I came upon this drawing of a Chupacabras creature on a Facebook group and I immediately recognised it as one of the better attempts to convey the type. Here is my comment I made at that time:
Dale Drinnon BTW, I really like this chupacabras you drew: it is very likely what one of the living animals the reports are describing seriously looks like, without the sensationalistic exaggerations that usually go with reports of the type. Mind if I post it on my blog and did you want to make a statement to go with that?
Reply from Andy Finkle:
Reply from Andy Finkle:
Please share away Dale. Thanks for asking! Just put the name Andy Finkle there somewhere in your blog. I do not have a statement about it, it isn't based on a[ny individual] sighting or anything. I just wanted to make it reptilian with hind legs that are more mammalian in structure. Nothing too absurd (not that I do not enjoy absurd too). Thanks.
First thing I noticed that its posture had its legs stretched out long, body arched like a cat, and its body puffed up. Chameleons and some other lizards do that as a defensive bluffing posture
The elbows bent and the tail curled around was like this Basilisk lizard. Like the Basilisk lizard, the Chupacabras sees to have at least one flap (and probably two) at the back of its head. The could be a "Fin" like the Basilisk has only more jagged, but actually it is usually described as a row of spines and hence is more like the usual kind of iguana in that. The spines are likely longer in the males.
The Basilisk lizard also runs on its hind legs the way a Chupacabras does. The Chupacabras is very much larger than the basilisk, with the body the size say 1 foot to 18" at the shoulders on all-fours, 3 feet tall up and running and the whole length 6 to 8 feet long, and the really big ones twice that size.
That is going strictly by the descriptions and is the approximate size range as Komodo dragon
I think that's a very accurate drawing, too. However, I would give it a longer neck and shorter front limbs.
ReplyDeleteYou are probably right in that too. As the original artist said, it was a composite and there were liable to be a few inaccuracies in it yet.
ReplyDeleteI have also clarified my thoughts about endothermy. I now think that they are not endothermic in the exact same way that mammals and birds are, but they are instead more accurately referred to as inertial homeotherms. In other words, they are capable of maintaining a high metabolism, a high aerobic capacity, an active lifestyle, and a body temperature that is stable and significantly higher than the surrounding environment, due to their relatively large body size.
ReplyDeleteThis same theory has been proposed for the dinosaurs, as well.
In another post, you mentioned that the unknown bipedal iguanids are omnivores and insectivores. What animals do they eat other than insects? I would imagine that they might prey on larger animals, such as deer, since they are 10 feet long and are apparently about the size of a komodo dragon.
ReplyDeleteThey are stated to eat larger animals including sheep: my guess is rather that they eat carrion more than hunt fresh meat. This is an area where the allegations are very shaky so we don't know how much we can trust. The common supposition is that "Chupacabras" attack up to medium sized animals but eat very little of what they kill, mostly drinking blood and eating some internal organs. That is consistent with a scavenger more than a predator especially since they said NOT to eat much of the flesh of what they kill, if any of it.
ReplyDeleteWell, I guess they probably do scavenge corpses that they come across, but I can't imagine how such a large predator could survive on just insects and scavenging, without hunting larger animals.
ReplyDeleteReports of the larger ones usually say they are vegetaraian. They seem to become more herbivorous with maturity and with greater size. But that is partly on assuming all of the different reports are describing the same species.
ReplyDeleteBy the larger ones, do you mean the quadrupedal ones sighted in South America?
ReplyDeleteThe larger ones are full-quadrupeds in South America, at a smaller size they are "Camptosaurs" that are mostly on all fours but can still run on their hind legs. And the corresponding reports in North America seem to be some kinds of "Water Monsters"
ReplyDeleteWell, in my opinion, the mostly bipedal ones that are sighted in North America (NOT water monsters) that can be 8 to 10 feet long are probably active predators.
ReplyDeleteRight, that is your opinion. I have never been so definite in my opinion on the matter simply because we don't know definitely enough from the reports. SOME reports say so, others are not so sure, and the balance of the evidence is, they do not eat much out of the bodies of anything they are said to be feeding on. If they were true carnivores they should be eating more of the meaty bits off the bodies and that much is scarcely ever reported. they seem to pick over the corpses and only eat a little, certain select parts. We CAN infer they are eating chicken eggs because they fart out fumes which smell of sulfur.
ReplyDeleteTO Troodon Man: there was a Blogger glitch and your last comment was mistakenly deleted. That was not my intention and I apologise. You can either re-submit your comment, or might I suggest you put it on your blog as a positive statement of these reports mentioning true predatory behavior? That would certainly be more valuable to me and you both in having a good blog entry on it rather than hidden away as a comment on a blog. And once again, I apologise, Blogger has been buggy for me lately and I only just published a blog to find that Blogger had deleted ALL of my text and I had to add it in all over again!
ReplyDeleteThat's okay. I will write many more posts about these creatures on my blog once I get my computer fixed. No worries! :)
DeleteDale, do you think the legs of the creature in this painting are accurate?
ReplyDeleteNot especially, I think they are mostly generally indicated without specific details
ReplyDelete