The creature in question looks like it’s been skinned, which can make lots of animals look weirder, and the picture is apparently stretched horizontally. Any idea what this really is?
This page has a link to the Youtube “clip” (it’s just a still image, not actually a video) that looks to be the first appearance of the image:
http://weirdworldnews.org/2012/08/22/strange-troll-creature-killed-in-africa-video/
It’s probably only a coincidence that The Daily Telegraph’s cropping of the image removed the Alien Disclosure Group UK logo.
But yeah, hoax.
It has a vague resemblance to a human fetus suffering from severe congenital birth defects. Probably stillborn or miscarried.
the “Baby” from Eraserhead qualifies as a “Muppet-like Beast”, and nobody knows what that is.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A0PDoQ3T_7RQL18Aua6JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Deraserhead%26_adv_prop%3Dimage%26va%3Deraserhead%26fr%3Dyfp-t-701%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D101&w=1200&h=799&imgurl=image.toutlecine.com%2Fphotos%2Fe%2Fr%2Fa%2Feraserhead-1977-07-g.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toutlecine.com%2Fimages%2Ffilm%2F0001%2F00012106-eraserhead.html&size=109.6+KB&name=Eraserhead+Image+1+sur+15&p=eraserhead&oid=5e6e627f66a754a7f072d8122c58a57b&fr2=&fr=yfp-t-701&tt=Eraserhead%2BImage%2B1%2Bsur%2B15&b=91&ni=190&no=101&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=123b7s3r1&sigb=13no5ulj6&sigi=11qpl3ahm&.crumb=G.kSrW0OssH
One theory holds that it’s a sheep’s head with the skin stripped off.
Sadly, I think this is correct. It looks very much like a typical case of anencephaly (some images may be NSFW).
The perspective (from the arm holding the thing up) makes it look too large to be a newborn. Other than that, I would agree.
I vote “hoax”.
I agree the arm looks too short or too skinny or something, but I think that’s caused partly by the way the picture is being stretched and warped, and partly by the hand and “creature” being so much closer to the camera. Look at the size of the fingers and thumb encircling the neck and torso, however, and then compare to these pictures of doctors holding normal (non-deformed) newborns. In relation to the hands holding them, those babies are at *least *as big as, and probably a little bit bigger than, this one.
A cruel hoax, using a pic from a newborn as **Atakapa **said. Unless shooting parties in Namibia routinely wear blue surgical gloves.
Look at the ears, also - not just that they’re pointed, but they’re a different color. Absolutely a hoax and not even a good job of photoshopping - I just looked again and on the left, you can see what looks more of the same color as the torso or head, chopped off.
There are links also, showing “other weird creatures”, many of which are very obviously photoshopped (that is, unless rabbits usually have wings and there’s a gorilla with the face of a pug dog).
Agreed. Anacephalic or microcephalic stillborn.
No that looks like THIS.
By “ears” here, do you mean the “donkey ears” behind the head or the “elf ears” roughly where human ears would be?
I’m wondering what the donkey ears are really.
Oooooh - the"donkey ears" are the bit that I took to be a really awful photoshop job. No, those actually match the rest of the body. I was referring to the elf ears.
I prefer not to look at the pics, but wasn’t the tiny ancient mummified man found sitting in a cave in Wyoming, or someplace like that, originally hailed by Fortean or woo-woo types as scientific proof of a different humanoid species or elves or goblins or whatever? And didn’t the naturalist Loren Eisley reveal it to be just a microcephalus case who died soon after birth? He was set up in the cave in a position of reverence because as a striking birth deformity, he inspired susperstitious awe or something, not because he was a little spaceman from Mars or anything woo like that. That’s what this discussion reminded me of.
It’s a deformed human newborn or abortus against a jungle background. Anencephalic, yes. At least, the cranium is nowhere near normal.
The point thing in the back might be part of the abnormality or placental tissue hanging on or whatever. I doubt it’s photoshopped in, but could be.
Self-correction: Anencephalic is the word I wanted to use in post #14, not micro-.
What’s up with the hands? They look much larger, proportionally, than an newborn human’s hands, and held at a very odd angle. (It doesn’t look like anything else, either, mind you, I’m not arguing that it’s *not *a deformed fetus/newborn.) Is that a common constellation of deformities with anencephaly?
Distortion from being so close to the camera lens makes them look larger. The angle is more or less irrelevant, considering how flexible a fetus is–more like rubber than bone.
The Wyoming mummy’s name is Pedro. He’s been missing for years. He probably won’t make it onto a milk carton any time soon, but if you see him around, there’s a $10,000 reward out for him.
Establishment scientists insist that Pedro was a human anencephalic infant, while woo-woo enthusiasts insist his fontanelles were all closed up and his X-ray shows an adult skeleton, making him some sort of other (goblin?) species. The question of the little squirt’s (14 inches in height) nature is thought by some to depend on this evidence.
Pedro was also rather Muppet-like.