get an idea of show successful it is as a thylacine picture it's worth noting that most people are very unimpressed.
I don't like to speculate but I think the reason the man appears disguised is because he's playing a prank on Gallante. I'm not sure I should say what I think of Gallante but it isn't flattering, I think someone may be trying to make a fool of him.
One of the photos shows a skinny tail protruding backwards and sloping down in a manner clearly intended to evoke images of thylacines, but which is uncharacteristic of canines. Also, perhaps more obviously, there's the gape in the profile photo. So I doubt it could be done that way. No, I think whoever sent these pictures to Galante was at least aware of manipulation of the photos (or, potentially, creation of whatever was photographed, but these days digital manipulation seems more likely).What about the possibility that a small group of Tasmanian practical jokers might be raising dogs of a certain shape, dyeing them in tiger stripes, and showing them off along roads to see what kind of reaction they can create?
Admittedly, it's a lot of work for a gag, but arguably less than wandering remote forests in North America wearing a high-end ape costume.
Photos and stories like this really have to be definitively located as well. We have no evidence these were taken in Tasmania. They could be from any dark backyard. In these days of photo manipulation, it's actually a safer bet to assume an extraordinary photo is not re
I want SO MUCH to believe this is real. Part of me counteracts arguments with - well, maybe the population of thylacines has just reached a level where they are starting to become 'visible'. If a very very small number had been left alone, perhaps they've now managed to outgrow their area and are more 'out and about' needing new territory. Inbreeding could have resulted in deformities and deviations from the 'norm'.
But the sceptical part of me, that knows what AI is capable of, is shouting fake.
But I want it to be real...
What about the possibility that a small group of Tasmanian practical jokers might be raising dogs of a certain shape, dyeing them in tiger stripes, and showing them off along roads to see what kind of reaction they can create?
Hell no, you can even get investment for it now if you call it de-extinction.I've been looking for a new hobby! Is this actually illegal? Don't want an illegal hobby but this really calls to me...