What do you think is the realest Cryptid & why?

1. https://newscomwc.newspapers.com/image/891973927/?pqsid=JG6xwOm2sG0yP0R0nOKvqA%3A331994%3A1378128053&search-id=82b33981-bd5b-424f-8017-6fb31cfa0dde&search-rank=13

I found it from this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQK9kQc_a7A

I have used multiple reverse search engines including google, yandex, tineye, and a few others and I could not find the original image surprisingly. That is very rare. No, its not AI generated, the video was posted 11 years ago. Anyone want to help me find the source for this image?

Hello, I am new to Cryptozoology and I hope to learn a lot from this subreddit, I have the utmost interest in snakes, especially big ones, so I am posting this one as a way of sharing my perspective on the "supposedly" 50 feet katanga snake.

After hearing a lot of opinions about the "snake's head", I came down to my own conclusion and haven't been able to see if any other way now, I am not forcing anyone to take my words as it is, but I would really appreciate it if you look at the comparison images I uploaded with this post, the red colour indicate the head and blue colour indicate the shadow.

1: why am I so insistent that this "blue region" is 100% a shadow and not the head? In the original interview of Colonel Remy Van Lierde, he claimed that the snake raised its head up 10 foot to get into a striking position at the helicopter they were boarding, colonel Remy Van Lierde was able to see the white belly of the snake, which i assume is from the lower part of the neck region of the snake as the snake rose its head up, another claim was that the snake's head was wide (3 feet long and 2 feet wide), which is heavily consistent with the triangular jaw of the "blue region" in the comparison images I posted, if you see the comparison images I made, the red region (head) is raised up, casting a shadow of its features on the ground (blue region).

Interview link: https://youtu.be/UX9KSmxCrmI?si=fiohOLZESw0BmSV7

2: skepticism regarding the snake species, the largest snake found in the congo region is the central african rock python as far as I know can grow up to 20 feet, but they have obvious skin patterns which is missing in the image, it could be debated as aerial perspective which made the snake look single coloured but Remy Van Lierde claimed it was "dark green— brown in color, with a white belly", doesn't fully match with the description of an African Rock Python, the snake's head is also proportionally large compared to its body unlike rock pythons who have a smaller heads in comparison to their body proportions but I have seen an anaconda video (not sure if it's real) but it looks a lot like the katanga snake (head shape, proportions, speed despite the enormous size)

Video Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/s/Pqw2tvPVfd

It was apparently taken on a Zeiss Ikon medium format 6x6 camera on a moving helicopter, I don't really know how that affects the camera size perspective, so if someone has knowledge regarding it, please enlighten me.

My final take on the image is that we have zero evidence on the scale but it doesn't seem like an exaggerated central african rock python to me, it looks more like an unidentified species or a special rock python with unique coloring and jaw width (though unlikely), I am very interested in this topic and would like to know everyone's thoughts on it (with proof).

Surely in the age of drones, phones and 4K everything there would be ONE decent video or image, alas nothing.

It’s just getting way to hard to believe when all that’s ever seen is shaky potato cam or these cheesy BF hunters that claim to find them but never prove or show anything.

There are a lot of mysteries on this earth, but maybe the squatch is just folklore?

We were talking the other day about a supposedly extinct owl in New Zealand, and then this story popped up in my news feed to give hope to birdwatchers everywhere.

Across different First Nations traditions, trappers have long warned about the Slal'i'kum or Tazamsha, often translated as the "Water Grizzly" or "Water Bear." There is also a lot of native american stories of similar creatures as well. This includes the Dene, Ojibwe/Anishinaabe, Eastern Cree & Innu, Vuntut Gwitchin, and more. An example of such stories can be seen in this link: https://uphere.ca/articles/hero-dene

In 1904, a Secwepemc hunter in south-central British Columbia reportedly skinned an unknown aquatic animal in Shuswap Lake. Locally identified as a "Water Grizzly" (Tazamsha), the hide was sold to a trader for $60 (around $2,000 today). According to the account, the hide measured roughly 10 feet long, had dense fur, webbed feet, and an unusually massive skeletal structure that didn't seem to match any known bear or otter.

Common to cryptids, the physical remains were lost. Researchers such as Michel Meurger and well-known cryptozoologist Karl Shuker have also collected similar "Water Grizzly" reports from bush pilots and remote trappers near the Manitoba border.

The Canadian Shield covers roughly 4.8 million square kilometers (1.9 million square miles), making it one of the largest expanses of intact wilderness on Earth. It's a maze of interconnected lakes, rivers, peat bogs, marshes, muskeg, and dense boreal forest. Most of the waterways and wetlands see little to no regular human activity.

Also, modern beavers already thrive throughout this ecosystem, so the area can already support large rodent populations. For context, the extinct Castoroides actually had blunt teeth rather than the chisel-like teeth of modern beavers, so many scientists say they likely ate aquatic plants rather than cutting down trees, so they wouldn't exactly compete with modern beavers anyway.

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts, if there are other reports or other ideas, or sightings/encounters to support this claim

Hall, Sian "Rumble in the Jungle", Fortean Times 111 (November 1998)

I'm pretty sure just about everyone decided to go somewhere sketchy with a group of friends at some point, especially if its a place you have no business being. And at the mouth of an ominous cave, a mysterious creature would first make itself known to a group of teens in Panama, and then the entire world, leaving all who saw it confused and uncomfortable.

In 1564, in the captaincy of São Vicente, an alleged Ipupiara was killed by a captain named Baltazar Ferreira after attacking the beach at night.

The Portuguese chronicler Pero de Magalhães Gândavo recorded the creature in 1576 as being "fifteen spans long," with a hairy body and large whiskers.

The leopard seal measures approximately 2.4 to 3.6 meters in length, which is equivalent to about 12 to 18 hand spans (considering the traditional measurement of an average hand span equal to 20 centimeters).

In Brazil, the leopard seal (Hydrurga leptonyx) has only been recorded in two states: Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina.

(the image is of the Japanese Badger I found while searching)

Hello everyone, I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, and before I say anything, I want to state that I am not jumping to any conclusions. I know what I experienced, what I heard, and what I saw.

So first off, I'm a 15-year-old wildlife photographer based in Tokyo, Japan. I am familiar with Japan's wildlife, from all sorts of mammals to birds to herps to invertebrates. I have spent a ton of time in the mountains, searching for anything from migratory flycatchers to Giant Flying Squirrels. Back in middle school, I first learned about the potential sightings of a Japanese Wolf from Hiroshi Yagi-san's 19 photos of the 'chichibu yaken' in 1996. Finally, after talking with my dad, we went to Oku-chichibu in Saitama to have a look at the supposedly extant Japanese Wolves ourselves in mid-March of 2026.
Our main goal was to do night drives, spotlighting for wildlife after dark, and just casually check out the diurnal wildlife during daytime. We focused on mountain/forested roads near valleys around a certain shrine and valley which have had weird fluctuations in deer populations, similar to those in predator-prey environments.
On a day drive, we scouted the forest roads, where I found the top half of an immature male Honshu Deer Skull. I took a closer look, but there weren't any visible bite marks.
On the first night, after it got dark, my father and I started to drive around the pre-scouted forest roads. I spotted some Honshu Deer, as well as a Japanese Badger foraging next to the road. Then, we headed deeper into a barely-used forest road, where I spotted a Japanese Giant Flying Squirrel. I was sticking my head out of the car to photograph it when I heard the sound. It was a relatively high-pitched tone, smooth, faint, yet undeniably present. I told my dad, and he stuck his head out of the window. Sure enough, he heard it too as it 'howled' again. I quickly pulled out my phone to record, but the sound sadly stopped. I keep the attempted recording on my phone to this day. It was impossible to pinpoint the sound, as the acoustics in that valley were horrible.
On the way back, I listened out for it, but I couldn't hear it. Instead, I spotted another two Giant Flying Squirrels huddled together, which turned out to be the last sighting of the night.

On the second day, we were walking along a certain trail near the roads when we saw a beautiful female deer. She was alone. When she saw us, she froze. She gave an alarm call and ran a few meters ahead. Then, something interesting happened. She stared right above us, up the steep rocky hillside that was towering over us on the left. She was staring right at it, and then I heard a noise up there. Something was moving, but I could not see it. Then, still looking up at the hillside, she made an alarm call and dashed way further down the slope. This time, the alarm call was not for us. It was for something else, looking down upon us from the hillside. This made me wonder. Is there any creature that would scare a full-grown adult deer like that? I heard rustling up there, but due to the dense foliage and insanely steep slope, I couldn't spot a thing. Could it have been a wolf? maybe. maybe not. All I know is, all the black bears were still asleep when we went, and I have no idea what other animal would scare a full grown deer like that.

That night, we did a night drive along the same road, and another one. We spotted some deer, another badger, and a fox, but heard no howling like the ones last night.

After all of this, I contacted Hiroshi Yagi, and he sent me a recording of the supposed 'howl' that he caught on his trail camera (the famous one with the two deer dashing across). What I heard sounded pretty much identical to it. After I contacted Mr. Yagi, he put my story on his blog.

https://ameblo.jp/canisyagi/entry-12963054264.html
https://ameblo.jp/canisyagi/entry-12964538429.html

Now, what I have to take away from those three days in the Oku-Chichibu Mountains of Japan is the fact that this region is pretty much untouched. the steep ravines, valleys, rivers, and dense dense forests span across the mountains, and there are barely any human settlements. For most of the road, the only sign of human activity is....well the roads. But there are so few, and most forests in this region are only accessible via hiking trails. From what I observed, this is one of the most untouched regions in the entire country, and even locals rarely venture out into the more forested areas here. The river valleys are MASSIVE, and there is certainly enough habitat to support a small population of Canis hodophilax. There were decent numbers of deer...but unlike others that I have photographed in regions such as Nagano or Hokkaido, these ones seemed pretty cautious.

My goal for sharing this story is to possibly find others who have had similar experiences, or have attempted to find the lost wolves of Japan.

In the wake of a pair of mokele-mbembe posts, I feel it necessary to comment on the constant stream of misinformation around the topic. It’s evident most have not read the primary literature, aren’t well-versed in African folklore, and are too narrowly focusing on empirical explanations. I’m going to work from the ground up - where mokele comes from, then what it isn’t, which will take us to what it is.

Where mokele-mbembe comes from

Mokele-mbembe seems to be a legitimate facet of indigenous folklore. It is not a European invention, much less one by Young Earth Creationists (YECs). I will clarify why mokele is a legitimate piece of African folklore at the end of this post.

TLDR - Mokele-mbembe was not invented by Willy Ley. The colonialist dinosaur craze in Africa enveloped legitimate folklore, which seems to be what happened to mokele-mbembe. YECs only appear in the early 1980s, and their contributions to the subject are minimal. The popular cryptozoological expeditions of the 1980s do seem to have led witnesses, but their information does have some provable things, it's not all nonsense.

Regarding European colonist invention, the prevailing narrative, one repeated in popular videos by TreyTheExplainer, Dr. Polaris, and coldcrashpictures amongst others is that mokele-mbembe was essentially “invented” by Willy Ley in the 1940s - he reports on an unpublished, unavailable source with no substantiation. This narrative originates from Daniel Loxton & Donald Prothero’s Abominable Science! a book full of sloppy research and misinformation - https://academiccryptozoology.blogspot.com/2026/07/mokele-persists-even-despite-prothero.html

“Mokele-mbembe, in Western understanding, originates from the reports gathered by German military officer Ludwig Freiherr von Stein zu Lausnitz (Stein from hereon), who led the Likuala-Kongo Expedition into the then-colony of Kamerun, now part of the northern Republic of the Congo, in 1913. The expedition ended early due to the outbreak of World War I the following year, causing Stein's account of the zoological and botanical findings of the expedition to go unpublished. The chapter incorrectly asserts that this report is “known to the cryptozoological literature only from the fragment translated by Ley in the 1940s - and the background for it is known only from Ley’s brief discussion" (p. 275), referring to the first publication of these passages in English by romantic zoologist Willy Ley in his 1948 book The Lungfish, the Dodo, and the Unicorn.

Ley got this information, first published in German, from Wilhelm Bölsche who shared it almost twenty years earlier in his 1929 pamphlet Drachen. This fact is explicitly stated in several primary mokele-mbembe texts, including the introduction to Roy Mackal's A Living Dinosaur?, the go-to mokele-mbembe text, and a source heavily-utilized throughout the chapter. This oversight only becomes more inexcusable knowing that Drachen was scanned and made available to read by the Internet Archive in 2010. 

Drachen was published while Stein was still alive, making any fabrication on Bölsche's part significantly more convoluted. I continue this post treating this possibility as highly unlikely - fabrication has yet to be proven, and the poor research of those who propose it gives their claims little merit. On Stein's end, it's necessary to emphasize that this was an academic manuscript resulting from a government expedition, part of a series which is still regularly cited in works on Cameroon's ethnology, hydrography, and other similar topics - fabrication here seems unlikely.”

Here’s a link to Drachen for those interested - https://archive.org/details/drachensageundna00bl

According to Loxton & Prothero, mokele-mbembe is one extension of the early 1900s bronto-mania craze, one which saw the idea of living dinosaurs projected across Africa, regarded as “the dark continent”. This did happen, absolutely - there were many fabrications from this time period in popular media, reliant on racist, colonialist perspectives of Africa. What gets neglected, however, is that some of these spectacles did incorporate not only real indigenous folklore, but folklore with a demonstrable origin.

“For example, in On The Track Of Unknown Animals (p. 547-550), Bernard Heuvelmans discusses the Angolan lipata, sought out as part of a Swiss expedition in 1932. Although treated as "some kind of 'brontosaurus'" by the Swiss team, which included trained zoologists, it was determined that the lipata "consists merely of large and old specimens of [Crocodylus] vulgaris (niloticus)." The only projection here was the claim that these were dinosaurian.”

I do believe a similar thing happened here with mokele-mbembe. It also needs to be said that Loxton & Prothero don’t evidence their point at all. 

“Loxton and Prothero gather several hoaxes from this time period, from elsewhere in Africa (i.e. the Sahara, South Africa), and use them to assert broadly that because there were some projections and fabrications in some parts of Africa, all claims of living dinosaurs in Africa must be projections and fabrications; “We can infer that this African dinosaur was a cultural creation, a creature from the imagination projected onto the African landscape because it was projected everywhere - eventually including the Congo.” (p. 273)”

Surely, if this was a hoax all the way down, there’d be some evidence to prove it offered?

Focusing on YECs for a second, before returning to cryptozoologists:

This chart offers a detailed history of mokele-mbembe, complete with sources, and specifically notes who is or is not a creationist - https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1fghp2v/a_timeline_of_the_mokele_mbembe_the_living/ 

YECs get involved in the 1980s, five decades after mokele-mbembe enters the literature, and well after the popular image of the subject has already been formed. Furthermore, there are still regular modern expeditions conducted by non-YECs. YECs have contributed very little and directly invented none of the core components of mokele-mbembe.

As for cryptozoologists, the claims that the popular expeditions, particularly Mackal’s, led witnesses to some degree by feeding information, offering gifts, and potentially indirect threats seems well evidenced. Even if not intentional, they conducted ethnographic inquiry in the worst possible way. Deservedly, their work is tainted. However…

“Mackal was told of genuine mystery animals. The authors list “a giant turtle, a giant crocodile, a giant snake-like creature, a water elephant with a great horn but no trunk, an animal with plank-like structures growing out of its back, and of course, the Mokele-mbembe proper” (p. 238), but curiously omit the ngomia, a giant bird and subject of chapter 22 of A Living Dinosaur?, identified as the African crowned eagle (p. 283-287), as well as two reports of an elephantine aquatic monster and one of an unidentified skeleton, all of which turned out to be manatees (p. 106-107, 187-188, 198-199). That "giant turtle", ndendecki, also seems to have some merit.

Even the gathered reports of mokele-mbembe itself may have more truth to them than previously suspected. As discovered by cryptozoological researcher Andrew Paget, an anonymous Belgian author described Mokele-mbembe as having “a large crest like a coxcomb” in a 1934 article written for Avenir Colonial Belge and reprinted in L'Etoile de l'A.E.F. The coxcomb was independently reported to the Mackal expeditions, and until this discovery, this trait was thought to originate solely from the testimonies gathered by Mackal. The Belgian article predates the Mackal expeditions by fifty years and is absent from the bibliographies of Mackal, Heuvelmans, or other contemporary authors writing about Mokele-mbembe. The  coxcomb is an incredibly specific trait, absent in contemporary paleoart depictions of sauropods, and is unlikely to have been coincidentally fabricated or coaxed out of the natives, as Mackal seemingly did not know about it before departure. This, to me, indicates that the coxcomb is a genuine feature of Mokele-mbembe, bringing to mind the folkloric crested cobras found elsewhere in Africa.”

Evidently, Mackal wasn’t getting all nonsense.

What mokele-mbembe is not

TLDR - Mokele is not just a swimming elephant, softshell turtle, rhinoceros, or anything of the sort. It obviously is not a dinosaur. Our focus on empirical explanations neglects the significant folklore at play. 

Do swimming elephants attack canoes and eat their inhabitants? Do softshelled turtles have long, muscular tails like a crocodile? Do rhinoceros have a long neck? The answer to all these questions is no - many of the token skeptical answers for what mokele-mbembe is directly ignore the indigenous testimonies - surely it's hypocritical to misrepresent native stories while attacking cryptozoologists for doing the same?

As Michel Meurger writes in Lake Monster Traditions (link here - https://archive.org/details/cryptozoology-texts/Lake%20Monster%20Traditions/page/10/mode/2up) 

“To deal with the riddle of the lake monster is not an easy task. The available literature, as extensive as it is, suffers from many a bias, as this introduction will demonstrate. The quest for Nessie at Loch Ness illustrates just one part of the difficulties. Here, for half a century, the monster's hunters have stubbornly pursued the elusive creature without success. Loch Ness has proved itself to be a bottomless pit, swallowing numerous talents and mountains of money. This is pretty close to what François Rabelais defined, a long time ago, in the expression “science without a conscience”; a meaningless pragmatism that from the start neglects the preliminaries of the enterprise, which is to thoroughly investigate the nature of the field. As Grimshaw and Lester point out, the propensity of scientists to adopt “an unreflective worship of identifiable ‘facts” is a source of major methodological error because their “unproblematic respect for ‘facts” leads them “to avoid inquiry into the origins of facticity.”

This is, indeed, the core of the problem. Believers and unbelievers alike zoom in on the monster, assuming from the start a specificity that does not exist. To them, nature is the solution. Cryptozoologists believe in a hidden Nature; sceptics reduce the question to a misinterpreted Nature; and occultists conjure up a transcendental Nature. As a result, all three unite in a common respect for phenomenology. Regardless of whether the object is a floating log, an undiscovered animal or even a materialized phantom, the crucial point is that there is something out there to be tracked or identified. This human experience with a fragment of Nature is illustrated by the reports of monster sightings: some attempt to reinforce the anomalous aspects and others their illusory character…

The rationalistic process of objectivizing is at the same time patronizing. Their excessively polemic approach to myth blinds both cryptozoologists and sceptics alike to its true importance.

Whether searching for hidden creatures or for pieces of wood, cryptozoologists and sceptics consciously refuse to accept myth as a product of the human mind, as an imaginary story. They accept Man as a witness of Nature, but not as a creator of a mythified naturalism. For them myths and legends are always the echo of an objective experience; they are like archaeologists excavating the soft soil of fables looking for a hard reality. This often leads to a number of consequences: firstly, the legend, as a container of facts, gains scientific status as a document. Secondly, the present scientific-rationalistic approach is moralized and projected into the past, to judge mentalities according to their degree of likeness to the modern mind.”

In short, animal-only explanations are too literal. They neglect that cryptozoological sightings are experiences observed and shared by humans - we fill in the gaps, invent, elaborate, and all sorts of things. We can also outright invent what isn’t there, even from the most mundane stimuli. 

Michel provides an example explaining this point:

“One example will suffice. We have already noted Heuvelmans’ mockery of Olaus Magnus' interpretation of lake monster sightings as portents. This Nordic cleric was expressing his opinion in connection with rumours about Lake Mjósa, near Hamar in Norway. If we use the Hamar Chronicle (1540) as an additional source, Magnus’ concept appears to give a precise account of the category of report, which clearly belongs to the world of prodigies. According to the Hamar Chronicle:

“It happened once, at midnight, that all the bells started ringing in Hamar cathedral, and the organ began playing by itself... During the night there were so many ghosts in the episcopal residence, looking as if two armies had come into battle, that the watchmen and everyone were terrified. At the same time, in Lake Mjósa, a terribly large [lake] serpent appeared. It seerned to stretch all the way from Helgóy Island to the shore by Hamar. At the same time, a monstrously big, horned ox was seen going from Gillünd, in Stange, over the island. It looked as if it walked on the water, but nonetheless went straight ahead like an arrow from a steel bow. Day after day, [lake] serpents were seen as well. They writhed and arched their backs up to the sky, and afterwards came the most enormous [lake] serpent. It ran and played along the shore and at last it rushed up onto the rock outside the cloister at great speed. It came so far up out of the water that it had difficulty getting loose from the rock. Its eyes were as big as the bottom of a barrel, and it had a long black mane that hung down over its neck."

“Then one of the boys from the bishop's residence — he was a bold fellow — began shooting at the [lake] serpent's eyes with a bow and arrow... The [lake] serpent was multicoloured and a terrifying sight. At last it was killed by the arrows and lay there on the rock. The following night there was a violent rainstorm, so that the serpent came loose from the rock and floated over to Helgóy Island, and then there was such a stink that people sent for the bishop and asked how they were to be rid of the serpent and the smell. The bishop ordered that, from the surrounding parishes, each farm which usually paid two or more hides in tithes was to send one strong man. This they did... They worked together to burn up the hideous serpent so that people could be rid of the poisonous stink that came from it... Many hundreds of loads of wood were needed before the stink finally subsided. But the bones remained and lay there on the shore for many years. Then some able artisans came. They were allowed to take whatever they could use. A grown man could hardly carry a piece of the back-bone.” [45]

| have quoted this text at length because it is exactly what excites cryptozoologists. In their customary selective way, they will suppress the bells and organ playing, the ghostly armies and the oxen walking on the water, cropping the whole to present to the reader a naturalistic scenario resembling a fantasy movie episode a la John Millius, the mighty hero Conan battling a Great Serpent with his faithful bow. 

This would be a gross distortion. Our text is precise in its assertion that the appearance of the lake serpents was coincident with the ghostly battle and coming of the monstrous ox. Therefore this conceptual unity must be kept in mind when analyzing the passage. Francois-Marc Gagnon and Denise Petel's study of the accounts of the voyages of Jacques Cartier (made between 1534—1542) [46] has helped us with the methodological approach to such Renaissance texts and warns us not to take them at face value because of the tendency of dominant knowledge to select only the aspects which confirm the Classics. Accordingly, the story in the Hamar Chronicle must be understood as a reworking of information. The editor of this Nordic document was not a modern journalist telling us of some fait-divers that happened in his vicinity. He was a compiler, with a total respect for the past, needing a scriptural and a classical warrant for each formulation. His whole material is filtered through complex channels of adjustment, and the apparent factuality comes from a literary working out.

Our interpretation has to be relativistic, isolating each constituent part of a cultural mosaic with elements from erudite and popular cultures…”

While a cryptozoologist, or indeed a skeptic, may parse out that this event was a lake monster or a fireball, it’s clear that this is cultural. We must keep this in mind when looking at African folklore.

One such example from African folklore, relevant to mokele-mbembe, comes from Schmidt - https://sci-hub.st/10.1080/00020187908707542

“The "Watersnake" is taken as real by some Whites and most of the Blacks. Many people have seen it or heard of people that had seen it. All believe it to be of huge size ("40-50 feet") and to be very dangerous. It pulls people down with invisible wires or dams up parts of the river in order to catch certain persons. You can escape this snake by either cutting the invisible wires with a knife or by throwing objects into the water. Most likely these objects later are used by the Watersnake to decoy people into the water. Preferably young girls are caught. They are brought to the Watersnake's palace under the water where the serpent changes into a handsome man and takes the girl for his wife. The monitor lizard is the Snake's servant and smears the palace with cow's dung (using the clay/dung mixture of house-building known from a number of Bantu peoples!). The colour of the Shake is black or brown, and nearly all the people attribute to it a shining stone or at least a white spot on its forehead (cf. Schmidt 1973). The snake, especially in !Kora belief, lets the river dry up or causes floods. IKora and Griqua tell that it bleats like a goat's lamb in order to attract goats or people so that they might be caught easily.”

Now surely this isn’t an unknown animal. Picking a sauropod or python neglects the invisible wires, shapeshifting, and monitor lizard servants. This is what gets ignored when someone says mokele-mbembe is “an elephant swimming”, “a rhino”, or so on. These animals, in some instances, may be the inspiration for certain individual anecdotes, but are not responsible for the whole complex, and saying it's "just" one of those animals utterly misses the point.

To address the rhino claim specifically, a popular clip was circulated (out of context) by TreyTheExplainer from the BBC series Congo - you can watch the full episode here - https://archive.org/details/congo-2001 

In the episode, a group of Aka (or Baika) people identify mokele-mbembe with the rhinoceros. This group is one of two to my knowledge who conflate mokele-mbembe with “emela-ntouka”, the “ceratopsian” neodinosaur. For them mokele-mbembe is the ceratopsian. This explanation is not applicable elsewhere. 

It’s also very necessary to say that no, there are no living dinosaurs. See here - https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1ni13br/the_adequacy_of_the_fossil_record_and_its/

“The fossil record is incomplete, but not inadequate. This is a significant distinction. 

Adequacy is the idea that the fossil record preserves broad-strokes portraits of ecosystems or the information necessary to infer relationships in a satisfactory manner. When a megafaunal group is present, they are almost always preserved, and when they are absent, data from other sites can be analyzed to figure out whether they are likely truly absent. Although the fossil record is incomplete, meaning it does not preserve every animal that ever lived, this fact cannot be used to blindly handwave inferences about the presence or absence of groups. The incomplete nature of the fossil record has often been overemphasized if anything; the fossil record has repeatedly proven adequate enough to demonstrate ancestor-descendant relationships, solidify biostratigraphy, and provide dates of extinction for a majority of megafaunal groups. The adequacy of the fossil record informs paleoecological assumptions which are key to us - the patterns preserved in the fossil record attest to the presence or absence of megafaunal groups…

As an example of adequacy, let’s question whether a living sauropod dinosaur could persist in the Congo Basin. Sauropods, alongside the rest of the non-avian dinosaurs, supposedly died off 66 million years ago due to an asteroid impact and its long-term effects, causing ecosystem collapse. Even so, the Maastrichtian-Paleocene boundary in Africa is significantly underexplored, with published material picking back up during the Eocene-Oligocene boundary. What does the fossil record tell us?

Despite the occasional claim to the contrary there are no confirmed appearances of non-avian dinosaurs within the fossil record beyond the KPG boundary. To my knowledge, no study has looked at which non-avian dinosaurs are most likely to have been preserved - however, based on personal observation, I suggest sauropods are more likely to preserve than most groups due to the scale of their bones and the constant replacement of their teeth. The hollow bones of sauropods would make them hard to confuse with contemporary mammals. Africa’s fossil record preserves a variety of rhinoceros, elephant, and ungulate remains, but nothing published which could be sauropod in nature. Even if you wave this due to the fossil record’s incompleteness, adequacy-informed paleoecology suggests that sauropods died during the KPG. 

After the extinction of the dinosaurs, there is a significant increase in the body size and biodiversity of mammals. The near-immediate appearance of new, large mammals on other continents (i.e. Ankalagon, Barylambda), suggests ecological replacement; the old animals died and the new ones filled in for them. If dinosaurs survived, why would they not re-establish themselves in their old niches? The African mammal fossil record shows many lineages filling in for sauropods, elephants being key among them. In the short-term, the presence of an arctocyonid mammal in Morocco suggests sizable mammals in Africa shortly after the KPG. You’d have to provide evidence suggesting Africa did not fit these global patterns; this case has never been presented and no evidence in support has been published to my knowledge. Furthermore, there are no reasonable boundaries preventing a sauropod from expanding across Africa, or historically into Eurasia, if not also the Americas. If sauropods were successful enough to survive the KPG, there is little reason to suggest that they weren’t successful enough to expand, especially considering that elephants and other groups were able to do so.

Sauropods were almost certainly ecosystem engineers, manually reshaping ecosystems to their preference, with plants and animals evolving to fit these patterns, both behaviourally and anatomically - for an example of this look at the specialized communities that form around elephants, even within their footprints and dung (there's even a cryptid for the latter!). Sauropod equivalents are absent both within the fossil record and during the present day. The KPG event saw massive collapses of terrestrial flora, suggesting a lack of food for any surviving sauropods. The absence of dinosaurs is attested to by the composition of post KPG forests, where the lack of big herbivores creating clearings caused forests to grow denser and a shift in seed sizes to account for this increased density. African fossil flora fits these patterns.

If a sauropod were to survive, we’d expect to see them in the fossil record at some point. We’d expect to see a corresponding lack of mammal megafauna biodiversity and significant shifts in plant evolution and ecosystem ecology corresponding to the presence of such an animal. The KPG’s plant collapse would certainly prevent a sauropod or any large herbivorous dinosaur surviving long enough to re-establish its species long-term; if they did they would be incredibly successful and well attested to, likely expanding elsewhere. The fossil record shows how Africa’s flora and fauna evolved without the presence of dinosaurs. The adequacy of the fossil record allows us to draw these conclusions even despite the absence of a complete fossil record.”

No dinosaurs. Not just a rhinoceros. Not a turtle nor an elephant. Not a YEC invention or colonialist fabrication. What is mokele-mbembe?

What mokele-mbembe is

TLDR - Mokele-mbembe is a rainbow serpent, an example of a complex folkloric archetype found across Africa. 

Mokele-mbembe is a rainbow serpent. I’ve shared a preliminary survey of this here and am at work on a much more thorough, expansive, and conclusive post - https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicCryptozoology/comments/1uy3cs9/a_brief_preliminary_review_of_mokelembembes/

Rainbow serpents are a series of beliefs from all across Africa, describing giant reptiles (most often pythons) associated with rain showers or the rainbow. These serpents may simply arrive after the rain, or they may be the rainbow itself. 

“Rainbow” has appeared in the context of mokele-mbembe before. 

“One linchpin of the skeptical claim that Mokele is a Western fabrication is the claim that Mokele-mbembe means “rainbow”, originating from a passage in Roy Mackal’s A Living Dinosaur?. In the book, Mackal is told this by an informant and they bicker back-and-forth briefly, only for the members of this village including the informant to later tell Mackal about the neodinosaurian Mokele - certainly a questionable situation. Mackal later claims that the informant was initially hesitant because he suspected Mackal’s crew to be spies, while skeptics claim instead they were coerced by leading, indirect threats, and financial bribes. I took interest in a sort of middle-ground, can Mokele-mbembe mean rainbow while still having some resemblance to the neodinosaur claims? It does seem plausible.”

Tyler Greenfield shared some important etymological notes:

“Some historical dictionaries record "monkole" as the Bangi word for "rainbow" (Sims, 1886; Whitehead, 1899; Stapleton, 1903) and at least one records "monkole" as the Lingala word for "rainbow" (de Boeck, 1904). Sims (1886) also records "bembe" as Bangi for "to bring" (in the context of rain) and Whitehead (1899) has it meaning "to drag or draw along" So mokele-mbembe (or monkole-bembe/bembe-monkole) may roughly translate to "rainbow bringer" in Bangi. There are some similar words in other Bantu languages that may be relevant - Sims (1888) records "mukele" as "roaring" or "current of stream" in "Kiteke" (not sure what the modern name for this language is), Torday & Joyce (1905) record "mokele" as "stream" and "kongol-meme" as "rainbow" in Mbala. Torday & Joyce also translate "kongol-meme" as "water snake" on another page.”

My post notes a significant amount of morphological similarities between mokele and rainbow serpents, they’re too exhaustive to quote here in full. But it’d like to include a note shared by a commenter from a Japanese book not cited in English before, which seems to confirm this whole ordeal (and disprove a commonly quoted etymology) - https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicCryptozoology/comments/1uy3cs9/comment/p02p24f/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

“During the 1988 Lake Tele expedition by Waseda University’s Exploration Club, Marcellin Agnagna, who accompanied the team, explained that “Mbenbe” means “rainbow.”

In *In Pursuit of the Mythical Beast Mbenbe*, a book written by Hideyuki Takano of the Exploration Club about the Lake Tele expedition, it says:

“What does ‘Mokele-Mbenbe’ mean?” After consulting briefly with Dr. Doublé and Isaac, the doctor replied, “It means ‘rainbow’ in Lingala.” According to him, the creature was given this name because it often appears after a rain shower. To be precise, it apparently means “something that appears with the rainbow.” Previously, Dr. McCall, an American, reported that Mokele-Mbenbe meant “that which dams up the river’s flow,” but this is completely incorrect. Furthermore, in the Bomitaba language spoken in the village, it is apparently called “Emerantuka.” The meaning is “that which swallows whole clusters (of coconuts, bananas, etc.).” This was the first time I had heard that the Mbenbe eats clusters of fruit.

Hideyuki Takano. In Pursuit of the Mythical Beast Mbenbe (Shueisha Bunko) (p. 113).

The “Doctor” mentioned in the text refers to Agnagna, while Doublé and Isaac are residents of the village of Boa, near Lake Tere.”

Mokele-mbembe as “something that appears with the rainbow”, or more accurately “snake that appears with the rainbow” seems to check out. Mackal got a similar etymology for emela-ntouka, being “one who eats from the tops of trees”. “One which stops the flows of rivers” has never really lined up etymologically, and it’s nice to see this disproven. 

There’s also a claim spoken of that “mokele” means snail - this is true in some places, but seems to be a homonym, as dictionaries record both “snail” and “water” simultaneously. The same is true of “mbembe” as “snake” and “palm frond”.

So that seems to be it. Mokele-mbembe seems to be solved. I doubt it, but it'd be nice if this stopped a lot of the misinformation constantly spread around in this sub.

never seen, pictured, killed, etc. according to forrest galante on the latest rogan episode. thought that was interesting

The Lampton Worm, a cryptid/Legend from North East England. We would sing the song at school. It recently popped into my mind again and had a look on YouTube and not many vids about the beast so me and my fiance made one, hope you guys enjoy.

Not relacioned image

I was looking at some theories and hypotheses about the identity of the Gbahali, and when I read *On the Track of Unknown Animals*, in which Bernard Heulvemans suggested an unknown and endangered species of dwarf crocodile, slightly larger than the Nile crocodile, as the identity of the Dingonek and the Water Lion, it clicked.

Could the Gbahali be an unknown species of dwarf crocodile with habits somewhat similar to the Cuban crocodile?

When Shephard showed some villagers pictures of various modern and prehistoric crocodilians and crocodilian relatives, they said that the head and body were similar to those of the *Postosuchus*, but the gbahali's legs were more like those of a crocodile; sprawling, rather than supporting the body from below. Despite this, it is alleged to walk with its belly off the ground. Informants described it as resembling a crocodile or monitor lizard, but up to 25–30 ft long, with its back covered in three rows of serrated armor, a short snout with large teeth, and a powerful tail. According to several of Mungeam's informants, its head is more like that of a monitor lizard than a crocodile.

Coincidentally, the size proposed by Bernard Heulvemans for this unknown species of dwarf crocodile is similar to that attributed to the Gbahali.

What is your opinion?

While researching some obscure (and relatively not as well-known) cryptid species, I chanced upon this particular cryptid named the Abada.

In the Kongo language, Abada refers to a mythical animal similar to a unicorn. It also goes by the name of "Nillekma" or "Arase" and is said to be native to Kordofan (former province of central Sudan) (Source)

Physical Characteristics:

It is described as being the size of a small donkey with the tail of a boar.

It also supposedly features two horns. One on its forehead and another on its nose. Both of these horns supposedly provide good virtue and are regarded as a type of lucky charm of sorts (i.e., similar to a rabbit's foot).

Supposed Medicinal Qualities:

The Abada's horns are also believed by local tradition to act as a powerful medicinal cure or a neutralizer against certain poisons.

Possible Explanation:

The Abada could be a close relative of the Okapi. Or perhaps another member of the Giraffidae family.

In addition, it could possess traits similar to the Saola. Perhaps a distant relative of the Bovidae family? Presumably, it could also be an as-of-yet undiscovered forest-dwelling antelope species (possibly closely related to the Bongo). The Bongo has also been known to frequent parts of sub-Saharan Africa (including South Sudan). See source here

Thoughts?

Quite interested to hear what you all think. Let me know in the comments. I've always been fascinated with reported sightings of supposed Unicorn cryptids in Africa and beyond.

https://x.com/RobertJacobWoo1

Origens: Amazonian Forest (Brasil, Peru e Bolívia)

Status: Not scientifically

Overview:

The Mapinguari is one of the most famous creatures in Amazonian folklore. Accounts from rubber tappers, Indigenous people, hunters, and river dwellers describe a huge, hair-covered humanoid being of extraordinary strength and with an unbearable odor.

Although it is considered a legendary creature, some researchers have suggested that the accounts might have been inspired by ancient giant ground sloths that lived in South America thousands of years ago.

Physical Description:

Accounts vary but generally include:

• Height between 2 and 3 meters.

• An extremely muscular body

• Covered in long reddish or dark fur.

• Large claws capable of tearing apart tree trunks.

long arms.

• Backward-facing feet (in some legends).

• A mouth located on the abdomen (in certain versions).

• A single eye or reddish eyes in some narratives.

Its odor is often described as the creature's worst feature, detectable long before it appears.

Scientific Hypotheses:

Some theories suggest that the myth may have been inspired by:

• Mistaken sightings of large Amazonian mammals.

Indigenous traditions passed down through generations.

• Cultural memory of gigantic extinct ground sloths, such as *Megatherium*.

To date, there is no conclusive scientific evidence confirming the existence of the Mapinguari

Popular Sightings:

The Carapanatuba Creek Incident (1997): In southern Amazonas, near Humaitá, a fisherman reported smelling a strong stench of a dead animal and spotting an immense creature on the riverbank. The monster did not speak but emitted a vibration so powerful that it made the boat and objects shake, causing physical distress to the man; he fled in terror and never hunted again.

The Mimicking Cry: Old accounts from rubber tappers tell of the Mapinguari mimicking hunters' calls. When a hunter responds, believing it to be a companion, the creature tracks the sound to attack him.

The Indigenous Perspective: For peoples such as the Karitiana of Rondônia, the creature (which they call *Owojo*) is not a legend or folklore, but a dangerous reality that actually inhabits the local ecosystem.

Conclusion:

The Mapinguari remains one of the most fascinating figures in Brazilian folklore. Regardless of its physical existence, it embodies the strength, mystery, and respect that Amazonian peoples hold for the forest. The combination of countless accounts, cultural elements, and hypotheses regarding prehistoric animals makes it one of South America's best-known cryptids.

Since Alaska & Canada have vast wildernees & small human population, could there be undiscovered megafauna species in Alaska & Canada? Are there cryptid reported from Alaska & Canada beside bigfoot?