What do people think about the legend of Mokele-Mbembe from Africa, just a misidentified creature or something prehistoric?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokele-mbembe[poll type=multiple results=always min
1 Like
Cryptozoology is full of so many reported monsters of all kinds. I wish they were real but I am afraid that none of them probably are real.
8 Likes
Even though I agree that we’ll never see that first iNat observation of Mokele-Mbembe, or Sasquatch, or Nessie, I’ve always had a fondness for cryptid stories and what they teach us about our own human perceptions. Every lake must have its monster, at least in our minds. One of my favorites is Mishipeshu, the Underwater Panther of Ojibwe tradition, though he’s more of a god or spirit than a typical cryptid. He plays an important role in Louise Erdrich’s novel Tracks.
It’s also interesting how frequently a pretty ordinary animal is interpreted as some kind of mutant creature…remember the Montauk Monster? I’ll bet it would have been correctly IDed in ten minutes here on iNat :)
5 Likes
large, smooth skinned quadrupeds with long necks
The animal is said to be of a brownish-gray color with a smooth skin, its size is approximately that of an elephant; at least that of a hippopotamus. It is said to have a long and very flexible neck and only one tooth but a very long one… its diet is said to be entirely vegetable.
Sounds a lot like someone who doesn’t know the language well trying to interpret a description of an elephant.
When it comes to cryptozoology the safe assumptions are that either it’s entirely made up or that whoever was recording the information badly misunderstood what the teller was saying.
11 Likes
Montauk monster does look like a raccoon whos fur is gone.
2 Likes
Most of us like a good cryptid story and the news media love telling those stories. I suppose we like the idea that science hasn’t yet explained everything. And it’s more exciting to say that a photo of a strange looking animal is evidence of a chupacabra rather than a coyote with mange.
11 Likes
Almost definitely a misidentified existing creature. If you think Bigfoot surviving to the modern era is a longshot, a living non-avian dinosaur would be almost impossible without being noticed and clearly photographed by one of the billions of cameras we all carry today. A dinosaur would not be able to run away or hide as well as as Sasquatch theoretically could.
A lot of the Mokele’Mbembe mythology comes from creationists, whose material you have to take with the biggest grains of salt. A living sauropod would be surprising but no more “impossible” for evolution than a living bird or a coelacanth or a stalked crinoid. It’s simply a persistent lineage. There is no conspiracy to hide this information as any scientists would LOVE to become famous if they discovered a living sauropod
I saw in a lot of these situations the natives were persuaded to think they saw a dinosaur. The people would bring dinosaur books to native African tribes and ask them which of those things they saw. The people there could easily be fooled/coerced into thinking those were living creatures.
8 Likes
Yeah, the creationist involvement in this particular cryptid myth is interesting.
4 Likes
Yeah it’s always because they think a living dinosaur would “defeat” evolution, which it doesn’t. I guess it would have more of an effect on the age of the Earth, but a dinosaur doesn’t date the planet.
3 Likes
More than that, to survive for an extended period of time a minimum population is needed, and animals have ranges, with (on average) larger animals needing large ranges.
There is zero possibility of a creature this large surviving for that long with such a small population and restricted size as to remain legendary even by local standards.
5 Likes
… that country called Africa? They go from the Congo to Zimbabwe.
3 Likes
I wish I could say I believed it was real, and the history is certainly fascinating. But the idea of such a massive animal living undetected in our modern world seems unfeasible to me.
1 Like
We had this discussion recently in the forum about cryptozoology and your comment once again makes me wonder, if the term is used differently in different countries or if it is just a general misunderstanding going on?
For me cryptozoology does not mean that every organism discussed by that science (yeah, for me it is a form of science actually) is by definition “unreal”. Actually, quite some organisms have been or are parts of cryptozoology that I find not too unreasonable … e.g. most famously Architeuthis or Coelacanth which had been subjects of Cryptozoology until they were proven to be real, or the Thylacine or the Ivory-billed Woodpecker that could have gone the same route… Unfortunately, among the few serious cryptozoologist are a lot of quacks that distort the picture quite a bit, which is very unfortunate I think.
to the topic: that creature is most probably a myth like all of those long necked dinosaur descentants have turned out to be…
1 Like
A problem that plagues cryptids of prehistoric organisms is their depictions and descriptions are influenced and limited by the time. Using Mokele-Mbembe as an exmple, we see that it’s depiction mainly stems from what was known in the 20th Century. Outdated features such as a dragging tail, a snake-like neck, and elephant-like feet all make an appearance in the Glencomeragh carving. It’s said to be ancient but clearly possesses the outdated features, suggesting the person who carved it was referencing scientific illustrations of the 20th Century rather than actually seeing it in the flesh. This is often used as evidence but is clearly a product of the 1900s. Other pieces of “evidence” face the same issue.
To me, it’s clear that Mokele-Mbembe is a hoax created in the 1900s, possibly to disprove evolution as others have mentioned.
TREY the Explainer made a detailed video on Mokele-Mbembe as well as many other ‘living dinosaurs’. I really recommend them, here’s a link to the one on Mokele-Mbembe: Cryptid Profile: Mokele-mbembe and the “Lost” Dinosaurs of the Congo.
3 Likes
I would highly recommend this video, which goes over the mokele-mbebe stories and ultmately debunks them.
Perhaps the most hilarious reveal in the video is the account of an investigator who followed up with some local communities in the area (who themselves were already well aware of dinosaurs thanks to general knowledge osmosis), who revealed that the creature was entirely made up and they were just playing along with the cryptozoologists and telling them what they wanted to hear. When asked why they’d lie, the son of a village elder said this:
“Don’t you know? It’s to bring idiots like you here. And make a lot of money.”
2 Likes
I suppose the money to be made by locals from gullible researchers could be called crypto-currency.
9 Likes
Oh, you mentioned it too! Same!
1 Like
It’s a really good video, it’s nice to see other remember and activity share it. The whole channel has great information on cryptids and how to debunk them.
By far one of the most memorable things from that video!
Something something…extraordinary claims…something something…extraordinary evidence.
2 Likes
Yeah, but it’s only a suggestion.
1 Like