>Why is anyone entertaining this
Because they're thirsty.
They want to to be real so bad they can taste it. I've seen it before in other subs that turn into a circlejerk echo chamber, like the ridiculous tiny alien mummy sub and the mh360 abduction sub.
There seems to be quite a few anatomical issues with the Gallante Thylacine, some obvious (dislocated arm, Dinosaur Jaw, etc.,) and some more minute, as seen in the facial structure of the animal. It’s hard to lineup perfectly but I feel as though this is as good of an angle as any. The chest seems too broad, the body too lumpy. The nose is not large enough, and we should not be able to see the corners of its mouth like that. The space between its brow is too wide as well. My best guess is not AI like a lot of speculation, but faux taxidermy or a doll.
I’ll preface this by saying I agree that this is a fake (although it’s great fun!) , but I’m not sure proportions from different sources is a great way to compare.
Check out photos of animals or people taken at different focal lengths (the iphone they used would be 26mm eq, if memory serves). It can completely change the apparent dimensions + proportions of stuff.
It’s probably too big an ask to know the specs of the 1936 footage!
I'd also argue that there have been significant variation of thylacine colouration and stripes at least documented among the population as I recall- its not too far a stretch to make the case that there would have been some variation of other elements like mouths/ nose colouration and size / girth. Look at wolves.
So I'm not 100% on everyone weighing in saying it doesn't fit tiny elements of the few solid photos we have.
That does not mean I think it's legit.
Like- at least supply basic if not extraordinary evidence of claims before anyone takes you seriously
Completely fair, it’s very hard to compare any sighting to the actual animal when we have very limited footage of a live thylacine and said footage is almost a century old. I merely wanted a reference to loosely compare. There is a perspective and angle difference, as the Galante photo has its head lifted more so we are looking straight at its nose rather than the zoo footage.
I know very little about perspective compression (idk what to call it?) when it comes to lenses and camera specs, so does it really distort proportions that much? I know that fish eyes lenses will mess with it but I feel like thats a much more obvious effect that you can point out immediately.
Yeah it can make a big difference, random example here: https://petapixel.com/2013/01/11/how-focal-length-affects-your-subjects-apparent-weight-as-seen-with-a-cat/
Another thing to consider when making these side by side comparisons is how much individual animals can differ, for example a Central American female jaguar vs a male from the Pantanal.
Basically just playing devils advocate though, as I say I think this is definitely fake!
Wow, fascinating! I did manage to find more info on the film I had used, considered the 8th discovered thylacine film dated between 1933 to 1936. It was taken by someone in the Bester family according to the NFSA. The more famous footage was taken by a cinematographer named Sidney Cook, who was known to use a Williamson camera. There is a difference in how far away the film was taken but the proportions are still similar to the Bester footage.
Haha wow that’s some fantastic detective work!
Aside from the actual pics, I’ve just watched this interview and I think this guy is pretty sketchy.
I’ll just wait for some experts to weigh in - but I reckon it’s a very good hoax
To be honest I’m still swinging wildly between it being fake and possible, probably because I really want it to be real.
Yes the pictures are sketchy but I can justify that by older iPhones not being great in bad light.
What’s still putting me off is the lack of detail and accuracy surrounding the circumstances. Location, travel details and behaviour of the people disclosing (galante included). This feels like someone is generating hype for a documentary and a visit to Joe Rogan again rather than being interested in an important scientific discovery. Facts could easily be checked and cleared up but are being left to the viewers interpretation.
18 Comments
paispais@reddit
IndividualCurious322@reddit
kat-deville@reddit
RotatingRectum@reddit
imright19084@reddit
DaemonBlackfyre_21@reddit
imright19084@reddit
Winterfalls13@reddit (OP)
JurassicTotalWar@reddit
elbapo@reddit
Winterfalls13@reddit (OP)
JurassicTotalWar@reddit
Winterfalls13@reddit (OP)
JurassicTotalWar@reddit
roqui15@reddit
Orchid_Significant@reddit
its_reds@reddit
Kokosdyret@reddit