Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear

Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair.

Fuzzy Wuzzy is going to eat your face off for laughing at him.

:eek: What the fuck is that?


Does the Mail hire English-speaking copy editors? “She lethal claws are clearly visible”? “These is how Dolores would have looked”?

I noticed that as well. I also thought it was odd that it said “Vets have been left baffled by the condition of the bespectacled bear” and “The spectacled bears have a thick, dark coat normally” in another.

Not only that, IMHO (as a non-writer) ISTM it would be less clumsy to have said “This is what a healthy [type of bear] would look like.”

That bear looks like something out of “Where the Wild Things Are.”

Don’t feed the yao guai.

Awww, not so fuzzy!

At first I thought it was a guy in a creature suit.

The BRFO (Bigfoot Field researchers Organization) insisted one mangy bear in Pennsylvania actually was a Squatch.

Same, the rear leg looks like a human knee in a poorly-fitted bearsuit. But the other pictures look genuine. Just an unfortunate angle! And I don’t know about you, but I’m not used to seeing furless burs.

The St. Louis Zoo had a hairless chimp, but it didn’t look much different than one with hair: