Post Revamp: the Agogwe

There are literally dozens of cryptid hominins.  They hail from six of the seven continents-- only Antarctica lacks a rumored species.  From Australia, we hear of the Yowie.  Asia gives us the Xing-Xing, the Barmanou and the Yeren.  In North America we have Bigfoot and the Skunk Ape; South America has the Mapinguari.  Europe is represented by the Almas -- a Russian species that could be a Neanderthal.  And in Africa, we find the Agogwe.

This cryptid is not commonly seen -- my sources describe only three sightings.  All come from Europeans in the early 1900s, and all are fairly suspect.  The three witnesses, however, gave fairly uniform descriptions.  The Agogwe, they say, are about four feet tall.  They are covered in reddish hair, and have human-like feet with splayed big toes.  Their faces resemble chimps, but the Agogwe walk upright -- and move far more gracefully than an ape.

Bernard Heuvelmans, the father of cryptozoology, believed the Agogwe were relict Australopithecines.  These hominins lived in Africa three million years ago, and eventually developed into modern humans.  Their survival is unlikely, but the Agogwe well matches their description -- if Australopithecines did exist, this cryptid would look much like them.  Another possibility is that the Agogwe are misidentified chimps.  This is no more likely -- chimps can walk bipedally, but only for short distances, and they aren't red in color.  Besides, they live only in the jungle, and are familiar to Africa's native peoples.

A final theory is that these cryptids are gibbons.  In Africa, these lesser apes died out millions of years ago.  They still exist, however, in southeast Asia.  Gibbons do look like the Agogwe -- they're the same size, and share a high forehead.  But gibbons are extremely awkward walkers, with gangly arms that make them well-suited for tree-swinging.  They're also jungle-dwellers like the chimpanzee, and would never live on the savannah.  None of our current theories seem particularly probable; honestly, neither does the Agogwe's existence.  Could there be Australopiths surviving on the plains of Zimbabwe?  I'd love to believe so, but the odds are stacked against it.

Read more about the Agogwe:
http://www.americanmonsters.com/site/2009/12/agogwe-east-africa/
http://www.strangeark.com/reprints/beasts.html
Image from http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/Numriser0033.jpg

Post Revamp: Orang Pendek and Ebu Gogo

Writing a crypto-blog makes you feel like a party pooper.  I'm an optimistic person, especially about the existence of cryptids-- but fact must dictate BeastPedia's content.  I'm not going to post what I'd like to be true; I have to write what the evidence supports.  Unfortunately, that means I do a lot of debunking.  That's why I've been looking forward to this post-- instead of shutting down an unlikely creature, I get to trumpet its possibility.

The Orang Pendek is a mysterious Sumatran primate.  It has been sighted dozens of times, and locals have known of it for centuries.  The creature is small-- two to five feet tall, say most sources, with an average of about three.  It lives in the forest like an ape, but walks upright on feet resembling a child's.  The Orang Pendek has a human-like face, but with a larger brow ridge and prominent incisors.  Its feet are bent slightly outwards, giving it a bow-legged appearance.

This cryptid is quite cunning, and locals attribute it an almost human intelligence level.  Some say it can use tools, and that it hunts its prey with small axes.  The Orang Pendek also obtains its food through thievery-- it's known to raid local farms, stealing crops from villagers.  Nonetheless, the locals treat it with respect, and see it as an animal with which they can coexist.

The first westerners to see the Orang Pendek were Dutch colonists in the 1920s.  Their reports launched a debate of identity that has continued to this day.  There are three basic possibilities, one of which is misidentification.  Many believe this primate simply doesn't exist-- and that most sightings can be attributed to the local siamangs.  These siamangs are apes of Orang Pendek's size-- and they can walk bipedally, at least in short bursts.  The cryptid's "humanoid" footprints, skeptics say, are actually those of a sun bear.

But the Orang Pendek can't be easily written off.  The creature is well-documented in local reports, and the locals know a siamang when they see one.  They insist that the Orang Pendek is a different animal; a much larger, stronger one that walks upright and has a humanlike face.  This doesn't sound like a gibbon relative to me.  As for the sun bears, it's true that their prints look like those of humans.  However, sun bears also have claws-- which are noticeable in the prints when examined by an expert.

In my opinion, the evidence points to Orang Pendek as a new animal-- not a case of mistaken identity.  So what is it?  According to one theory, it's a new species of orangutan.  Orangutans don't live in central Sumatra, but they do live in the north of the island.  These large apes are big enough to pass for Orang Pendek, and do spend some time on the ground.  There are some clear differences-- Orangutans are arboreal, and the Pendek lacks orange fur.  But perhaps this beast is a ground-dwelling variant.

But the more compelling theory is this-- Orang Pendek might be a surviving hominin.  In 2003, scientists on Flores-- a nearby island-- made an incredible discovery.  They uncovered the bones of a new prehistoric human; a tiny species they dubbed Homo floresiensis.  Commonly called "Hobbits," these diminutive creatures greatly resembled Orang Pendek.  They were three-foot ground-dwelling bipeds, and would have been quite intelligent.  They had human-like faces, and their footprints resembled a child's.  Most strikingly of all, these hominins vanished just 12,000 years ago.  Floresiensis certainly interacted with modern humans, and may continue to under the name Orang Pendek.

It's impossible to mention floresiensis without mentioning Ebu Gogo.  This is another Indonesian island hominin-- this one from Flores.  It's near-perfect match for the "Hobbits", and locals believe it died out a century ago.  It was finally killed off by humans, they report, but only quite recently.  Was Ebu Gogo the same creature as Orang Pendek?  Do both represent surviving "Hobbits?"  For now, it's hard to say-- but the evidence is striking.  Have faith, crypto-fans!  This is a beast in which it's easy to believe.

Read more about the Orang Pendek:

http://www.orangpendek.org/orangpendek/

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2011/sep/09/orang-pendek-quest-sumatra

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/creatures/orang.htm

Image, of Homo floresiensis skull compared to a human, from https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwvvJnzVKgBZODsnxgaefbKjvo_s96ivtgoEtqAEf6ampuL0yosczUoUvV0sfzVSanqngoxh-me3CdFnVx-nTUTRL0Njgzx9G7OgO7PDHkVjZAEiJH5xrBQ-pGmvgSoazKmhwty3eIheQ/s1600/craneo+++humano.jpg

Post Revamp: Nguma-Monene

The Nguma-Monene is a reptilian cryptid of the Congo.  Unlike the Mokele-Mbembe and other local beasts, it's generally not confused for a dinosaur.  instead, this beast is said to be a gigantic snake or monitor lizard.  The Nguma-Monene has been sighted several times since the 1960s-- sometimes by reliable eyewitnesses.  The local tribes are also familiar with it, and seem somewhat afraid of the beast.  According to some sources, discussions of the monster are taboo.

The Nguma-Monene shares much with other Congolese cryptids.  It hates hippos, for one, and is said to kill them on sight.  This same trait is ascribed to the Mokele-Mbembe, and sometimes to the Emela-Ntouka.  Also notable is the Nguma-Monene's aquatic lifestyle.  This cryptid has never been sighted out of the water, making it difficult to physically describe.  At the very least, we can say this:  it's big.  A commonly-cited figure is thirty feet, but the animal may be even larger.  This measurement comes from a witness who only saw the beast's tail.

The other distinguishing trait of the Nguma-Monene is the spiky ridge on its back.  In this it resembles Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu-- through the two animals are clearly different.  Nguma-Monene is long and thin; the other cryptid has a more standard quadrupedal body.  For this reason, it is often argued that Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu is a crocodile, while Nguma-Monene is a snake.

This is a fairly solid theory-- many huge snakes are semi-aquatic.  Take the anaconda for example.  At thirty feet in length, it's the world's longest reptile-- and it spends much of its time in the water.  Of course, anacondas only live in South America, but Africa has plenty of similar creatures.  The twenty-foot African rock python is a great swimmer-- perhaps the Nguma-Monene is a similar species.

Another possibility is that this creature is a monitor lizard.  These animals are also African natives-- and are also fond of the water.  I've heard it said that Nguma-Monene must be a monitor-- because snakes don't have spiky ridges on their backs.  Of course, neither do most monitor lizards, and for that reason I think snakes are a better candidate.  Monitor lizards don't grow nearly large enough to pass for this cryptid.

Read more about the Nguma-Monene:
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2012/11/reposting-congo-dragons-and-colossal.html
http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9740968/1/
Image from https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1nHdnZcjs9cwIbuRs3rWD-knPx75dhC2YX_QL5WVBQzKXvHrAXJVM5XKoBJQ4USRC_O9_Zv9klIyn8NUz1Vl1Twm_aBSOoVgEphMPJtoebeS5zgBmF6oi4KT4-n2LZQ23wDUvSrgS61W4/s400/Nguma-monene%252C+David-Miller-Roy+Mackal.jpg

A Different Kind of Revamp

If you're a reader of this blog, I'm sure you've noticed its massive design overhaul.  I've redone the sidebar, adding a search feature and reducing the number of labels.  I've created a useful links page, and moved the "About Me" information to a tab of its own.  I've also added a "subscribe by email" gadget-- if you really like my posts, you can get them in your inbox!

But the most obvious change, I think, is that the site just looks much better.  New typefaces, new colors, new background, new design... BeastPedia has never looked so good.  And I won't take an ounce of credit for it.  All of these features were added by a good friend, who is a fantastic graphic designer.  She's given my blog an amazing facelift, and I can't thank her enough.  A round of applause, ladies and gentlemen!

The Splinter Cat

It’s time for a “fearsome critter!”  I’ve left dozens of these guys undescribed, and haven’t written one up in weeks.  Today I introduce you to the Splinter Cat-- an arboreal beast of the Pacific Northwest.  These felines cannot be distinguished from normal cats, except by their unusual behavior.  Your average tabby eats mice and cat food, but the Splinter Cat feeds on bees.

This is odd, but not unheard of in nature.  Plenty of animals eat insects, and many have adaptations to prevent stings.  No, the odd thing about the Splinter Cat isn’t its diet-- it’s how that diet is obtained.  When it gets hungry, a Splinter Cat climbs the nearest tree before leaping off into thin air.  It will then crash head-first into a nearby trunk, shattering it completely and destroying any beehives within.  The destroyed trees are often explained as lightning-strike victims.

The problem is this-- not all trees contain hives.  A Splinter Cat is thus forced to ram its way through entire groves every time it wants a meal.  This is a rather inefficient method of hunting, and not pleasant for the animal.  It's easy to see why the Splinter Cat is so ornery.  You would be too, if you had a massive headache every time you tried to eat!

Read more about the Splinter Cat:

http://www.fearsomecreaturesofthelumberwoods.com/pg37.htm

http://www.splintercat.org/SplintercatMainFolder/Splintercat/StoryOfTheSplintercat.html

Image from http://www.fearsomecreaturesofthelumberwoods.com/images/splintercat.jpg

The Veo

On the Indonesian island of Rinca lives a creature called the Veo.  This cryptid is found in the island's mountainous center, where it emerges at night to feed on termites.  The Veo is larger than a horse, and its hide is covered in armored plates.  The creature looks rather formidable-- but thankfully, it eats only insects, and locals do not fear the beast.

If you've studied your obscure mammals, the Veo might seem familiar.  Except for its size, it's a near-perfect match for a creature called the pangolin.  These little beasties-- sometimes called "scaly anteaters" are found throughout Africa, Asia and Oceania.  They have platelike armor, long tongues and insectivorous diets.  There are plenty of pangolins in southeast Asia-- and the Veo sounds just like a large one.

If you've read my recent posts, you know how I feel about extinct creatures.  They're cool, but I consider their survival unlikely-- moreso the longer they've been dead.  The Veo, though, is one cryptid I actually believe to be prehistoric.  Very close to Rinca is an island called Borneo-- where fossils have been found of gigantic fossil pangolins.  The largest living species are about four feet long, but these ancient varieties could be twice that size.  What's more, they died out only thousands of years ago.  It's not a far stretch to imagine their continued existence.

Now, I've heard other ideas about the identity of the Veo-- that it's an ankylosaur, for example, or another armored dinosaur.  To me, these theories sound silly.  Which seems more likely to you:  the survival of a giant pangolin for ten thousand years, or the survival of a dinosaur for sixty-five million?  Besides, anklyosaurs didn't eat insects-- while all pangolins do.  If the Veo is real, there's no doubt in my mind about its identity.

Read more about the Veo:
http://asiaparanormal.blogspot.com/2010/01/10-mysterious-cryptids-of-asia-part-2.html
http://www.newanimal.org/giant-animals.htm
Image from http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090608231239/secretsaturdays/images/5/5f/Manis_paleojavanicus.jpg

The Man-Eating Tree of Nubia

As readers of this blog, you're obviously all familiar with cryptozoology.  But have you heard of cryptobotany?  It's a real field, though a small one-- and its version of Bigfoot is the Nubian Tree.  This plant is described in only one account-- which comes from Egypt in the late 1800s.  The story sounds fantastical, and is probably a work of fiction.  But nonetheless, it's a fascinating tale of cryptid foliage, and it deserves a place on BeastPedia.

The Man-Eating Tree is a deadly organism, but to the unwary it seems appealing.  It is always found in shade-filled clearings, surrounded by lush grass.  Golden fruit hangs from its branches, and dew glistens on its leaves.  This harmless appearance is a carefully-constructed trap-- every facet of which is lethal.  The plant grows alone because it poisons all nearby trees.  Its fruit serves as a lure, drawing animals to their deaths.  And its dew drips onto the grass below-- nourishing it, and causing it to grow tall.  Why is this so dangerous?  Because it conceals the skeletons of previous victims, lying beneath the tree.

When prey approaches, the tree's leaves begin to rustle-- with or without a breeze.  These leaves are the plant's primary weapons, capable of latching onto victims and sucking their blood.  Usually, the Man-Eating Tree feeds on wildlife-- but when they're available, it will take human victims.  A man can be consumed in under a minute, wrapped up in long branches and drained of life.

Predatory trees abound in cryptobotany-- though few are as deadly as this one.  Fortunately, none of them are backed by sgood evidence.  Carnivorous plants do exist, but most of them feed solely on insects.  The biggest may occasionally catch a shrew-- but there's a big difference between a two-inch rodent and a six-foot human.  Never fear; you're safe from the world's foliage!

Read more about the Man-Eating Tree of Nubia:
http://vampiresrealm.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/the-man-eating-tree-phil-robinson.pdf
Image from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/The_ya-te-veo.jpg (depicting another man-eating tree, not the one described here)

Post Revamp: the Ngoubou

Well, I've finished updating my first batch of old posts-- the ones covering Africa's "dinosaurian" cryptids.  The last among them is the Ngoubou, a beast only recently described.  In 2000, Bill Gibbons and John Kirk launched a cryptozoological expedition to Cameroon.  Their goal was to search for Mokele-Mbembe-- but they found something else entirely.  Members of the expedition interviewed many locals, seeking out information on unknown animals.  As expected, some natives talked about Mokele-Mbembe, but others brought up a creature called the Ngoubou.

This animal, they said, was a savannah-dwelling beast-- about the size of an ox, and fiercely tempered.  It had a beaklike face, a rhino-like snout, and a frill bearing six long horns.  To Kirk and Gibbons, this animal sounded a lot like the dinosaur Styracosaurus.  Physically, the two animals are almost identical-- and their habitats match perfectly.  The similarity between this dinosaur and the Ngoubou is striking.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, there are no ceratopsian fossils in Afica.  This makes one's existence there unlikely, and drives me to seek alternative explanations.  It's been suggested that the Ngoubou is a misidentified rhino, and in fact, the two animals share the same local name.  However, the natives of Cameroon insist that the beasts are different, and that the cryptid Ngoubou has many more horns.  Another theory is that the Ngoubou is a surviving Uintathere.  This prehistoric mammal is another good match for the creature-- or it would be, if it had ever lived in Africa.

One more theory, presented by Dale Drinnon at the blog "Frontiers of Zoology," deserves mention.  Mr. Drinnon identifies the Ngoubou with Sivatherium-- a prehistoric giraffe that had multiple horns.  This creature is a good physical match for Ngoubou, though giraffes aren't particularly aggressive.  However, Sivatherium has two major points working in its favor:  first of all, it lived in Africa, and second of all, cave paintings reveal that it may have lived even a few thousand years ago.  Perhaps a small population survived, giving rise to the Ngoubou legend.

Read more about the Ngoubou:
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptotourism/ngoubou/
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2011/04/surviving-sivatheres.html
Image from http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130501133457/cryptidz/images/0/08/Ngoubou.jpg

Steller's Sea Ape

Seven decades before Lewis and Clark's journey, Vitus Bering began his Second Kamchatka Expedition.  Bering, though Danish by birth, was an officer of the Russian navy.  He was also a great explorer, who had traveled through Siberia in the 1720s.  In doing so, he conclusively proved that Russia and North America were not connected by land-- that there was open water between them.  In his second expedition, he would travel these northern seas, while mapping the unexplored Siberian coast.

Bering's 1933 expedition involved thousands of men.  Among them were many scientists, brought along to document the wildlife and geology of northern Russia.  One of them, Georg Wilhelm Steller, would become quite famous in his own right.  Steller was a naturalist, who traveled with the expedition all the way to Alaska.  Indeed, he was the first to document many Alaskan animal species-- including Steller's Eider, Steller's Eagle, Steller's Jay and the now-extinct Steller's Sea Cow.

But Steller also described one less-ordinary animal-- a creature which remains a cryptid two centuries later.  He called it a "sea ape," though it has little in common with any primate.  Instead, the animal was more doglike in appearance-- with tall, pointed ears and drooping whiskers.  It was furry, intelligent, and playful-- much like an otter or seal.  But it had no limbs, and a tail like a shark.

Steller's Sea Ape is quite a cryptozoological puzzle.  It was reported by the most reliable of witnesses-- a trained zoologist, who discovered many other animal species.  Steller was known to be extremely factual and accurate in his observations, so it's unlikely that he would attempt to hoax the public.  But what did Steller see?  Most believe that the Sea Ape was a misidentified seal.  But this, to me, does not sound probable.  Steller encountered many seals during his journey, and was extremely familiar with the animals.  An amateur might mistake one for a Sea Ape-- but an explorer and naturalist would not.

No, it seems to me that there are two possibilities when it comes to the Sea Ape:  either Steller saw something in the Alaskan seas, or he made something up.  At first I thought the latter option unlikely, but recently I've changed my mind.  As I said, Steller was a talented naturalist, who I highly doubt would hoax the public.  But his descriptions of the Sea Ape were not publicly released.  They do not appear in his official expedition reports, or in the ship's log.  They can't even be found in Steller's book about the aquatic wildlife of Alaska.  Clearly, Steller himself knew that the Sea Ape wasn't reputable enough to publicize.  So why would he write about this creature in his journal?

Biologist Andrew Thaler has a theory that I personally quite like.  He points out that, during the time when Steller described the Sea Ape, the naturalist was on poor terms with Vitus Bering.  The two men had never gotten along, and tensions were especially high during the Alaskan part of the trip.  Bering, like many of the crew, was extremely sick with a disease called Scurvy.  Steller had recommended a simple cure, but the crew completely ignored him.  With the captain sick, Steller was never allowed off the ship to explore-- something that limited his work and left him highly frustrated.

Thaler suggests that this frustration manifested itself as the Sea Ape-- meant to be an insulting caricature of Vitus Bering himself.  Bering's most notable features were his moustache and pointy ears, similar to those "seen" on the Sea Ape.  But this alone is circumstantial.  To me, the incriminating evidence is this:  Steller originally named his animal the "Danish Sea Ape."  At the time, the expedition was nowhere near Denmark, and there was only one Dane on the ship:  Bering.

Bering would die of scurvy during the expedition, and Steller would perish shortly thereafter.  Steller thus had no way to explain that his "Sea Ape" was a joke-- it was taken to be a description of a real animal.  The mistake has persisted for centuries, and Steller's Sea Ape is still listed in many cryptozoology books.  In fact, it is an eighteenth-century insult, still echoing in the present day.

Read more about Steller's Sea Ape:
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/stellers-seaape/
http://www.southernfriedscience.com/?p=6968
http://www.southernfriedscience.com/?p=11327
http://www.popularsocialscience.com/2013/07/02/profiles-in-natural-history-georg-wilhelm-steller-and-the-ape-in-the-sea/
Image from http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/stellers.jpg

Post Revamp: the Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu

Dr. Roy Mackal was one of the most famous cryptozoologists of the 20th century.  A biologist at the Univeristy of Chicago, he was also vice-president of the International Society for Cryptozoology and a long-time researcher of the Loch Ness Monster.  Later in his cryptozoological career, he developed a strong interest in the Mokele-Mbembe-- launching two African expeditions in order to find it.  Dr. Mackal never located the creature, but he brought back tales of several other cryptids from the Congo.  One of them was the Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu.

Like virtually every Congolese cryptid, this animal has long been associated with a dinosaur.  In this case, it's often claimed as a relict stegosaur of some kind-- perhaps a Kentrosaurus.  Why?  Its name, rather aptly, means "the animal with planks growing out of its back."  The Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu is semiaquatic, and its full body has never been seen-- locals have only caught glimpses of its back, which is covered in tall plates.

The case of Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu reminds me of the Emela-Ntouka.  Both are claimed to be dinosaurs, although the dinosaurs in question could not live underwater.  Furthermore, neither was found in Africa.  How could a North American reptile end up in a Congolese swamp?  If it exists, Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu is probably a reptile-- few other creatures have notable back-plates.  But this animal is surely not prehistoric.

Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu is more likely an undiscovered crocodile.  These reptiles have platelike scales on their backs-- though they're not as large as this purported cryptid's.  Crocodiles are also native to the Congo, and spend much of their time underwater.  We don't have much information on Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu, but what we do know sounds crocodilian to me.

Read more about the Mbielu-Mbielu-Mbielu:
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2011/04/muhuru-mbielu-mbielu-mbielu-and.html
Image from http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xjrYJb-V758/TbM7asBGBZI/AAAAAAAAB_w/CModePXdDNU/s1600/mbielu_mackal.jpg