Maybe it was because of my cheeky beginning in my response to T.G. Powell's, of the CryptoFlorida blog, comment on my previous post about so-called blue dogs: "Stop Killing the Blue Dogs" -- the murder of quasi chupie. I did start off my response to his comment with:My but aren't we testy today?I continued, in reply to his comment below:
"These animals are NOT anything but disease ridden common animals."And I agreed that they are not chupacabras:
As was my point, they are not chupacabras.As I've posted many times about these animals, if they are victims of mange or some other disease, why now, why so many, and isn't their conspicuous appearance an indicator of something we should be paying attention to?
My other point: that some people insist on calling these poor creatures "chupacabras" and kill them, not for "humane reasons" as you say you do, but because of fear. They don't know what they are, and they kill them because of that fear. That is not a reason to kill.
It's sad all around, and one question that hasn't been addressed, as far as I can tell, is why are there so many of these creatures, in the UK and elsewhere -- if they are mange ridden animals, why so many? Is it an indicator, like so many other animal signals of late, that the planet is in crisis?
I think you've misunderstood motivations here as well as being defensive.
Maybe it's because CryptoFlorida continues to misunderstood my purpose in posting items concerning blue dogs/chupie news. Or maybe it's because some people are just that way; obnoxious in tone and intractable. Whatever, Powell has posted about my abilities as a "mental midget" and my "moronic thinking" in his post More Blue Dog Stupidity.
My main intent in posting items about canine type creatures who appear to have mange or other diseases -- or, who may be another variety of animal altogether -- is to point out the meme that any hairless looking dog like animal is a chupacabra for many people, and of course, these canines are not. That is my point. As I wrote in that post:
I've written before, as have others, that these so-called "chupacabras" seen in the Southwest are not the crypto-creature from Fortean or paranormal realms. These hairless 'blue dogs' are simply mundane animals. Either mange or some other disease, or, as Lon Strickland of Phantoms and Monsters writes:
The key point here, as I've made many times, as I made in the post that has Powell distressed over, as Lon makes in the above quote, is the fear trigger response to something perceived as a chupacabras -- there fore a "monster."a hybrid species of Mexican wolf and another canine species. Ken Gerhard and Jon Downes have done extensive study and have written about this cryptid canine. I just wish people would stop killing the 'blue dog' just because it's been given the 'chupacabras' moniker. Below are previous posts on this cryptid...Lon
I don't pretend to be a field investigator of blue dogs, and I don't say I know anything about them other than what I've read on-line from a variety of researchers. Those researchers offer interesting views and, as such, I pass them along. It's up to readers to make up their own minds. I find it all interesting.
My purpose in posting about these items is to share my fascination with the fact that the name "Chupacabras" has morphed from the label of a truly unknown, possibly paranormal creature, to labeling obviously mundane creatures such as "blue dogs" as Chupacabras. That's it. That's all. I quoted Jon Downes in that post:
It is a very weird and very interesting member of the dog family; it has nothing to do with this weird folklore," said Jonathan Downes, a former zoological journalist and self-taught amateur "cryptozoologist" from West Devon, England.I'm not the expert, so can't speak to the reality of Downes statement, again, interesting and others will decide for themselves. Either way, what Downes says about this dog like creature not being Chupacabras holds.
However, within that context, I have said that it is sad people are running around shooting anything that moves just because they can. Fears based on some vague "chupacabras" creature and an unknown (those who aren't familiar with mange ridden canines, or are afraid of a new animal, if it's a new animal) kill what they don't understand. The way of humanity for eons.
In my previous post, Powell says he kills them to put them out of their misery; as well as to protect livestock and children, and he says the same thing again his current post. That hasn't ended things for CryptoFlorida however. A recent post on his blog reveals his thoughts concerning Frame 352:
It would seem as though there are those out there that refuse to give in to proof, DNA testing, and first hand experience. Frame352 is the latest in this line of moronic thinking. Basing theory on what those with arm chair experience and NOT looking at the over all picture. It would seem that letting these animals suffer by freezing to death in the frigid winters, or letting them raid chicken farms which the humans depend on for food, or maybe letting one that has gone hungry for a period of time, attack and maybe even kill someones small child while he or she is playing in the yard is OK with these mental midgets.
You can visit Frame352 to get the low down, if you really care too.Well, if these "blue dogs" are a threat, and if they are also in misery, I don't know what to say, since I am not there, and have not seen or lived in that situation. Again, my points are this:
- The chupacabras label has moved from paranormal/unknown/cryptid creature to mundane, possibly new species of mundane, animal
- Too many trigger happy people in some cases reacting to what they don't know or fear by killing.
