Magical creatures?

Question

do you beleive in Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster,and Chupacabra

Answer 1

No, not really. Would be cool if they found one of them, but almost all the famous photos and sightings have turned out to be hoaxes, so I am not going to hold my breath.

If perhaps Bigfoot buried their dead, then we might not find any carcasses, but loch ness and chupa would have been found long ago if they existed. However, its strange that they live in areas populated by people and still remain unseen, unphotographed, etc........

Answer 2

They're not magical they're mythical.Chupacabra is just a silly peasant legend.It's been de-bunked by Skeptics and cryptozoologists.Bigfoot and Nessie,as much as I'd like to think they're out there.After all these years,with so many searching.It's more and more unlikely.

Answer 3

Of the three, I think Bigfoot is the most likely, but that's not saying much. Just from a science point of view, I don't see how a population of huge creatures can stay small enough to hide so successfully from modern man, yet be large enough to sustain a healthy gene pool. And then there's the total absence of skeletons or carcasses which is perplexing if they are real creatures. I'd love for Bigfoot to be real, but I doubt it.

Answer 4

no not really, they are probably just made up.

Answer 5

I believe that a lot of people have seen things like this that are unidentified...like UFOs are unidentified. There should be a name for these creatures..USC...Unidentified Scary Creatures . I also want to tell "toastette" that she has a good blog..very interesting...and pretty.

Answer 6

i believe the EL Chupacabra but thats it

Answer 7

yah, i think they are bleed throughs from different dimensions.

Answer 8

Yes And there are others...as far as Bigfoot is concerned I feel the reason none have been found or captured is because "They' are Interdimentional they're only visiting here[other world tourist] also others you might want to reaserch.....Owlman....Mothman

Answer 9

Bigfoot, yes. There are too many sightings for he not to exist. I think he is an extremely smart gorilla. Afterall, the gorilla was only discovered recently, in the early 1900's. And newq species are being discovered all of the time. Loch Ness, yeah. Lots of people have done sonar, but I am sure a fish knows it's home better than us.  Cuupacabra, not sure, who knows.  I do like like the interdimensional theory.  Could be either/or.

Answer 10

Bigfoot yes nessy maybe and chupacabra no

Answer 11

Yes,

Yes,

Yes.

and even more that are not listed.

If you are going for a list though what about Faeries and Unicorns, Ogre's and Gnomes.....

Included are links to search to your hearts content, and if not then cut and paste to Google.

Answer 12

First, I don't consider these creatures magical like they can teleport or turn invisible or cast magic spells or something.

Second, I consider the idea of them Mythical (just like the Gorilla, the Panda Bear, and the Tasmanian Wolf once were before they were all found).

Third, I think there is something there behind all of them.

For example Bigfoot might be an ape or bear that is a line of genetic mutations or maybe even a regular bear that is spotted/experienced under poor conditions.

Nessie, might be a giant eel (along the lines of the now confirmed mythical giant squid) that is again seen under less than perfect conditions. The darkness of the lake makes that a difficult search. We know that people don't judge size well in the air with no reference and I suspect this true in open water (true they have a shore for some reference).

Chupacabra, do you know how many breeds of dogs are officially recognized by the AKC alone? Imagine the amount if we included all mutts where breeding wasn't controlled by humans. It would not be unusual for some new breed to emerge from the wild that attacked animals when it was hungry. I believe Coyotes and Wolves do this.

However, all that said I don't think the explanation of the skeptics (can be explained by normal means so there is nothing to it so let's not examine any evidence) is acceptable in the quest for scientific knowledge.

I do think one would get further by not calling these monsters or magic creatures and just calling the animals and then setting out to investigate them like any other animal. Perhaps this get biologist and anthropologist interested enough to study it if they weren't worried about being known as monster (or magical creature) hunters.

If Bigfoot is a bear let's try to find out why so  many people that report seeing it say they know it wasn't a bear.

In other words let's use the tools of science not to debunk people's experience but to find out what they are experiencing.

Psi

Answer 13

You never know it is just someones opinion on something it can go 50-50

But my beliefs are that

Bigfoot- 78% Fake --- 32% Real

Loch Ness Monster 80% Fake ----- 20% Real

Chupacabra is something I DO belive it completly well at least

90% Real   --- 10'% Fake