• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
I thought the proportions and size looked strange, but the story implies it was very young. Is that a foot in the grass in the bottom left? It looks wrong, if it is...
 
OldTimeRadio said:
nataraja said:
New supposed Thylacine photo from Cryptomundo: http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-repo ... ine-photo/

The animal seems alive enough, a small mammal, possibly a marsupial, nesting/sleeping. I see no reason to even suspect that the photograph is in any way fraudulent.

But what in the world is supposed to make it a thylacine?

Erm, the typical thylacine like bands across the lower back and hips of the creature. Plenty of other creatures have similar shaped markings but the colouring in this photo is exactly the same as a thylacine. I must admit, they do look very convincing, but as stated earlier, without a head shot it could be anything from a stuffed creature to a live creature in disguise. But I really hope it is a real live thylacine.
Thylacines have always struck me as one of the likeliest 'supposedly extinct but actualy alive' creatures out there. They're small enough to remain very well hidden in the undergrowth, in a part of the world where there is plenty of prey animals to keep them going.
They were thought to become extinct in the early 1930s after the last captive creature called Benjamin died at Hobart Zoo, but during the 1945-46 David Fleay Tasmanian Tiger Expedition, one was almost caught in a trap, but escaped leaving definate footprints, hair and faeces samples which were later submitted to Dr. Pearson at the Tasmanian Museum who verified that beyond any reasonable doubt, they were from a thylacine.
 
The numbat looks as if in a similar partial view it would appear to have white stripes on a dark background, rather than dark stripes on orangish/tan... there isn't any white fur visible in the "thylacine" photo... however in size and shape it's a good match, so if they come in colour variations without the white, it could be a good possibility... not sure if they're found in Tasmania tho (of course there's no actual proof that this photo *was* taken in Tasmania)...
 
Maybe I'm all by my lonesome here, but the "stripes" on this putative thylacine strike me as nothing more than shadows cast by the tall grass.

Moreover, those same stripes seem to continue on the ground in front of the animal!
 
nataraja said:
of course there's no actual proof that this photo *was* taken in Tasmania

If I'm reading the Cryptomundo account correctly, this particular "Tasmanian Wolf" was photographed in AUSTRALIA
 
tastiger_wideweb__430x243.jpg


Thylacine photo constructed by professional photo-journalist Mike Bowers of the Sydney Morning Herald

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/03/25/1111692630684.html
 
Sorry, I'm not exactly certain what this blow-up is supposed to convey. The stripes you show are extremely interesting, but they also seem to be considerably behind the nesting/sleeping animal which was the original object of the photograph.

Since you published this enlargement without commentary, I have to ask you what you think this indicates.

Thank you.
 
Maybe I'm all by my lonesome here, but the "stripes" on this putative thylacine strike me as nothing more than shadows cast by the tall grass.
I don't think they are - i can't see them continuing on the ground, and the tapered shape of them doesn't look like shadows to me - also, there aren't any "matching" grass blades to cast them...

IMO the stripes are "real" (ie really on the animal, and made up of darker hair), but there's no way of telling if they are natural or painted/dyed on...

DougalLongfoot's photo looks to me like a slightly blurred and tinted pic of an okapi...
 
nataraja said:
Maybe I'm all by my lonesome here, but the "stripes" on this putative thylacine strike me as nothing more than shadows cast by the tall grass.
I don't think they are - i can't see them continuing on the ground, and the tapered shape of them doesn't look like shadows to me - also, there aren't any "matching" grass blades to cast them...

IMO the stripes are "real" (ie really on the animal, and made up of darker hair), but there's no way of telling if they are natural or painted/dyed on...

DougalLongfoot's photo looks to me like a slightly blurred and tinted pic of an okapi...

I agree. Any artist will tell you that shadows need a light source and something to cast the shadow. The bands on the 'alledged' thylacine are quite evenly spaced which means that if it is the shadow of 'grass blades' then the grass that's casting the shadow is growing in an evenly spaced line of single leaf blades, something which just doesn't happen. It could be a fence maybe but the bands follow the contour of the backbone and rear, so if it is a shadow, it'll have to be something like a garden rake, lined up perfectly to cast the shadow in the exact place to make it look like banding.
My conclusion is that this must be either the real thing, a disguised creature, a doctered photo or a computerised graphic image of some sort.
 
Scientists have digitally crash-tested the predator performance of two Australian icons - the feral dingo dog and the extinct Tasmanian "tiger".

The team built sophisticated computer models of the animals' skulls to compare their feeding behaviour.

The study showed that although the tiger was the bigger, more efficient biter, the dingo was better equipped to deal with prey that struggles.

The results are reported in a Royal Society journal.

The researchers say they may help explain why the tiger disappeared.

It has long been suggested that the feral dog Canis lupus dingo out-competed the tiger (Thylacinus cynocephalus) for food, and was a major factor in pushing the marsupial carnivore off mainland Australia.

The new analysis, which simulates the bite forces and stress patterns applying to dingo and thylacine skulls in the act of killing, confirms there would have been substantial overlap in their choice of prey.

Computer comparison

"What this study suggests is that the thylacine had a much more restricted range of prey," explained Dr Stephen Wroe from the University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney.

"The dingo, on the other hand, is adept at taking anything from invertebrates through to kangaroos. The dingo can also be a social hunter and it's most unlikely that the thylacine was; and we know that the more specialised an animal is, the more vulnerable it is."


DINGO WILD DOG
Dingo (SPL)
Descended from a domestic dog brought in from Indonesia
The social dingo is a pack hunter but will also scavenge
Females only breed once a year, having four or five pups
The team used a technique known as finite element analysis, which is also employed by engineers to predict distortion and "failure" in load-bearing materials, such as the metal in the body and wings of an aeroplane.

The researchers took CT (X-ray) scans of the animals' skulls and then built high-resolution digital models of each, incorporating realistic representations of details such as the change in bone material across skeletal structures.

They then loaded the models with forces and analysed the visual read-out. The "hotter" the colours appeared on the screen, the greater the mechanical stresses and strains experienced by the skull, jaw, teeth and cranial muscles.

"We are able to simulate various predatory behaviours - biting, pulling and tearing - to see the patterns of stress and strain. With two skulls that are performing the same behaviour, you can then tell which performs best under particular circumstances," said Dr Wroe.

Reduced size

The approach gave insights into the feeding behaviours of the two animals. For the dingo, its eating habits are well known; but for the extinct thylacine, the observational data is sparse.

The study demonstrates, the team says, that despite being armed with a more powerful and efficient bite and having larger energy needs than the dingo, the thylacine would have been restricted to eating relatively small prey. On the other hand, the dingo's stronger head and neck anatomy allows it to subdue large prey as well, they add.


TASMANIAN 'TIGER'
Tiger, AP
The thylacine was a large marsupial carnivore
It ranged widely from Papua New Guinea to Tasmania
Many scientists doubt cloning technology can bring it back
"The thylacine has a greater bite force than the dingo but its skull becomes more stressed than the dingo under conditions that simulate the influence of struggling prey," explained Dr Wroe.

"In terms of getting the balance between the energy expended in catching prey versus the amount of energy you get from those food items, the thylacine was sailing close to the wind."

He added: "If the thylacine had been better able to hunt large prey, such as adult kangaroos and emus, as well as smaller species, then it would have faced less competition from the smaller dingo."

Complex factors

The dingo was introduced by humans to mainland Australia little more than 4,500 years ago and spread rapidly across the continent - only failing to reach Tasmania because rising sea levels had inundated the Bass Strait some 6,000 years earlier.

This march across Australia is matched by the retreat of the tiger to its last island refuge.

It was there that European settlers then persecuted the animal, believing it to be a wolf-like creature that killed sheep. The last tiger died in a zoo in 1936.

Scientists stress that the tiger's removal from the mainland was not solely down to the dingo. Climate change, and a shift in Aboriginals' land-use and hunting practices would also have been factors.

Dr Wroe conducted the thylacine-dingo study with Karen Moreno (UNSW) and University of Newcastle colleagues, Colin McHenry and Philip Clausen.

Their paper is published in Proceedings B of the Royal Society.

Source
 
I agree with everything that is said here but would also add that the Tiger may have also suffered due to outright agression from the dingo. If it was a pack animal then it would have out numbered the tiger. Size don't mean diddly squat, Polar Bears are much larger than Grizzlies but they are easily put to flight if they meet one in the wild.
 
The Thylacine was very unfortunate I think, not only did the Dingo out compete it, but it was also 'demonised' by man, it was, like so many other animals around the world (the wolf in western Europe springs to mind) made out to be the devil incarnate and persucuted because of this; another great animal species that the human race has almost certainly caused the extinction of, either directly or indirectly. It is so sad that our success is also our downfall, we loose out on so much due to our success as a species, biologically we are incredibally successful, so can we really blame ourselves for all of this destruction? Well the answer of any educated person will almost always be 'yes' we should surely be advanced enough by now to realise the impact that we have on our planet. I will stop now, I am going a bit off-track on this one hehe
 
Well I've just driven a week on the East Coast and inland of Tassie - sadly, not one Thyalicine in sight - not that I really expected to see one.

But I for one believe they are still out there - because they are my favourite "extinct" animal and I want them to be out there.

Good luck - you certainly have my vote!
 
Just wondering if you included any plans to check the mainland, where there have been sightings of thylacines over the years? Of course, a wild population would have to have survived since the arrival of the dingo some 20-40 thousand years ago without being found in that time. Then again, an eccentric millionaire could have taken some to his homestead in Victoria as part of a private zoo...

Yeah, probably better to stick to Tasmania.
 
I think you'd have a better chance of catching a Yowie than a Thyalicine on the main land! :lol:
 
I think you'd have a better chance of catching a Yowie than a Thyalicine on the main land

Actually a lot of the most promising sightings have come from the mainland. I think there is a suggestion that thylacines may have been released in Wilson's Promontory in Victoria in the late 19th century... although of course how they might have survived last year's bush fires there is another matter. :(

And wasn't a dead thylacine found in a cave in (?) WA a few years ago?
 
There was, but it turned out to be 3000+ years old, but really well preserved just like the sloth skin in Patagonia.
 
Ah, I hadn't heard that - that's a real shame. I think the last thing I read suggested that it might be more recent.
 
Another shame is when you see eye witnesses interviewed who sound really impressive, then you see foot casts and they only have 4 toes. The only time I've seen it done right was the paws photo of the Thylacine supposedly accidentally shot in the 90's, shown once on one of the myriad documentaries I've seen. Be nice to know if that was ever disproved.
 
The tazzie wolf has been see by a park ranger and a zoologist. Of all the cryptids most likley to exist (and i think there are quite a few that do) this has to be number one.
 
Who was the zoologist, and when was it. I know about Hans Naarding in 1982. Another reliable sighting would be wonderful
 
That Park Ranger sighting happened in 1995 - I remember seeing the guy on TV calmly stating that he'd seen one. Then a day or so later, he and some "higher uppers" held a press conference denying that he'd seen one and saying that he was now convinced that is wasn't a tiger.

The press grilled him a bit further and they said something to the effect that even if they'd seen one, they wouldn't say so as not to attract some hunters after the ultimate trophy.

My guess is that at least some park rangers know that they are still out there, but won't say where so as not to endanger them. If true, it's a good thing, IMO.
 
Quake42 said:
Actually a lot of the most promising sightings have come from the mainland. I think there is a suggestion that thylacines may have been released in Wilson's Promontory in Victoria in the late 19th century... although of course how they might have survived last year's bush fires there is another matter. :(

I looked a bit more into that and you have a point there.

Here's a link to a story from 2003 from the SMH - quite interesting. I wonder if these sightings are still happening?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/ ... 65660.html
 
Thing is if the Thylacine was rediscovered it would be such a high profile boost for the Tasmanian wildlife authorities/conservation lobbies, that it would be hard to imagine them suppressing any information relating to it.
 
Hans Naarding was whome i was refering to. I still think this is the best sighting of a cryptid ever.
I actualy think that the thylacine is more elusive than endangered. I think there may be far more thylacines around that Javan rhinos for example.
When under heavy persecution only the most wary would have survived. It was man made 'natural selection'.
 
I definitely agree on the first and last points, and hope for the second. But I want to ask you as someone who knows, if anything ever came of those paw photos.
 
As far as i know nothing ever did. It seems as if every time what seems like good evidence is uncovered then it seems to vaish or be forgotten about. Case in point the 6 foot long cat shot in Australia that turned out to be a feral. None of the scientists involved seemed to be intrested in following it up.
 
lordmongrove said:
As far as i know nothing ever did. It seems as if every time what seems like good evidence is uncovered then it seems to vaish or be forgotten about. Case in point the 6 foot long cat shot in Australia that turned out to be a feral. None of the scientists involved seemed to be intrested in following it up.

Why would they though? It was just a bloody big feral cat (which is exactly what I think the "Penrith Panther is, but that's a different story).

The question is for me, if someone had hard evidence of a living Tassie Tiger, would it be hushed up or made public? I really don't know.
 
Back
Top