Home » Eyes Rolling, Just For Fun, Media » Hoax, Arthur Spiderwick, or True Chimera

Hoax, Arthur Spiderwick, or True Chimera

In case you missed it in the news or in SciAm:

Mystery of the Montauk Monster is making the headlines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arthur Spiderwick’s Spitting Gargoyle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man Bear Pig Chimera (art)

 

 

 

 

 

You decide.  :)

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

12 Responses to Hoax, Arthur Spiderwick, or True Chimera

  1. 1

    it’s a demon, no doubt!!! Head for the hills.

  2. It could be an evolutionary oddity, but where is its common ancestor?

  3. It looks like a missing link. Crap, evolution has been proved now.

  4. A question to all of the US contributors (capable of writing a new blog entry): What is your position on the idea that a lot can be learned about evolution in embryology?

    It doesn’t pass the common sense test, and aside from derision and bald assertions, I can’t figure out the scientific reasoning behind the idea.

  5. Verdict: Raccoon

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,396182,00.html

    Also, off-topic. Real stem cell research in action. Adult stem cell research:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,396001,00.html

    I say we get more funding for this and less for embryonic, based solely on actual results.

  6. Perhaps a long lost forerunner of the raccoon…or maybe its a mtauted raccon from the movie “Prophecy”

  7. This is surely the genetic ancestor of the ACLU.

  8. It looks a bit like Dr. Evil’s cat “Mr. Bigglesworth” from “Austin Power, International Man of Mystery”.

    http://www.dmko.info/evil1.jpg

  9. You know, regardless of whether universal common ancestry is true or not- one thing that these pictures illustrate well is the obvious reality of species of living things here on planet earth… (incidentally the only planet know to produce life)…

    living things that don’t seem to be mutated into strange partial creatures, mixtures of all various other phyla. That is the intermediate living organisms that we do know of seems to look and be almost exactly like their ancestors and offspring. Where are the bat/cats? The fish birds? The bear beetles? The dog/ people?

    What about scary looking swamp creatures and such?..

    Nature seems not only to select for function and fecundity, but also for beauty symmetry, consistency and order. The point is you don’t have to be a born again religious literal fundamentalist zealot to think that all life forms emerged independently as opposed to interconnected linear progression. The world is as it seems and DE is not a theory that we easily come to realize via our innate intuitions-

    The probabilistic resources (or lack there of) required to support a non-designed universe and tree of life however – IS a problem that DOES intuitively present itself- and so we must deal with that before we can accept a tree of life that is non-guided.

    This planet, it seems, until adequately falsified via scientific evidence, is still the privileged one…

    and no stupid and ugly pictures are going to change that.

  10. I suspect the only evolution here is the evolution of Adobe Photoshop 1.0 to 2.0 to 3.0 etc.

  11. William Wallace wrote:

    It looks like a missing link. Crap, evolution has been proved now.

    METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL.

  12. 12

    Haha, yes, ManBearPig was our April Fool’s joke here at ThinkGene.com. You’d be surprised how many people write to us complaining that they think its real…

Leave a Reply