Latest Activity

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

Fun article at eSkeptic. I'm partial to the Chupacabra because it's basically the easiest "monster" to solve, yet people obstinately insist is not a coyote, dog, or similar, but it's this imaginary spiny vampire beast with glowing eyes. The book the article talks about sounds interesting. How folk stories propagate and become "facts".

Exposing the Chupacabra:
A Morphing Modern Monster

by Sharon Hill

The paranormal explanation can be the quick, easy and popular route to go compared to the genuine one, which is far more complex. We, as a culture, create our monsters to suit us, smearing the line between fiction and reality, paranormal and normal, as needed. That’s what Tracking the Chupacabra: The Vampire Beast in Fact, Fiction and Fol... is about. Author Benjamin Radford admits this book is not actually about the “monster” called “chupacabra”1 but about how folklore becomes real, how humans tell and receive stories, and how memories can be wrong. In this comprehensive examination, Radford shows us that “chupacabra” is not an explanation for a specific phenomenon; it’s a convenient scapegoat utilized in circumstances perceived as threatening or bizarre.

Descriptions of the chupacabra as a real creature are problematic. Its chameleon-like, shape-shifting nature became one of its hallmarks. The tale of the monster begins with livestock attacks in Puerto Rico in 1995, which is explained in part one of the book. The animals were found reportedly drained of blood. An unidentified, mysterious vampiric killer was on the loose and the media embraced the story. Naming the creature “chupacabra” (goat sucker) brought it into being. Confusion over its physical description finally sharpened in response to the widely publicized description by witness Madelyn Tolentino. Her story is scrupulously examined in the key chapter of the book, Chapter 7, where Radford concludes that Tolentino’s recollections and interpretations hold the key to solving the mystery of the chupacabra. Based on the Tolentino report, the chupacabra was an otherworldly humanoid with spines, claws, red eyes and a curious hopping locomotion. A subsequent second body form associated with the chupacabra was smaller, essentially hairless and dog-like. This type was based upon actual animals killed in proximity to livestock attacks. They appeared far too grotesque to be common fauna. A third bin of creatures labeled “chupacabra” was filled with any unusual thing regardless of size, number of limbs and body shape. If one couldn’t identify a creature right away or affirm that it was a recognized animal, it was called chupacabra.

Tracking the Chupacabra: The Vampire Beast in Fact, Fiction, and Folklore (book cover)

Prior to Radford’s book, there was only one other volume dedicated to the subject—Scott Corrales’ Chupacabras and Other Mysteries.2 Corrales’ work is a collection of chupacabra-related incidents including encounters (reported in the local press and some obtained directly by the author), livestock attacks and UFO reports. Presented as a diary through the years where the legend blossomed and spread, Corrales’ book connects the chupacabra stories to interpretations in terms of UFOs and alien visitation. Corrales’ book is a collection of tales, uncritical of eyewitness’ testimony and paranormal explanations. Radford, as a scientific and skeptical investigator, launches from a foundation based on collected evidence. The intent of his quest is to solve the mystery, not to promote it. This is a fundamental difference between the few genuinely useful cryptozoological references and the profusion of popular, often speculative, monster books which rehash anecdotes without scrutiny or analysis.

In multiple approaches to the chupacabra enigma, Radford explores the following topics: vampires and other blood-eating animals, folklore, mass hysteria, cultural influences and socioeconomic factors, sarcoptic mange and canid genetics, animal deaths and postmortem effects, and the trouble with eyewitness reports and making unsupported assumptions.

Read the rest here.

Tags: chupacabra, cryptozoology, monster, skepticism

Views: 116

Replies to This Discussion

Chupacabra

Sometimes, in our pursuit of service, we are asked to do strange things.  Today’s guest post from Terry chronicles one such act of service.

One night on my mission, my companion and I received a call from the ward mission leader asking for our assistance in giving a young couple in the ward a blessing. It was past curfew, so there was some hesitation, but “the spirit” won out over the “the letter”, and we agreed.

When we arrived at the house, in a  a middle class neighborhood in El Cajon (San Diego), the couple was clearly agitated. With wide eyes they spoke in hushed tones, telling us there was a demon in the house, and pleading with us to cast it out. Even as young missionaries (I was only 6 months into my mission and my companion was in his first month), we were skeptical. But they insisted with ever increasing desperation that we perform the ritual, until at one point, the wife jumped up and screamed, pointing toward a dark hallway, claiming that she had seen it. Frustratingly, I could see nothing but shadows and darkness.

At this point, the ward mission leader suggested that we just go ahead and do the casting out, and I was feeling a level of discomfort such that I was all too happy to go along and get it over with so we could, literally and figuratively, get the hell out of there. We all knelt in a circle, and the ward mission leader said a nice prayer for the couple, closing with the words,  “By the power of the holy Melchizedek priesthood, and in the name of Jesus Christ, we command you, evil spirit, to leave this house!” I’m paraphrasing, but it was something close to that. Now, I’m not really sure if it’s good form to bless a couple with success and happiness while casting hell-spawn out of their home, but it seemed about as right as anything else we were doing at the time. Besides, our little white missionary handbooks were completely silent on the subject, so we figured we had some lee-way.

After the prayer, the couple wasn’t sure that it had worked, so we began a search of the house. Finding no demons inside the house, the search continued outside, where at first, we also found nothing. After several more minutes of searching outside (during which time, the demon caused me to feel foolish and stupid), we all gathered at the front of the house where it was our plan to declare victory and leave. But as we were saying our goodbyes, the wife screamed again, and pointed, this time at the neighbor’s roof, claiming to have glimpsed the demon. I looked at my companion and rolled my eyes, trying to stifle a smirk, when to my horror, the ward mission leader said that he had also seen it, and that it had taken off toward the next house over.

When the ward mission leader began running after it, my companion and I dutifully followed. We chased shadows down the block, and then down the next block. Then we hung a right and went up to the next street over, where the chase was resumed in the opposite direction – back toward original house (because, we were winded, and because when you’re chasing small devils at night in El Cajon, you don’t want to stray too far from your car, lest you leave yourself with a lengthy walk back through the demon haunted darkness). There were, of course, various sightings as we went, but frustratingly, I always seemed to be looking in the wrong direction at the critical moments, and the demon always managed to skitter just out of sight by the time I turned my head. Those SoCal demons are quick little buggers.

Anyhow, about the time that we began to feel sweaty and cold, we were able satisfy ourselves that Satan’s minion had been successfully chased off – for that night at least, and went home. For a while I wondered what it was that we had done battle with that night. Then, a few years later, I heard that someone, somewhere, saw something they called a “chupacabra”, and I knew – that was it.

Because if there’s one thing about that night on my mission in early 1990… one thing that I know to be true with every fiber of my being, and beyond the shadow of any doubt – it’s that it sucked goats.


Capivara

Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris

Spotting Image 1
  • photo 1
  • photo

Description:

The capybara (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris) is the largest extant rodent in the world. Its closest relatives are agouti, chinchillas, coyphillas, and guinea pigs. Native to South America, the capybara inhabits savannas and dense forests and lives near bodies of water. It is a highly social species and can be found in groups as large as 100 individuals but usually live in groups of 10–20 individuals. The capybara is not a threatened species though it is hunted for its meat and skin.

Habitat:

Capybara are semi-aquatic mammals found wild in much of South America (including Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana, Uruguay, Peru, and Paraguay) in densely forested areas near bodies of water, such as lakes, rivers, swamps, ponds and marshes, as well as flooded savannah and along rivers in tropical forest. Capybara have flourished in cattle ranches. They roam in home ranges averaging 10 hectares in high density populations. Many escapees from captivity can also be found in similar watery habitats around the world. Sightings are fairly common in Florida, although a breeding population has not yet been confirmed. In 2011, it was spotted in the Central Coast of California.

I've seen these guys in the wild in Uruguay. They are HUGE. Huge teeth. They exist. they do not suck goats; they are vegetarian. We call them "carpincho." They love their babies, just like we do.

RSS

© 2013   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service