Dead Monster Washes Ashore in Montauk. What is it?
It’s fucking ugly.
It’s called photoshop.
[quote]rsg wrote:
It’s called photoshop.[/quote]
Proof?
It is clearly either Zuul or Gozer from GhostBusters.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
rsg wrote:
It’s called photoshop.
Proof?[/quote]
This is the first i’ve heard about it, but if it was proven to be real by experts surely i would have heard about it in in the news by now - on TV or on a decent news websites at least
That’s chuppacabras cousin.
Probably a movie promotion. They kept showing it on the news last night but I didn’t feel like waiting around to find out. If it was serious shit it would’ve been breaking news.
Breaking news? probabaly not there have been many new species of animals found and I have never even read stories or heard about them on the news, true this shit is pretty weird looking but, still.
Just like this is real too?
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
Dead Monster Washes Ashore in Montauk. What is it?[/quote]
Judging from the neck size, I’d say Drivethruherpes must have topped himself.
I think they’re called dogs.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
rsg wrote:
It’s called photoshop.
Proof?[/quote]
I think the burden of proof is on the person claiming this is some kind of monster, not on the person offering other plausible explanations.
No way to tell…could be photoshop, could be a hybrid, could be anything.
From mahalo.com
"It has been suggested that the photo of this monster may be part of an unknown viral marketing campaign, possibly for the forthcoming Cartoon Network series, Cryptids Are Real.2 Another theory postulates that the creature escaped from nearby Plum Island, location of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center.3
Montauk was home to the alleged “Montauk Project,” a government operation developing methods and techniques for psychological warfare.4
During a conversation about the Gawker image on FriendFeed, it was suggested there may be a connection between the Montauk dead monster and this research, which is sometimes thought to be a continuation of the infamous Philadelphia Experiment."
[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
xXSeraphimXx wrote:
rsg wrote:
It’s called photoshop.
Proof?
I think the burden of proof is on the person claiming this is some kind of monster, not on the person offering other plausible explanations.[/quote]
You would think so wouldn’t you.
Well, looks liek someone tried to grill it. If it doesn’t taste good, why do I care?
I would Jason Elam that bitch into traffic
Its like no one has ever seen a turtle without a shell before.
[quote]shizen wrote:
its like no one has ever seen a turtle without a shell before. [/quote]
I didn’t know turtles had teeth.
[quote]shizen wrote:
its like no one has ever seen a turtle without a shell before. [/quote]
that’s what i thought as well. It’s curious and highly unlikely that there wouldn’t be tears of some sort on the back of the spine area, however, seeing as the shell is an integral part of the turtle’s spine.