What Cryptids are the most likely to exist

[all]

You mean it was known to westerners before 1920 Natives knew it for long time. Mngwa is very rare and white people started to settle Africa long after the mngwa was already well known to natives but before time that whites started to pay attention to less common African beasts it was not known in the west. 


Mngwa is grey striped with black stripes. Leopon looks completely different than mngwa. Leopon's in the wild might actually be rarer than mngwa if mngwa would be new species.  

And most importantly Mngwa does not behave like Lion leopard cross. 

Natives are brave enough to pull lions tail while unarmed. 

They are terrified of mngwa even if armed. 

[all]

I meant not known to westerners before 1920 

[all]

Further more Lion leopard hybrid would rarely be a size of a lion. Most of them would be between size of the lion and leopard. Larger ones could be as large as a small lion because of hybrid vigor. But they will newer be the size of the largest lion (like average mngwa)and definitely not size of a donkey ( like large mngwa)

[Infinity Blade]

You mean it was known to westerners before 1920 Natives knew it for long time.

No, I think he's saying the natives themselves did not consider it real until the 1920s. Before then it was just a mythical creature to them.

The Mngwa is a legendary creature in native folklore like the unicorn is to us. It was not considered a real animal until the 1920's.

[kekistani]

Jun 5, 2020 18:01:53 GMT 5 all said:

Further more Lion leopard hybrid would rarely be a size of a lion. Most of them would be between size of the lion and leopard. Larger ones could be as large as a small lion because of hybrid vigor. But they will newer be the size of the largest lion (like average mngwa)and definitely not size of a donkey ( like large mngwa)

Since there has only been one sighting of a Mngwa (discounting leftover cadavers they supposedly leave) nobody can say what is average and large. Given that spotted and striped cats can exhibit extremely varied pelage, it is most parsimonious to assign the Mngwa as a leopard with aberrant size and pelt. Given that this single Mngwa is the only one that has actually been SEEN killing people (and not just being blamed for deaths that can be attributed to lions or normal leopards) and that it appeared in Lindi several times before, it appears that this leopard became a habitual maneater, perhaps because its pelt left it at a disadvantage n the wild.

[Ceratodromeus]

Not to throw a damp rag on the "the natives knew about it" argument, but the natives of pretty much every country have a deep history of folklore and things of that nature surrounding these "cryptids". It doesn't make them any more legitimate.

[kekistani]

Jun 6, 2020 1:38:43 GMT 5 Ceratodromeus said:

Not to throw a damp rag on the "the natives knew about it" argument, but the natives of pretty much every country have a deep history of folklore and things of that nature surrounding these "cryptids". It doesn't make them any more legitimate.

Well, there's also the major issue that they considered the Mngwa as purely mythical, not as a real animal.

[all]

I read  three encounters of Mngwa one in 1920 one 1937 and one when mngwa entered a man's hut. Natives describe it as size of a donkey. Just because white man saw it only a couple of times does not mean that native description of it is incorrect. one of the native hunters was badly mauled by mngwa. Hichens described the man as a skillful 
and brave hunter who would not mistake anything else for mngwa and as Hichens  describes the hunter would not get anything by lying and his livelihood as a hunter depended on being honest. 


While mngwa does exist in stories as well. Where it is described in fanciful ways. It also exist in hunting songs which do not embellish mngwa they simply number three giant cats of Africa, Lion, Leopard, and Mngwa. All three stated as separate species.

We make stories as well for example those of werewolves but I'm pretty sure that there are hunting stories and songs about actual wolves as well. Werewolves are imaginary wolves are not. Same is happening here.


As far as comparing Mngwa to unicorn. If you think mngwa is as unrealistic as unicorn which unlike mngwa no one seen (other than in children's ferry tales)and based on its description is quite a bit less likely to be a real creature ( horse with a horn on its nose vs new species of cat which has pretty much similar features as other large cats) then nothing that I can say can convince you of entertaining mngwa's existence even if you are actually presented with one in a zoo. 

I'm not saying that mngwa is definitely real but unlike you I'm willing to consider the possibility. And I believe that there is actually a good chance that it does exist. 

[Infinity Blade]

As far as comparing Mngwa to unicorn. If you think mngwa is as unrealistic as unicorn which unlike mngwa no one seen (other than in children's ferry tales)and based on its description is quite a bit less likely to be a real creature ( horse with a horn on its nose vs new species of cat which has pretty much similar features as other large cats) then nothing that I can say can convince you of entertaining mngwa's existence even if you are actually presented with one in a zoo.

You don't understand the point that was brought up regarding unicorns. It was said earlier in this thread that the natives themselves thought the Mngwa was a purely mythical creature (at least up until a certain point), in a similar way to how we view unicorns as complete fantasy. There's a difference between that and saying "The Mngwa is as unrealistic as the unicorn", which I don't believe anyone here is willing to go so far as to assert. Although, in the absence of strong, reliable data and evidence for a third unknown species of large African cat being responsible for these sightings and killings, I'm inclined to think the Mngwa, as taken at face value from descriptions and myths, is not real.

[kekistani]

Jun 6, 2020 19:19:04 GMT 5 all said:

I read  three encounters of Mngwa one in 1920 one 1937 and one when mngwa entered a man's hut. Natives describe it as size of a donkey. Just because white man saw it only a couple of times does not mean that native description of it is incorrect. one of the native hunters was badly mauled by mngwa. Hichens described the man as a skillful 
and brave hunter who would not mistake anything else for mngwa and as Hichens  describes the hunter would not get anything by lying and his livelihood as a hunter depended on being honest. 


While mngwa does exist in stories as well. Where it is described in fanciful ways. It also exist in hunting songs which do not embellish mngwa they simply number three giant cats of Africa, Lion, Leopard, and Mngwa. All three stated as separate species.

We make stories as well for example those of werewolves but I'm pretty sure that there are hunting stories and songs about actual wolves as well. Werewolves are imaginary wolves are not. Same is happening here.


As far as comparing Mngwa to unicorn. If you think mngwa is as unrealistic as unicorn which unlike mngwa no one seen (other than in children's ferry tales)and based on its description is quite a bit less likely to be a real creature ( horse with a horn on its nose vs new species of cat which has pretty much similar features as other large cats) then nothing that I can say can convince you of entertaining mngwa's existence even if you are actually presented with one in a zoo. 

I'm not saying that mngwa is definitely real but unlike you I'm willing to consider the possibility. And I believe that there is actually a good chance that it does exist. 

The ONLY sightings of a Mngwa occured in 1920 (that's the hut invasion you describe). All sightings and the 1920 attacks correspond to an individual man eating leopard with abberant size and pelage. OTher Mngwa killings were done by people capitalizing on native fear of the mythical beast to make money. The 1937 attacks were simply attributed to the beast, it was not seen.

Fun fact: Given that the Unicorn is described as something like a hairy rhino in eastern myth (probably based off of thawed out wooly rhino carcasses), the original (i.e. Vicious, man-killing, hairy and gigantic) Unicorn is grounded in more fact than the Mngwa as a third unidentified great cat in africa.

[Ceratodromeus]

Jun 6, 2020 19:19:04 GMT 5 all said:

I'm not saying that mngwa is definitely real but unlike you I'm willing to consider the possibility. And I believe that there is actually a good chance that it does exist. 

Based on:
- folklore of natives
- "accounts" of sightings without anything remarkable, all of which are dated as having happened  a century ago.
-hearsay

Not a strong nor logical argument for the existence of a novel species of large predatory felid.

[all]

As far as mngwa is concerned it seems that information you read is quite different than the ones I read so Honestly I don't know what to make of that.

But If you believe that Mngwa is unrealistic then the Tasmanian creature (I don't mean thylacine which I also think there is a possibility that it does exist) you are going to think I'm completely insane or incompetent to believe even though it was studied by a biologist from Tasmania Bruce Mollison.

What he said was

" Body has color of elephant ivory, resembling consistency of rubber and is impossible to destroy neither by fire or different chemical substances. It however is not rubber nor body in a normal sense of the word or a fruit pulp. It is something that cannot be assigned to any kind of known system" 

Now I don't know if I should have a reason to doubt this biologist but I haven't found one so far 



    

[Infinity Blade]

"studied by a biologist"

You mean a biologist just said a bunch of words? If it was studied, where are all the peer-reviewed scientific articles, rigorous scholarly books (which may use peer-reviewed articles for reference), or any sort of hard data supporting the existence of this Tasmanian creature as described? I mean...

"Body has color of elephant ivory, resembling consistency of rubber and is impossible to destroy neither by fire or different chemical substances. It however is not rubber nor body in a normal sense of the word or a fruit pulp. It is something that cannot be assigned to any kind of known system"

...what? You have every reason to doubt these claims, whether they're from a biologist or not. Extraordinary. Claims. Require. Extraordinary. Evidence.

[all]

Like I said before we could talk all day and never convince each other. 

Now you think that burden of proof is 100% up to me. 

But the question is what cryptid you think exists. Not what cryptid you know exists

If we were 100% sure that the animal in question exists it would not be called a cryptid

Now in your statements you didn't call me incompetent or retarded. Thank you for that

But even if you didn't say it directly It was implied. 

And you will probably say my statement in the your tread of ridiculous statements. Your wall of shame or something of that nature.

But I don't really care about your opinion or anybody else here (maybe with exception of dinosauria) just like you don't care about my.

Kid I was called retarded crazy and not fit to live on this planet many times. It was no more true then then it is now. 

You are very knowledgeable and logical probably more so than me. But logic and intelligence are not necessarily same thing.

Now I know you would never help me with anything.

But if you ever had a any kind of wish to show me mercy don't

or expect any from me 

But speaking of implying bad will without actually saying it.

Maybe one day I can show you the dark side of the moon.  

 

[creature386]

I feel guilty about the paragraph thing since I told you about this. You don't need a new paragraph for every sentence, just when you change the topic (maybe watch how others are doing it for reference9.

As for him disagreeing with you, well, we are all entitled to our opinions, but we are also entitled to explain why we disagree with others. Even if such debates change no-ones' mind, they often increase the knowledge of the participants and provide a show for spectators. While you don't have to argue with Infinity, at least understand that he has reasons for what he does. And trust me, we very rarely shame fellow forumers and you almost certainly won't be publicly shamed for what you wrote.