Posted : April 2014
Author : Benjamin Radford
A Texas
couple has captured what is being called a baby chupacabra, the legendary
animal said to roam the countryside in search of blood. The "Ratcliffe
chupacabra," as it's been dubbed, was found Sunday in a tree on the
couple's property in Ratcliffe,
Texas. But upon closer
examination, it becomes clear that the mysterious creature couldn't possibly be
the legendary beast.
So, is this animal the elusive chupacabra? It's clear that
it's not, because video of the creature broadcast on KAVU clearly shows the
Ratcliffe chupacabra doesn't have the anatomical mouth features that would
allow it to suck blood, from goats or anything else. Like several other
"chupacabras" found in Texas
and elsewhere in recent years, a simple look at the mouth demonstrates that it
is physically impossible for the animals to suck blood. The mouth and jaw
structures of raccoons, dogs and coyotes prevent them from creating a seal
around their victims, and, therefore, physically prevents them from sucking the
blood out of goats or anything else. This Ratcliffe chupacabra was not seen nor
videotaped sucking blood from anything.
What is it?
So, if the mysterious animal is not a chupacabra, then what
is it?
The most likely answer is that it's a raccoon. Animals that
have lost most or all of their hair can be very difficult to identify
correctly, for the simple reason that people are not used to seeing the animals
without hair. Wildlife experts often see wild animals suffering from various
stages of sarcoptic mange - a skin disease that causes animals' hair to fall
out - but most people do not. Healthy raccoons are instantly recognizable by
their signature dark "bandit mask" coloring around their eyes. But
when their facial hair falls out due to disease, it becomes much more difficult
to identify the animal.
Then, you need to look at other features, including size,
behavior and anatomy. These features suggest that the Ratcliffe chupacabra is,
indeed, a raccoon. And though most "chupacabras" found in Texas have been
identified as canids (the zoological family that includes dogs, coyotes and
foxes), this is not the first raccoon misidentified as a chupacabra. In an
article in the March/April 2014 issue of "Skeptical Inquirer,"
another "chupacabra" found and photographed in the 1950s in Texas was
identified by Darren Naish, a vertebrate paleontologist and science writer from
the University of Southampton, as a mangy raccoon.
Raccoon |
Another clue about the animal's origins can be found in
where it was discovered: in a tree. This is a typical place to find a raccoon,
but unlikely for a dog or coyote. Furthermore, in a video of the animal, the
Ratcliffe chupacabra picks up food with its paws to eat. This behavior is also
typical of raccoons. The mysterious critter is currently being fed a diet of
corn and cat food, but if the creature truly is a chupacabra, that theory can
be easily tested: Put it in a pen with a goat or chicken, and see if it attacks
them and sucks out its blood. The reason that the Ratcliffe chupacabra has been called a
chupacabra is not that the mysterious animal's characteristics match those of
the legendary vampire - because they don't - but instead because those who
found it didn't know what else to call it, according to the book "Tracking
the Chupacabra: The Vampire Beast in Fact, Fiction, and Folklore"
(University of New Mexico Press, 2011).
The original chupacabra, whose image came from the 1995
science-fiction film "Species," was of a bipedal, spiky-backed
monster with glowing red eyes. That chupacabra has faded into folklore and
myth, but over the past decade, any strange animal whose identity is not
immediately obvious is often dubbed a "chupacabra." The word has
become a sort of catch-all term for weird animals, living or dead. It's not
surprising that the chupacabra continues to be found, whether it exists or not.
~Blog Admin~
No comments:
Post a Comment