Updates

Since I have now been writing on this blog for over a year, I feel that it is time for some updates.

First, some of my readers might remember an article I wrote in September 2013 called "Sightings of Large, Flightless Dinosaur-Like Birds". In that article, I proposed that the bipedal dinosaur cryptids reported in North and South America could perhaps be giant, flightless birds that have evolved features which resemble those of non-avian dinosaurs.
Now I no longer support this hypothesis. I still think it's possible, but I just don't think it's as likely as I thought before.

Also, I think I need to clarify something about my blog's style. I have always been somewhat interested in speculative biology, and I have a vivid imagination. Therefore, when I formulate a new hypothesis about what a particular cryptid might be, I like to pursue my hypothesis to the fullest extent, as if it were true, and create a picture of the animal in my mind.
For example, in the article about flightless dinosaur-like birds, I said that they are "5 feet tall, 9 feet long, and are omnivores that eat nuts, seeds, and insects, as well as occasionally taking larger prey". I don't have direct evidence of this; I was just speculating.
Like paleontology, cryptozoology is a field that is very often prone to speculation, simply because the reports we have usually cannot tell us very many details about the nature of the unidentified animals that we are pursuing. So whenever I think of a new hypothesis, I don't just put the idea out there; I also create a mental picture of what the animal might look like, and describe it in my article.

A recent book that is somewhat similar to this is The Cryptozoologicon. 

As a final note, I have been planning to write an article about unidentified primates all over the world, but I have decided to postpone it until the currently-ongoing consternation within the "Bigfoot Community" dies down. When that happens, I shall be posting the article.

Happy Birthday to Mysterious Zoology!

Incidentally, I just realized that today marks the first anniversary of the creation of this blog. Exactly one year ago today, on June 16, 2013, I created Mysterious Zoology, with my very first post:
Hidden Animals
So today, on June 16, 2014, I would like to wish a very happy birthday to Mysterious Zoology, and all the cryptids of the world!

Bipedal Lizard Update

If you are a regular reader of this blog, you probably remember my posts about bipedal lizards that I wrote last year. Those posts were a combination of fact and speculation. And now, my opinions have changed, and I no longer agree with some of the things I wrote back then.

In my original posts, I said that they were iguanids, and possibly members of the genus Iguana. Now I am no longer so sure about that. I now think it is too early to identify what family or genus they belong to, and we don't have enough information yet to be sure.

As I have stated in other posts since then, we're not even sure if they're lizards. They could also be theropod dinosaurs or birds. Therefore, it should be noted that most of the ideas and hypotheses proposed on this blog regarding the possible identity of these animals is highly speculative. We simply don't know for sure yet what these animals are, and we probably won't know until they are discovered. 

Reptile Intelligence: A Paradigm Shift?

At first glance, it might appear that I am going on a little sabbatical here by discussing a non-cryptozoological subject. However, it is worth noting that I never meant for this blog to be exclusively cryptozoological in nature. I meant for it to cover any zoological topic that interests me. And the topic of intelligence in reptiles certainly interests me. And in fact, since the name of my blog is "Mysterious Zoology", this post is especially appropriate given that the topic of reptilian intelligence is definitely mysterious among the scientific community.

Indeed, it is only recently that major cognitive experiments have been conducted on reptiles. Numerous other animals, including mammals, birds, and even fish and cephalopods had been tested, but not reptiles.

There are probably many causes of this, but the fact that reptiles do not have good public relations probably plays a major role. Since cognition in animals first began to be studied, reptiles have always been assumed to be primitive and stupid creatures, vastly inferior in intellect to mammals and birds. And for many centuries, humans have hated reptiles. They were widely seen as abhorrent, and they were often associated with evil. In fact, the following quote is attributed to Carl Linnaeus, widely credited as the father of modern taxonomy: "Reptiles are abhorrent because of their cold body, pale color, cartilaginous skeleton, filthy skin, fierce aspect, calculating eye, offensive smell, harsh voice, squalid habitation, and terrible venom; wherefore their creator has not exerted his powers to make many of them."

Therefore, studies on reptilian cognition were not really in existence until the late 2000s and early 2010s. And the results of these studies are very different from the stereotypes that most people have about reptiles. Instead, the results paint a very different picture from the slow, dim-witted, unsuccessful reptiles of popular culture.

In one study, anoles were found to perform as well as birds on an experiment which involved hiding food behind a lid, and having the animals find a way to get to it. Anoles usually capture their prey by striking at it from above, but in this situation, the lizards were forced to innovate, and find other ways to gain access to their food. For example, some of them used their snouts as a lever to lift the lid off. This experiment shows that anole lizards are capable of problem-solving.

In other experiments, tortoises were shown to be capable of navigating mazes at least as well as mammals, and monitor lizards have been shown to be capable of counting.

In addition, there is also plenty of anecdotal evidence from pet owners that iguanas are very intelligent, and are capable of being trained, like dogs.

All of this new evidence is startling to most people, who used to underestimate reptiles' intelligence.

And this leads me to ask a question: Are we currently in the midst of a paradigm shift? A paradigm shift is when a major revolution occurs regarding the way the majority of people think about a scientific topic. Charles Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection in the 19th century was a paradigm shift, as was Albert Einstein's discovery of quantum mechanics in the 20th century. It appears to me that another paradigm shift is currently underway with regard to reptilian intelligence; in the direction of increased intelligence. Rather than slow, dull, primitive creatures, reptiles are now being transformed into intelligent, successful, and elegant animals. And that's good, because that is what they are.

Plesiosaurs

A reconstruction of Cryptoclidus oxonensis, a plesiosaur from the Middle Jurassic of England. (Dmitry Bogdanov, 2000). New research suggests that longnecks might, in fact, be extant plesiosaurs, closely resembling Mesozoic plesiosaurs such as this one.

Recently, my friend Jay Cooney has been talking to me about the possibility of relict plesiosaurs. According to him, researchers such as Scott Mardis and Dale Drinnon have provided convincing arguments that extant post-Mesozoic plesiosaurs might be at the heart of longneck reports, both in the oceans and in freshwater lakes and rivers. After doing some more research on the topic, I have come to agree that the possibility of surviving plesiosaurs is a compelling one, and certainly deserves more attention than I have paid it thus far.

Many of the arguments provided by skeptics against the plesiosaur hypothesis fail if one examines them more closely. A common argument is that, since plesiosaurs were ectothermic reptiles, they would not be able to withstand living at lower temperatures, such as in temperate oceans and cold, deep Caledonian lochs. However, being ectothermic does not necessarily preclude an ability to tolerate lower temperatures. Indeed, many reptiles can tolerate colder environments very well. For example, leatherback turtles are famous for their ability to swim in freezing water, and this ability has captured the attention of marine biologists for many decades. Alligators have also been known to survive completely frozen in ice, with no apparent ill effects.

Besides, we don't know everything about plesiosaur physiology and metabolism yet. It is certainly possible that some plesiosaurs might have evolved some degree of endothermy, or something similar to it.

Another anti-plesiosaur assertion is that the reports do not match plesiosaur anatomy. This cookie also crumbles under closer examination. This is because the people who make this argument are usually assuming that all sea serpent and lake monster reports are referring to the same thing, and that is simply not true at all. The majority of sightings are probably just misidentifications of common animals and inanimate objects. The reports which specify "hair", "fur", or other mammalian characteristics are most likely referring to misidentified common mammals, such as moose or otters. It's also possible that there could be some kind of unknown mammal behind the reports, as well (such as a giant otter, or an atypical pinniped). However, it should be noted that, even if this is the case, these sightings would still be distinct from the long-necked, plesiosaur-like reports.
Many reports also describe "manes" on the animals. These manes are usually described as being floppy in appearance, and sometimes green in color. According to some researchers, including Jay Cooney and Dale Drinnon, this mane could simply represent seaweed, kelp, or algae that got stuck around the animals' necks. This might give the appearance of a mane.

Some critics also claim that the plesiosaur hypothesis is impossible because plesiosaur neck flexibility cannot be reconciled with the neck flexibility which is apparent in the reports. However, in my opinion, this cannot be considered a viable argument, simply because we do not know enough about the neck anatomy of all plesiosaur species to say for sure that this is the case (although there have been numerous detailed studies conducted on certain species of plesiosaurs). And not all of the studies have come to the same conclusions. In fact, according to some of the studies, there does appear to be some evidence that the necks of some plesiosaur species might have indeed been flexible enough to account for the degree of flexibility observed in the longneck sightings. So, while this argument is interesting, it cannot be used to completely rule out the plesiosaur hypothesis.

One additional common objection which I feel the need to address right now is that, if plesiosaurs had survived to the present-day, they would have left fossil evidence between the end of the Cretaceous and now. But, just like with the neck flexibility issue, we simply do not know enough about the situation yet to assert that this necessarily has to be the case. There are many factors and variables that affect whether or not fossilization can successfully occur. As an example, the coelocanth is another marine animal which was believed to have died out at the end of the Cretaceous, but has now been found to be extant. And, as far as I know, there aren't any coelocanth fossils left between the end of the Cretaceous and now. 

Scott Mardis has also provided another, very intriguing possibility. According to him, there have been numerous plesiosaur fossils found in geological formations dating to the Cenozoic Era. These range from the Paleocene all the way to the Pleistocene. Most paleontologists consider these to be reworked fossils. However, Scott has argued that they might actually represent genuine evidence of plesiosaur survival past the end of the Cretaceous.

Many sightings also describe the animals moving on land. Some plesiosaurs, such as the aforementioned Cryptoclidus, as well as Plesiosaurus itself, are also thought to have been capable of locomotion on land, like pinnipeds.
There is also some evidence that plesiosaurs might have occasionally lived in freshwater habitats, as well as marine ones. This would explain why sightings occur in freshwater lakes and rivers (such as Loch Ness, Loch Lochy, and Loch Morar in Scotland, Lake Champlain in the United States/Canada, and Nahuel Huapi Lake in Argentina), as well as in the oceans.

In conclusion, I feel that the plesiosaur hypothesis is definitely a very interesting and reasonable possibility, and I shall probably be writing more about it on this blog in the future. And, once again, if you are seeking more information on this topic, I highly recommend that you read some of the work by Scott Mardis and Dale Drinnon.
Much of Scott's writing regarding relict plesiosaurs can be found here, on Jay's blog:
bizarrezoology.blogspot.com

Meanwhile, Dale's writing can be found here, on his own Frontiers of Zoology blog:
frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com

P.S. It is also worth noting that I am still open-minded about the whole situation, and I am not a dogmatic supporter of the plesiosaur hypothesis, by any means. There are still many other options. For example, they could also be mammals, such as long-necked pinnipeds or relict archaeocete whales. I still remain open-minded, and my thoughts and opinions on the identity of longnecks could change in the future.

Update: July 6, 2016 Since I wrote this article, I have found out that coelacanth fossils dating from between the end of the Cretaceous and the present-day have, indeed, been found. So the survival to the present-day of the coelacanth can no longer be used to corroborate the possibility of surviving plesiosaurs. However, it should be noted that numerous other examples of ghost lineages (gaps in the fossil record), including sizable ones lasting many million years, are known to exist. An obscure example that probably has the most relevance to this article is the 66-million-year-long gap between the Early Jurassic and the Early Cretaceous that exists for the ichthyosaur family Ichthyosauridae, exemplified by the discovery of the ichthyosaurid genus Malawania, which dates from the Early Cretaceous period, in Iraq in 2013. This particular gap is significant due to the fact that it is the exact same length of time as that which exists between the end of the Cretaceous (which has recently been recalibrated to 66 million years ago, after previously thought to be 65 or 64 million years ago) and now. So I now know my use of the coelacanth as an example of a gap in the fossil record to corroborate the possible existence of plesiosaurs is erroneous. It is also worth noting that it has been pointed out by paleontologist Darren Naish that coelacanth bones are fragile and rarely-fossilized, while bones of substantially-sized marine reptiles such as plesiosaurs are dense and resistant to erosion, and therefore, gaps in the fossil record are less likely. However, the gap in the fossil record of the family Ichthyosauridae, demonstrated in a 2013 paper co-authored by Naish himself, demonstrates that it is, indeed, possible. So no, coelacanths can no longer be used to corroborate the possibility that plesiosaurs could have left a 66-million-year-long gap in the fossil record between the end of the Cretaceous and now. But ichthyosaurids can.

Surviving Descendants of Troodontids: A Possible Explanation for Bipedal Dinosaur Sightings?

A reconstruction of what a modern, featherless descendant of a Troodon might look like.

After thinking some more about the topic, I have come up with a new hypothesis about sightings of bipedal dinosaur-like creatures in the United States. I now think it's possible that they might actually be surviving descendants of troodontid or dromaeosaurid-like dinosaurs. I will now explain what led me to this conclusion.

First of all, after reading this fantastic article by Scott Mardis, I have become much more open-minded about the Prehistoric Survivor Paradigm (PSP).

As Scott pointed out in his excellent article, there are many examples of Lazarus taxa (creatures which disappear in the fossil record, only to appear again much later) and ghost lineages (the missing fossils that are in between the Lazarus taxa). A good example from Scott's article was the megachasmids (a group of sharks which includes the modern Megamouth Shark). Fossils of megachasmids are found in the mid-Cretaceous, but then they disappear. They do not appear again until the Miocene, 70 million years later. So there's no reason why dromaeosaurids or troodontids also could not have left a 66-million-year ghost lineage from the end of the Cretaceous until now.

And actually, according to this article, a fossil tooth of a Velociraptor-like dinosaur was, indeed, discovered in Miocene deposits in Louisiana. It is possible that it was just reworked from older sediments; however, there still remains a distinct possibility that it actually was native to the Miocene, and that it is evidence of the survival of small theropod dinosaurs beyond the end of the Cretaceous.
(By the way, it is worth noting that there are actually a lot of plesiosaur remains from the Cenozoic that are supposedly "reworked". These remains range from the Paleocene to the Pleistocene, and according to some researchers, such as Scott Mardis and Dale Drinnon, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that they are not really reworked, and that they are actually native to the Cenozoic.)

For the most part, the creatures described in the sightings very much resemble a Troodon-like dinosaur, except for one major difference: they lack feathers. It is now believed that troodontids, dromaeosaurids, and their relatives had feathers, like modern birds. And almost all sightings of these bipedal dinosaur-like animals describe them as having scaly, featherless skin.

However, I have found that even this difference is still reconcilable with a troodontid identity. Many birds alive today have lost their feathers and replaced them with scales, so there is no reason why troodontids also couldn't have done the same. There could be many possible reasons for the loss of feathers.

One hypothesis, which I think is the most likely, is that they lost their feathers due to adaptations to a semi-aquatic lifestyle. These creatures are said to live around bodies of water, and are said to be somewhat semi-aquatic. This is why they are often referred to as "River Dino" and such.

When animals start to live in the water more, they often lose their fur or feathers. For example, whales are descended from furry ancestors, but they have now lost almost all of their fur. Penguins are an example of modern birds which are semi-aquatic, and they already have shorter feathers than other birds.

And it's possible that not all of the feathers have been lost, and some of them still remain.
Perhaps they still have some feathers left on their backs, for example. This could explain why so many witnesses claim that they have spine-like structures on their backs.

So this is my hypothesis. I would very much appreciate any constructive critiques or suggestions.

P.S.: I am not completely in support of this hypothesis. It's just a possibility that I'm throwing out there.

New Bipedal Lizard Sighting From Utah

I have recently been informed of a new bipedal lizard sighting. It happened in Arches National Park near Moab, Utah in the Summer of 2011. A man saw several bipedal lizards in a pack. They were about 4 feet tall. He then drew a sketch of the animal that he had seen. It was lightly-built, with long legs and a long neck.

Here is the sketch:

Using this sketch and the information from this sighting, I have been able to come up with a new hypothesis about these lizards. I have modified the ideas that I previously had about them.

I now think that they are closely-related to the Collared Lizard. They are around 4 feet tall, 10 feet long, and weighing around 32 pounds (possibly up to 40 pounds or so in the largest specimens). They are lightly-built, with long legs, a long neck, and a long tail. They are capable of running very quickly on their hind legs.

They are vicious predators who hunt in packs, and there are stories of them killing humans. Both the predatory behavior and the pack-hunting behavior leads me to believe that these lizards might possibly be related to the Collared Lizard, which also lives in the Southwestern United States. Collared Lizards are also vicious predators, and they have also been observed using pack-hunting tactics to flush out their prey.
This lizard would pretty much be a gigantic and more strongly-bipedal version of the Collared Lizard.

This is probably the best sighting report I have ever heard of. I am looking forward to receiving more sighting reports of these fascinating animals in the near future.