Thylacine Videos
Posted by: Loren Coleman on November 10th, 2007
In Australia, as it turns out, there are many borderline good videos that may show evidence of the survival of the thylacine. Are some of these not merely dingo? Do I see some striping on the rear quarters of these animals? Are any of these the “Patterson-Gimlin film” of a thylacine? You be the judge.
Thanks to “on the track.”
About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct).
Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.
Interesting videos, but none of them are conclusive. My thoughts on them anyway.
Video number one looks promising, as the posture and gait looks comparable to what we see in the videos of known living thylacines. I can also make out the tail, which looks very much like that of a thylacine in appearance and the way it is held. Another thing is that i can see what looks like that sort of slope of the back into the tail that thylacines have. The video is very unclear and SHORT, but to me it looks like thylacine is a definite possibility.
The second video is quite clear, but the animal is frustratingly obscured by bushes. Why didn’t the videographer move to a better position? I cannot see any trademark features of a thylacine, but the head and face looks a bit like a dingo to me. I hate to say it, but it actually looks a little like a dingo with mange in my opinion.
The final video is impressive, as once again, the general shape of the creature and the look of the tail suggest thylacine to me. Although I cannot make it out too clearly, the head seems to be the right shape for a thylacine as well. I wish we had videos of thylacines running so we could compare the running gait and see if that’s what a thylacine would look like when it runs.
All in all, these videos are not terribly conclusive, but to me very interesting.
Interesting, but I do not know enough about the Thylacine to begin to determine one without being able to see the mouth. I do think these videos are incredibly interesting and possibly ground breaking.
Anyone know what is being said in video #2?
The first video, to me looks like a thylacine because the base of the tail at the anus is fat and tapers to a point. This is a trait of the thylacine.
I agree with mystery_man on the comment about the second video being inconclusive.
The third video I have seen many times before. To me this animal looks more like a fox with mange. I notice the tail of this animal is not fat at the base like a thylacine. I know animals with mange sometimes have other diseses like malnutrition. This could be why it’s tail is skinny at the base. When I pause the video during it’s run, I notice it’s tail seems to curl under it’s legs like a typical canine. A thylacine tail seems to be very stiff and not so limber like a canine. This is why I lean more twards fox. When I pause the third video at 0:07 I can see the tail curling downward. I do not think this animal is a Dingo because the side view of the head is narrow like a fox. A dingo’s head is more box shaped where their large jaw muscles are located.
I too wish the footage in these videos were clear. Maybe then we would know what these creatures are.
I think No 1 is the best and most likely to be (I hope so much) a Thylacine.
No 2 I’m pretty sure is a dog/dingo.
No 3 Undecided but I don’t think so-thinking again a bit doggy…
Video number 1 and 3 are the most convincing to me. Although I think the 3rd was shot in the 70s, so should not be considered recent. The 2nd video is a dingo with mange i.m.o. I’ve been quite obsessed with the Thylacine for a few years, and am convinced there is still a small population out there.
I think the first video is a Thylacine, the shape looks about right. The second is probably a mangy dingo. If I had seen that clip with no one telling me it’s supposed to be a Thylacine, my first thought would be mangy canine. As for the third one, I’m still undecided. Anyway, the first clip is the most convincing. these things might still be out there!
Where’s the rest of the footage for the first one?
I refuse to believe that 3 seconds was all they could record.
Things like this make me very wary.
Further more, after reading the description and watching the (insanely) short clip again, I’m more willing to believe it is a lion cub.
First one looks real, but really blurry, the second one looks more like a dingo with mange, and the lasst one, Is th Pgf of thylsacines, I can see stripes on it’s behind.
Hi guys,
not new to the site but newly registered… 🙂
@Ouroborus: That’s exactly what I thought when I first saw this clip. The shape of the head, the movement, etc. everything seems to be strangely reminiscent of a lion…
The second one looks like the Australian couterpart to the Chupacabras discovered in Texas lately… 😛
The third one is so damn blurry, yet I think it somewhat looks like thylacine, especially the colouring of the coat. I tend to think that it has black stripes running down his lower back and cross the hindlegs, still it could very well be a fox with mange or a large thin dog…
I often wonder why every cryptid footage taken nowadays is so inconclusive with all the hi-tech cameras and mobile phones and motion tracking devices and what not… maybe there are things that should better be left unknown…
AKDA
First one looks very interesting. I could be convinced.
The second is interesting but what makes me doubtful is the action (or not) of the camera operator. Why not try to get closer or find another angle. Still interesting, though.
Third one is a fox.
First clip is the most convincing i’ve seen – not that i’ve seen many-
The second could be anything (for a moment it looks like a horse!)
The third, i couldn’t really make any definite call on- however, it runs exactly like a fox (no reason it shouldn’t I suppose), so the idea that it is a mangy fox sounds most plausible to me.
If only we could ever get a squatch video even half as good as these (seems people with cameras in oz aren’t afflicted with the shaky cam disease like you north americans..)
I agree… the first clip is the most convincing as the head, shape & particularly tail looks very thylacine like. Best video evidence i’ve seen to date. The second one, although the clearest, I find the least convincing of all. Just looks like a dog with mange to me. The third is interesting but the tail is highly suspect, doesn’t seem rigid enough for a thylacine and this particularly video was also filmed on the mainland and not in Tasmania. Most likely the third one is of a fox.
The first one is slightly convincnig after first view. However, like the others, I wonder where the rest of the video is? Also, the more I watch of the first video, it does resemble a lion cub. The other two appear to be nothing more than fox or coyote with mange. Interesting! Thanks Loren.
To me, the most convincing of the three is the first one. Sure looks like a thylacine to me.
I agree with mystery_man that the second one looks like one but is too obscured by bushes. Unlike him, though, I will make a “leap of faith” and say it is a thylacine.
The third one looks more like a “mangy” fox but on second, closer look it does look like one. I’m willing to make a “leap of faith” on it too. The one that is “definite” as much one can be is the first one.
At least they are more slightly more definite than the previous two videos.
One looks like a marsupial to me. The key is in the tail, where it is held out stiffly. A lion has a flexible tail that loops towards the ground. You will almost never see a lion hold it’s tail like this. Also, we have a long square head, where a lion has a shorter muzzle and the proportions are all wrong for head vs. body for a cat.
#2 is a starving, imaciated dingo. You can see it’s spine and ribs, and it has a bad case of mange by the thickned skin around the eyes. The thing is unsteady on it’s feet and looks about to drop dead.
#3 Is a classic film. Someone did a frame-by-frame analysis of this film comparing it to a dog’s gait. I think here again they key is in how the tail is held, and how short the foot is between hock and footpad. Plus, the way it runs is sorta a modified hop, not the familiar gallop we see in most placental quadrapeds.
the first one is undoubtedly a tassie tiger, you can clearly see it, the tail – everything. No doubt.
The second one doesn’t look like a dingo OR a tasmanian tiger either, it looks more like a hyena, I could be wrong, but it looks like something filmed in a wildlife reserve
Third one I have seen many times, and you can see the, pardon the pun, tell tale tail
The second video is an emanciated canine of some sort, not a thylacine.
The third is definitely thylacine.
The first…..Holy Moly, if that is what I think it is….a thylacoleo…
I’d be happier than a kid who got all they wanted for christmas.
I can’t see the second film thanks to the “demon YouTube” syndrome my computer seems to suffer, but the first one makes me smile. It does appear to be a marsupial, and never have I seen a lion hold its tail like that, and I have been around a lot of captive lions in my zoo trekking days. I think that is one of the best pieces I’ve ever seen.
Intriguing , but nothing conclusive.
First and third are the best bet for a thylacine, but the First clip is waayyyyyyy to short to be anything conclusive, but very promissing to say the least. The Secound, I have to agree with mystery_man and the others that have said it, a Dingo with mange. The third is and will to date be the P/G of Thylacine video. The movements suggest a small creature with the porportions of a Thylacine, but nothing other than that…. Man, wish they would release that Steve Irwin video of his Thylacine hunt that reported to be out there…….
I haven’t read any of the other comments to be influenced.
Are any of these vids the Patterson-Grimlin of the thylacene?
Yes, possibly the first. I don’t see what else it could be. I don’t think it’s a hyena. As for the other two? No way. Vid 2 shows a malnourished dingo. And vid 3 could show any canine.
Just my two cents.
YourPTR- I wouldn’t go writing off the third video just because it wasn’t filmed in Tasmania. Some here might not be aware of it, but during the Pleistocene and early Holocene, the thylacine was found throughout mainland Australia and even New Guinea. It is just in modern times that the thylacine was confined to Tasmania. As a matter of fact, the most recent subfossilized remains of a thylacine found on the mainland are only 3,000 years old. Think about it, that is not an incredibly long amount of time in the grand scheme of things. If one is willing to entertain the thought of surviving prehistoric animals, or the idea that bigfoot could be an early human ancestor, then the idea that thylacines could still be surviving on mainland Australia isn’t all that far fetched.
mystery_man I’m not writing it off, I just think that fact makes it a lot less likely that’s all. I think there is more chance that the thylacine has survived in New Guinea than mainland Australia but I wouldn’t rule anything out. New Guinea has large unexplored rugged areas and a low population density and a few sightings of thylacine like animals in recent years.
The first video is by far the most convincing to me anyway, the head, the shape of the animal and especially the tail all look very thylacine like. But I certainly wouldn’t want to write off the third. It is very interesting indeed and could very well be a thylacine.
YourPTR- I see, it’s good to see that you haven’t ruled anything out. I have to agree that it is more likely we would find them in Tasmania and New Guinea is also an interesting possibility because as you said, it has a lot of remote areas. Australia has a lot of sparsely populated areas too, though, and I hold out a little hope that some pockets of thylacine populations may have survived on the mainland. I will admit that the third video would have been more exciting if it had been filmed in Tasmanis, but you never know. They could be out there on the mainland.
I also agree that the first video is the most compelling of the three. As short and blurry as it is, it is still an amazing little piece of footage as I can still make out some definite thylacine traits there. That third video still has my interest too, though. The general shape and the gait of the creature in my opinion do not match up completely with a dog or dingo. Hard to tell for sure, but it is intriguing.
1st one is probably a Thylacine, 2nd looks like a starving hairless African Wild dog and 3rd looks like somebody’s pet dog running on a driveway.
1st video is promising, the 2nd one looks like a feral dog or dingo/dog hybrid, it has similar traits to the african wild dog except that this thing is showing serious starvation and sickness pointing to a feral or abandoned dog, the 3rd one is also probably a feral dog. We see a fair amount of feral dogs on our farms and they all show similar traits as seen in the 2nd and 3rd video.
The first one looks very promising.
Personally, I find the first video a bit suspect, not for the length of the footage, but the appearance of the animal. The legs seem too short to me, and the tail and snout just don’t seem quite right to be a Thylacine.
The second one, I agree, is likely a known animal with mange.
The third is by far the best footage. The gait is unusual, the morphology is right, and it even has stripes. Like PG, it is an old film that has never been conclusively debunked.
First video – Not a thylacine by any means. Looks like a lion cub to me. The muzzle is broad and thick, and the ears are very round, and the tail is very thin. It also has the movement of a lion or similar wild feline. Nothing thylacine in those features.
Second video – Some kind of dog with mange.
Third video – probably the most convincing. The tail still seems too skinny though, but it could just be the way it looks from the poor quality.
One of the arguments i’ve heard used to discredit the first video is that it was actually filmed in Africa and it shows a female lion with a cub in its mouth and that’s why the video is so short and why the person filming didn’t zoom in because it would have become immediately obvious what the subject of the film was. This is just a theory, I don’t know if there is any truth in it or not but it is worth considering. Sometimes when I view the first video I can kinda make out something in the animals mouth in the first part like it was carrying something, this doesn’t prove it’s a lion with a cub of course and in the last part I don’t see that at all. Could have been sliced I suppose.
On the last one I see the stripes on the hind legs
The first video could be either a Thylacine or a Lion. I’m not particulary sure which because the quality is horrid. However, the shape of the head, the rounded ears, and the firm tail shows promise.
The second video is incredibly stupid. Not a Hyena by any means, but looks like either a dog or a dingo with some sort of illness. The ears are far too pointed to be a Thylacine which obviously had short and round ears.
The third video I think is definitely a Thylacine. I think it’s an amazing video. In stills of it, it obviously does not run anything like a fox nor a dog. The tail is held straight out behind it, just like the Thylacine. Regardless of the poor quality, if the stills are brightened, you can make out some very faint striping along the animal. I’d say the third is the best by far.
I really like the first one i think I can see the stripes and the way it’s holding its tail makes me think Thylacine.
There’s no way number two is a Thylacine because I can’t make out stripes and if you pause the clip at the right time you can see a flurry of a bushy tail something Thylacines just don’t have.
I don’t think number three is a Thylacine because its tail is too “floppy” when Thylacine run they hold there tails much stiffer, and I can make out something that might be stripes but I think it’s just do to the quality of the video I think number three is a fox.
Interesting I missed this post until someone recently sent it to me.
Of course I have seen all three and have analysed the second two in detail on my website. I have also analysed the first one considerably but not published my results.
In my opinion, the first and third offer some of the best circumstantial evidence for thylacines on the mainland in the 1900s. No video or photo will ever constitute proof, but they help you know where to look 🙂
The second is a dingo or other dog with mange.