+- RepairmanJack.com Forums (https://repairmanjack.com/forum)
+-- Forum: F. Paul Wilson Related (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: F. Paul Wilson Main Forum (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: mantauk monster (/thread-2984.html)
mantauk monster - Bluesman Mike Lindner - 08-04-2008
Lysistrata Wrote:Could it be a Sphynx Cat, bloated by decomposition?
http://www.moggies.co.uk/breeds/sphynx.html
Have we ever seen such a cat in that state?
mantauk monster - t4terrific - 08-04-2008
Lysistrata Wrote:Could it be a Sphynx Cat, bloated by decomposition?
http://www.moggies.co.uk/breeds/sphynx.html
It just looks like a modified corpse to me.
The fact that the photographer maintains that the skeleton still exists, but is unavailable for examination pretty well convinces me of another hoax.
It may be a merpig though.
mantauk monster - Legion - 08-04-2008
I'm just hoping its a baby Rakosh that finally washed ashore after the freighter went down.
mantauk monster - Bluesman Mike Lindner - 08-04-2008
Legion Wrote:I'm just hoping its a baby Rakosh that finally washed ashore after the freighter went down.
Could never be! Baby raks are cuter.
mantauk monster - KRW - 08-04-2008
t4terrific Wrote:It just looks like a modified corpse to me.
The fact that the photographer maintains that the skeleton still exists, but is unavailable for examination pretty well convinces me of another hoax.
It may be a merpig though.
Your more than likely right on this. But it does remind me of a short story Dean Koontz wrote about that dealt with genetic manipulation. (Yeah, there were a few) The body looks more like a mole with no hair on it, but the head has that beak on it which makes me think of turtles. But it's not a turtle, the shell is it's skin on the top and bottom and the shell can't be separated with out doing major harm to the body. I also wouldn't consider it an aquatic animal based on it's feet. They don't look big enough and I can't tell if it's feet are webbed. The tail also wasn't large enough to be used for propulsion. The feet look more like the feet I've seen on moles and rats.
mantauk monster - Ken Valentine - 08-05-2008
Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:In your place, Ken, I'd ask, "Please go on, Mike. Share your Fortean knowledge with us." But of course, you aren't interested in learning. Much easier to type "Clueless Mike" than ponder unfamiliar concepts.If your Fartean knowledge is anything like the rest of your "knowledge," then I could not care less. And the idea that an "anomalous creature," which seems to have been found washed up on the beach -- in an unalterable state of DEAD -- wouldn't let someone take photo's of it, would definitely fall under the category of an "unfamiliar concept." It would also fall under the category of "laughable."
Quote:Poor old Gunny Ken! His slide into dribbling confusion continues unchecked. Oh, the humanity!:cryin:Whose dribbling confusion? :hand:
Ken V.
mantauk monster - t4terrific - 08-06-2008
Ken Valentine Wrote:If your Fartean knowledge is anything like the rest of your "knowledge," then I could not care less. And the idea that an "anomalous creature," which seems to have been found washed up on the beach -- in an unalterable state of DEAD -- wouldn't let someone take photo's of it, would definitely fall under the category of an "unfamiliar concept." It would also fall under the category of "laughable."
Whose dribbling confusion? :hand:
Ken V.
I don't think they like you. I'm sure you'll make it though.
mantauk monster - Bluesman Mike Lindner - 08-11-2008
Ken Valentine Wrote:If your Fartean knowledge is anything like the rest of your "knowledge," then I could not care less. And the idea that an "anomalous creature," which seems to have been found washed up on the beach -- in an unalterable state of DEAD -- wouldn't let someone take photo's of it, would definitely fall under the category of an "unfamiliar concept." It would also fall under the category of "laughable."
Whose dribbling confusion? :hand:
Ken V.
So if you don't know about a subject, it's unimportant. Especially if I know about it. Because any concept of mine is, by definition, worthless.
Congratulations, Ken. I didn't think it was possible, but you've done it.
You've bettered Stalin in outright craziness.
mantauk monster - KRW - 08-12-2008
Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:So if you don't know about a subject, it's unimportant. Especially if I know about it. Because any concept of mine is, by definition, worthless.
Congratulations, Ken. I didn't think it was possible, but you've done it.
You've bettered Stalin in outright craziness.
Ah, you two fight too much.
What do you think this is Mike? (layman's terms please.)
mantauk monster - Ken Valentine - 08-12-2008
Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:So if you don't know about a subject, it's unimportant.And you know all about this Montauk "Monster" I suppose.
So tell me. How can this dead critter prevent people from taking photo's of it?
Quote: Especially if I know about it.So, tell us all about this critter.
Quote: Because any concept of mine is, by definition, worthless.No. It's because you tell untruths so often that I no longer believe a thing you say.
Quote:Congratulations, Ken. I didn't think it was possible, but you've done it.Taken the title away from you have I?
You've bettered Stalin in outright craziness.
Ken V.