For what it’s worth, while youse all were finding confirmation on the Web of where the picture came from, I was getting confirmation from the Department of Zoology at the University of Washington. The consensus among the zoologists I forwarded the jpeg to was that it is indeed an artist’s rendering of Thylacoleo carnifex.
Ok, I bit. I don’t see anything about me in the pit. But if someone wants to flame me, I can give 'em a reason 
btw, thanks for the independent confirmation, lissener.
Haha. Made ya look. Anyway, in my professional opinion, the picture on the page you linked to looks very similar to the picture referred to in the OP. I know you were dying for me to confirm this for you, so there you go. Everyone can leave this world happy now.
…
I meant the phone calls or whatever to washington. but yes, definitely a statue/artist’s rendition.
lissener: what you were thinking of is the tasmanian WOLF, which is indeed, very doglike, with stripes on its butt. Very likely extinct, but if so, recently. The T.Tiger was very likely never seen by white men. Yhere was also a Marsupial sabercat, likely gone prior to the abos.
it looks like an R.O.U.S. (rodent of unusual size) from the movie ‘the princess bride.’
i wouldnt want it under MY bed, in anycase…
rodents of unusual size? why, i don’t think they exi…
As far as I’ve ever known, Tasmanian Tiger and Tasmanian Wolf are both common names for the same animal, Thylacinus cynocephalus.
Cite 1
Cite 2
Cite 3
Cite 4
Cite 5
etc. . . .
I can only find reference to one taxonomical name, Thylacinus cynocephalus, but various references, interchangeably, to the Tasmanian Tiger and the Tasmanian Wolf. Tiger, presumably, because it was striped; and Wolf, presumably, because it was notably canine in conformation.