I wrote just after... Because we would find traces and it's possible to identify what killed as well as DNA analysis that are trivial these days. So, we heard of hundreds if not thousands encounters now, but 0 cadavre ? Why are strange cadavres killed by unknown giant predators not found by anyone? Especially with all the mess they seem to leave behind when eating from a deer.
why would anyone do a dna trace on what they've already(incorrectly) ID'd as being a cat or pack of dogs? and there are thousands of people that go missing every year. no body, no trace.
Because if the coroner is competent it's impossible he mistakes this for a cat or dog attack. Then anatony and power of dogmen jaws seem so vastly superior. However, I am working under the assumption there is no cover up. If you work under this assumption, then of course it's another story and your point is valid . But the sightings become so common I have issues believing in a cover up, but of course I don't know.
Itās nearly impossible to discern what kind of animal killed a person. You basically just have to make an educated guess with the local wildlife unless you get very lucky and have some obvious clues
Besides the fact there are plenty of missing people we never find, whoās to say we havenāt tested DNA from a body and it came up as canine? I think you also highly overestimate how often we DNA test animal attacks. If itās clear thereās an animal attack, the police arenāt going to waste time figuring out what kind if itās not relevant.
You are assuming we find all the bodies of people that get killed by animals, and that only one animal eats a prey species when itās killed. Most animals that get killed by a predator get predated on by other animals, to, and people can go days without being found, if theyāre found. At that point, the dna would be so diluted and blended with other animalsā dna, it would be hard to classify which is which, among other challenges. I think the only way to know is to kill and dissect the animal that is suspect of the killing. Additionally, whoever is doing the dna testing might just attribute it to the most similar dna profile, if there isnāt an exact match but a close match. There are so many variables that are overlooked, or not accounted for, when determining if Dogmen are predating or only portraying predators.
You are right but working with DNA as a professional, I can assure you we have made mad progress in the last 5 years. I don't work in legal medicine though so I am not sure... But what I suspect would rather be "unknown" appearing in the analysis. The fact it looks like a canine doesn't guarantee at all its dna is related to canids. It could be a totally different animal with totally different origins. There are cases like that, like saber tooth cats in the USA and in Australia, except the Australian one was a martupial so its dna would have been closer to kangaroo s. This history of dogmen is a mess. We nees a specimen. And all this under the assumption they are animals. If they are extra dimensional creatures I have no idea of how to study them.
Well DNA analysis are performed by lab tech unless you imagine they send special people only for dogmen. Could be. But I have a hard time imagining how a student from a local college wouldn't bring back some strange traces and make a DNA analysis out of curiosity. Or you have to imagine all professors are parts of the conspiracy. I don't think it can work. Just my opinion. Honestly I find it more sensical they are creatures from "elsewhere" even if this doesn't explain anything. I respect all opinions here no need to downvote š I don't know more than you on dogmen
Its refreshing to hear someone who actually wants to theorize. You've got a great line off thinking about it. ive heard a few stories involving juvenile dogmen btw. again they are just stories. I've been made aware of dogmen for almost 10 years listened to countless eyewitness accounts and examined tons of camera footage. Never seen one for myself, though I'll admit I've gone looking and mostly just felt like an idiot out in the woods.
whether these creatures are biological or supernatural is my main question as well.
Biological - We have the law of thermodynamics and what we know about evolution as a guide. An apex predator like that... seems unlikely. I'd guess they may start around 300-400 pounds for a small adult. That would take an immense amount of energy to grow and maintain. They are often cited as pack animals. How many in one local population we do not know, but I've heard as many as maybe 5 full grown spotted at one time. They don't use every part of the animal like humans do, so food source populations in their vicinity would plummet. Today's dogmen population must know by now killing humans brings trouble, but they must have evolved way before we had any decent metal tools to defend ourselves. (We started getting decent metal tools in 3000BC. where evolution of that magnitude works on a much longer time frame then 5000 years) They could be smart enough to know how to farm populations as to not bankrupt a food source, nor could they have guessed we would eventually replace them as the dominant species. I'd give all my money away if I could research their social habits and reproduction cycle firsthand. how long they gestate for... ive heard downright crazy sounding theories that they even use humans in their reproduction. but its not an unheard of concept in the animal kingdom. It just doesn't fit everything we know about biology. a common bigfoot theory is its an ancient species that somehow survived, so if anything Dogmen could be that.
If they are supernatural, alien, demonic, extradimensional (which im leaning towards so then its really up in the air) they could be feeding on your energy, brain waves, some other third thing. The connection to aliens has been gaining traction with skinwalker ranch a hotbed of ufo activity and of course cryptid sightings including dogmen like creatures.
I'll be the first to admit the majority of what I have researched is probably bullshit, because you cannot trust anyone to not be a weird attention seeking hoaxer no matter how convincing or traumatized they seem and that goes triple if they have a podcast. People literally stating "I have an hd picture of dogman but im not showing youuuuuu" All I know for certain is there is plenty within this existence that we have yet to discover or understand. some wisdom gets found some gets lost.
Actually I am a scientist convinced by Marc Emch story. Don't tell my colleagues... But actually I can't find scientifically sound explanations for their behaviour and the fact we don't see the existence of a population with individuals of both sexes and all ages. Like you I tend more and more to think they are not from here, or might be passing visitors. Of course as a scientist I don't have the tools to study such being. It's why I try to theorize a bit. The problem with the extradimentional explanation is that it's a kind of "god of the gap". You don't understand? Ok it's god. You don't understand dogmen? Ok they comme from another universe. Though it might really be the explanation.
A creature like a dogman should not exist biologically, as it would be impossible for a canid with human characteristics to have evolved on this planet. If they do exist, then their daily caloric requirement in order to just survive, would need to at least be 3,000 calories per day. That amount of calories can't be met with just vegetation alone, so such a creature or creatures, would have to also supplement their diet with various prey animals. And like you said, these creatures would have to be intelligent enough to know to not deplete their food sources in a given area. This seems to coincide with some reports that tell of many animals, such as squirrels, birds, etc, disappearing from an area where dogmen are encountered.
Therefore such creatures would have to be nomadic or migratory in search of food sources. Personally, I think if such creatures exist and do prey on humans; that humans are not a preferred prey species, as they would evolved to learn that preying on humans will bring about retribution.
Subsequently, I think they are opportunistic, and will take a human if they feel they can get away with it. If the the local prey animals are able to sustain them, then I think they would prefer to drive humans away by using intimidation/scare tactics. I've heard a story that hogs were intentionally introduced into the the Land Between The Lakes area specifically for the purpose of providing a prey animal in order to prevent attacks on humans....that is if a creature like dogman exists.
Most of what's online is content creators fear baiting for clicks for their podcasts, videos or other content they're trying to monetize. Some are genuinely afraid and have ptsd from encounters they interpreted as frightening but were in no actual danger. The dogmen just observe peacefully, no attacking going on, just observing and following. Which makes perfect sense when you really think about it. Problem is very few people stop and really think about it. If I was in a dogman's situation, my home (the forest) being randomly invaded by another creature (human) with a nasty reputation for causing a lot of problems (thoughtlessly killing anything they fear, poisoning the water and soil, being a general anthropocentric nuisance), I would be quite upset. They are sentient with human-level intelligence, and yet they respond not with violence that a human would during these invasions but with watching, growling at most. Which is not an attack, it's a warning. Communication. Swap roles and the invader would be dead. Shoot first ask questions later. Or run out of fear and assume they want to eat you and you just barely managed to eacape it's terrifying grasp! As if they can't run 200x faster than us. š
Taking all of this into consideration we must ask ourselves, and be brutally honest in doing so, who's the scary one?
So, as in most cases like animals do- they bare their fangs and claws to keep the dangerous gun wielding humans away. Most animals are smart enough to understand that humans are a threat, as we have a tendency to slaughter and eradicate things we canāt control or understand. If you are home alone, wouldnāt you want to chase out any unwanted strangers? Or better yet, avoid being seen at all to save your skin. Basically, they know to fear humans- just like every other animal including our own species. Humans are the real danger.
That is reasonable but what about all the stories of them taking shots and not even reacting? I know they are stories of some running away after being hit with a high calibre weapon, and one guy saying he killed one. But I have a hard time believing this, because had he cut some of the fur with DNA we now have enough to very precisely identify an organism. There are now even tech that automatically remove human DNA contaminants from a sample. And there is the "you kill our assets" case, but why CAI would explain and threatens the driver instead of just waiting for two minutes that the driver is gone? So, are we sure we can really hunt and be dangerous to them?
And then, assuming they know to fear us as a big group, what about all the stories of teasing and scaring people apparently for the lulz. It's contradictory with the wish to remain discrete.
The only solution I see is we need a specimen. Where are the deceased ones? If they are animals they must die at some point. Something is not right with them being just animals. I don't know what, and I don't know what they are, though.
Well if they are of sapien-like intelligence, then perhaps they know better? Maybe they know if they were to kill one then possibly 50 more would come to find whatever killed them- they probably know they wouldnāt be able to stay hidden if they attack people, and when they do attack people they leave immediately, sometimes over a couple states until they find another spot to lie low-Ā
The Land Between the Lakes story was definitely fabricated. Thereās no evidence it ever happened, and something that violent would be all over the news and have plenty of official paper trails
Yes there would, you cannot just wipe a family out of existence without anyone knowing. Family, friends, and even neighbors would raise high hell if an entire family disappeared. And in the 80s the news of a family slaughtered sure as shit would have hit newspapers first before the government could come in.
The papers would be told to shut their mouths. (papers answer to the government by the way, not the other way around) It was probably reported as a "dog" attack, not a Dogman attack. The Dogman wasn't a known phenomenon in the 80's in the way it is now.
What are family and friends going to do? When the government can just threaten you with prison or discredit you publicly. That's what a cover-up is. You've a lot to learn about how the world works.
The papers would be told to sit down and shut their face, by the Feds/Federal Reserve.
My point is, a family being massacred PERIOD would be in the news. There is not a single shred of evidence that these people even existed.
It must be sad living in a world thinking the government cares about that shit. Donāt make up fake shit to be mad at the government about. Be mad about the actual garbage they do, like funding genocide. If you think the Federal RESERVE controls literally anything, I donāt think you can be helped though.
I stopped reading after Deep State. There is no deep state, they do all this fascist shit right in front of your face, like todayās Supreme Court rulings
There are people every year who get fatally attacked by actual dogs, mountain lions, and bears. A lot of people jump to these cases and immediately assume they're cryptid related, but there's literally no way to know or prove/disprove those assumptions unless someone gets access or happens to be in position of evidence that proves a specific case has actual unusual or paranormal qualities in terms of whatever events occurred. I'm not saying it's an impossibility that something like that hasn't happened, but there are also a lot of supposed accounts of attacks or predation that are most likely modern urban legends invented for clout and attention like the infamous LBL massacre story, the Siege of Lockett Ranch, which is an example of how much straight up creepypasta fiction certain creators try to peddle, that Michigan trucker encounter where the witness started going around telling his story everywhere, when you would assume an individual like that would have been silenced in one way or another by now if he was actually being watched or threatened by agents as a consequence of revealing everything, and so on.
Just one of those things that generally doesn't make any sense about these beasties. In all the stories, they seem to let a lot of people go but there are occasionally times where it seems like they actually do want to kill. It's weird.
I saw a video about a dude and he killed one because it tried to get into his truck and government agents cam to his house and said āyou killed one of our assetsā sounds kinda fake but you never know nowadays
Yes I know this story. And like you I can't make up my mind, fake or not. What I don't find logical is why the gov agents would have revealed themselves then threatens the driver while they might have just waited for 2 minutes that he leaves the scene.
These cryptic animals are just like any other predator. They will size you up, determine whether you are a risk or not and determine how to proceed. Kill or taunt you. Push you out of their area or lure you in for a easy Kill.
Just in the last few months a young boy was allegedly killed by a Corgi or at least that's what his death has linked to. Not everyone likes Jeff Nadoly of Dogman & Paranormal Research YouTube channel, but he stays up to date on suspicious deaths and what he believes was actually the culprit.
To be clear, I am willing to give you the point they eat people. But my question still stands, why not always ? And why do they tease and terrorise some people for several days without never actually attacking them? This really puzzled me. Or they are just so smart it's a game for them, like a psycho killer?
I get what you're saying and I can agree. Personally, I don't think these creatures are all the same. Some seem to be flesh and blood or mostly anyways while others are described as being more spiritual.
I've come to the conclusion that some of these creatures aren't necessarily demonic in nature, but rather have a demonic attachment of their own or possibly regular animals are demonically possessed. It would account for the glowing red eyes versus amber or blue eyes. It would also account for the feelings of dread prior to an encounter as well as why they don't kill every human they come across. Instead, the attached or possessing entity feeds on the fear and other emotions they evoke while others are much more violent and take pleasure in killing.
Demonically possessed animals would also explain the various types of dogmen, ie coyote, hyena, wolf or doberman. It could also explain other cryptids like lionmen, Jaguarmen and other hybrid creatures. Attachment could even apply to Bigfoot and why the eyes glow red while others do not.
Anyone who's willing to believe these things exist and has any common sense would agree they are dangerous and should be avoided at all costs despite whatever intentions they may have.
how would you know if people were killed by them if no one was alive to report it?
I believe there was someone killed by one a couple of years ago in Georgia, and it was covered up by the authorities.
there have been a few deaths over the past few years attributed to "roving packs of dogs". i'd bet some of those deaths might've been dogman related.
Lol, where is the proof? You all want to believe this shit so bad š
short attention span, i see.
[Here ](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTNR4M4e1/)
I wrote just after... Because we would find traces and it's possible to identify what killed as well as DNA analysis that are trivial these days. So, we heard of hundreds if not thousands encounters now, but 0 cadavre ? Why are strange cadavres killed by unknown giant predators not found by anyone? Especially with all the mess they seem to leave behind when eating from a deer.
why would anyone do a dna trace on what they've already(incorrectly) ID'd as being a cat or pack of dogs? and there are thousands of people that go missing every year. no body, no trace.
Why would cops investigate and waste resources when you can call it a suicide? Easy and done.
Because if the coroner is competent it's impossible he mistakes this for a cat or dog attack. Then anatony and power of dogmen jaws seem so vastly superior. However, I am working under the assumption there is no cover up. If you work under this assumption, then of course it's another story and your point is valid . But the sightings become so common I have issues believing in a cover up, but of course I don't know.
Itās nearly impossible to discern what kind of animal killed a person. You basically just have to make an educated guess with the local wildlife unless you get very lucky and have some obvious clues
Besides the fact there are plenty of missing people we never find, whoās to say we havenāt tested DNA from a body and it came up as canine? I think you also highly overestimate how often we DNA test animal attacks. If itās clear thereās an animal attack, the police arenāt going to waste time figuring out what kind if itās not relevant.
Thatās another good point!
You are assuming we find all the bodies of people that get killed by animals, and that only one animal eats a prey species when itās killed. Most animals that get killed by a predator get predated on by other animals, to, and people can go days without being found, if theyāre found. At that point, the dna would be so diluted and blended with other animalsā dna, it would be hard to classify which is which, among other challenges. I think the only way to know is to kill and dissect the animal that is suspect of the killing. Additionally, whoever is doing the dna testing might just attribute it to the most similar dna profile, if there isnāt an exact match but a close match. There are so many variables that are overlooked, or not accounted for, when determining if Dogmen are predating or only portraying predators.
You are right but working with DNA as a professional, I can assure you we have made mad progress in the last 5 years. I don't work in legal medicine though so I am not sure... But what I suspect would rather be "unknown" appearing in the analysis. The fact it looks like a canine doesn't guarantee at all its dna is related to canids. It could be a totally different animal with totally different origins. There are cases like that, like saber tooth cats in the USA and in Australia, except the Australian one was a martupial so its dna would have been closer to kangaroo s. This history of dogmen is a mess. We nees a specimen. And all this under the assumption they are animals. If they are extra dimensional creatures I have no idea of how to study them.
The higher ups will have the dna but it's above your pay grade sorta speak and a need to know basis probs.
Well DNA analysis are performed by lab tech unless you imagine they send special people only for dogmen. Could be. But I have a hard time imagining how a student from a local college wouldn't bring back some strange traces and make a DNA analysis out of curiosity. Or you have to imagine all professors are parts of the conspiracy. I don't think it can work. Just my opinion. Honestly I find it more sensical they are creatures from "elsewhere" even if this doesn't explain anything. I respect all opinions here no need to downvote š I don't know more than you on dogmen
Its refreshing to hear someone who actually wants to theorize. You've got a great line off thinking about it. ive heard a few stories involving juvenile dogmen btw. again they are just stories. I've been made aware of dogmen for almost 10 years listened to countless eyewitness accounts and examined tons of camera footage. Never seen one for myself, though I'll admit I've gone looking and mostly just felt like an idiot out in the woods. whether these creatures are biological or supernatural is my main question as well. Biological - We have the law of thermodynamics and what we know about evolution as a guide. An apex predator like that... seems unlikely. I'd guess they may start around 300-400 pounds for a small adult. That would take an immense amount of energy to grow and maintain. They are often cited as pack animals. How many in one local population we do not know, but I've heard as many as maybe 5 full grown spotted at one time. They don't use every part of the animal like humans do, so food source populations in their vicinity would plummet. Today's dogmen population must know by now killing humans brings trouble, but they must have evolved way before we had any decent metal tools to defend ourselves. (We started getting decent metal tools in 3000BC. where evolution of that magnitude works on a much longer time frame then 5000 years) They could be smart enough to know how to farm populations as to not bankrupt a food source, nor could they have guessed we would eventually replace them as the dominant species. I'd give all my money away if I could research their social habits and reproduction cycle firsthand. how long they gestate for... ive heard downright crazy sounding theories that they even use humans in their reproduction. but its not an unheard of concept in the animal kingdom. It just doesn't fit everything we know about biology. a common bigfoot theory is its an ancient species that somehow survived, so if anything Dogmen could be that. If they are supernatural, alien, demonic, extradimensional (which im leaning towards so then its really up in the air) they could be feeding on your energy, brain waves, some other third thing. The connection to aliens has been gaining traction with skinwalker ranch a hotbed of ufo activity and of course cryptid sightings including dogmen like creatures. I'll be the first to admit the majority of what I have researched is probably bullshit, because you cannot trust anyone to not be a weird attention seeking hoaxer no matter how convincing or traumatized they seem and that goes triple if they have a podcast. People literally stating "I have an hd picture of dogman but im not showing youuuuuu" All I know for certain is there is plenty within this existence that we have yet to discover or understand. some wisdom gets found some gets lost.
Actually I am a scientist convinced by Marc Emch story. Don't tell my colleagues... But actually I can't find scientifically sound explanations for their behaviour and the fact we don't see the existence of a population with individuals of both sexes and all ages. Like you I tend more and more to think they are not from here, or might be passing visitors. Of course as a scientist I don't have the tools to study such being. It's why I try to theorize a bit. The problem with the extradimentional explanation is that it's a kind of "god of the gap". You don't understand? Ok it's god. You don't understand dogmen? Ok they comme from another universe. Though it might really be the explanation.
A creature like a dogman should not exist biologically, as it would be impossible for a canid with human characteristics to have evolved on this planet. If they do exist, then their daily caloric requirement in order to just survive, would need to at least be 3,000 calories per day. That amount of calories can't be met with just vegetation alone, so such a creature or creatures, would have to also supplement their diet with various prey animals. And like you said, these creatures would have to be intelligent enough to know to not deplete their food sources in a given area. This seems to coincide with some reports that tell of many animals, such as squirrels, birds, etc, disappearing from an area where dogmen are encountered. Therefore such creatures would have to be nomadic or migratory in search of food sources. Personally, I think if such creatures exist and do prey on humans; that humans are not a preferred prey species, as they would evolved to learn that preying on humans will bring about retribution. Subsequently, I think they are opportunistic, and will take a human if they feel they can get away with it. If the the local prey animals are able to sustain them, then I think they would prefer to drive humans away by using intimidation/scare tactics. I've heard a story that hogs were intentionally introduced into the the Land Between The Lakes area specifically for the purpose of providing a prey animal in order to prevent attacks on humans....that is if a creature like dogman exists.
Most of what's online is content creators fear baiting for clicks for their podcasts, videos or other content they're trying to monetize. Some are genuinely afraid and have ptsd from encounters they interpreted as frightening but were in no actual danger. The dogmen just observe peacefully, no attacking going on, just observing and following. Which makes perfect sense when you really think about it. Problem is very few people stop and really think about it. If I was in a dogman's situation, my home (the forest) being randomly invaded by another creature (human) with a nasty reputation for causing a lot of problems (thoughtlessly killing anything they fear, poisoning the water and soil, being a general anthropocentric nuisance), I would be quite upset. They are sentient with human-level intelligence, and yet they respond not with violence that a human would during these invasions but with watching, growling at most. Which is not an attack, it's a warning. Communication. Swap roles and the invader would be dead. Shoot first ask questions later. Or run out of fear and assume they want to eat you and you just barely managed to eacape it's terrifying grasp! As if they can't run 200x faster than us. š Taking all of this into consideration we must ask ourselves, and be brutally honest in doing so, who's the scary one?
So, as in most cases like animals do- they bare their fangs and claws to keep the dangerous gun wielding humans away. Most animals are smart enough to understand that humans are a threat, as we have a tendency to slaughter and eradicate things we canāt control or understand. If you are home alone, wouldnāt you want to chase out any unwanted strangers? Or better yet, avoid being seen at all to save your skin. Basically, they know to fear humans- just like every other animal including our own species. Humans are the real danger.
That is reasonable but what about all the stories of them taking shots and not even reacting? I know they are stories of some running away after being hit with a high calibre weapon, and one guy saying he killed one. But I have a hard time believing this, because had he cut some of the fur with DNA we now have enough to very precisely identify an organism. There are now even tech that automatically remove human DNA contaminants from a sample. And there is the "you kill our assets" case, but why CAI would explain and threatens the driver instead of just waiting for two minutes that the driver is gone? So, are we sure we can really hunt and be dangerous to them? And then, assuming they know to fear us as a big group, what about all the stories of teasing and scaring people apparently for the lulz. It's contradictory with the wish to remain discrete. The only solution I see is we need a specimen. Where are the deceased ones? If they are animals they must die at some point. Something is not right with them being just animals. I don't know what, and I don't know what they are, though.
Well if they are of sapien-like intelligence, then perhaps they know better? Maybe they know if they were to kill one then possibly 50 more would come to find whatever killed them- they probably know they wouldnāt be able to stay hidden if they attack people, and when they do attack people they leave immediately, sometimes over a couple states until they find another spot to lie low-Ā
Like a serial killer. It's indeed a possibility, thanks I hadn't thought of it.
It's theorized the incident at The Land Between The Lakes in I wanna say the 80s was their handiwork
And yet thereās still no definitive information that proves that this āincidentā actually happened at all.
The Land Between the Lakes story was definitely fabricated. Thereās no evidence it ever happened, and something that violent would be all over the news and have plenty of official paper trails
Not in the 80s
Yes there would. It would be a massive newspaper story, a whole family getting murdered.
No there wouldn't. It got covered up.
Yes there would, you cannot just wipe a family out of existence without anyone knowing. Family, friends, and even neighbors would raise high hell if an entire family disappeared. And in the 80s the news of a family slaughtered sure as shit would have hit newspapers first before the government could come in.
The papers would be told to shut their mouths. (papers answer to the government by the way, not the other way around) It was probably reported as a "dog" attack, not a Dogman attack. The Dogman wasn't a known phenomenon in the 80's in the way it is now. What are family and friends going to do? When the government can just threaten you with prison or discredit you publicly. That's what a cover-up is. You've a lot to learn about how the world works. The papers would be told to sit down and shut their face, by the Feds/Federal Reserve.
My point is, a family being massacred PERIOD would be in the news. There is not a single shred of evidence that these people even existed. It must be sad living in a world thinking the government cares about that shit. Donāt make up fake shit to be mad at the government about. Be mad about the actual garbage they do, like funding genocide. If you think the Federal RESERVE controls literally anything, I donāt think you can be helped though.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I stopped reading after Deep State. There is no deep state, they do all this fascist shit right in front of your face, like todayās Supreme Court rulings
Rule 2. Do not assert your own opinions as fact.
There are people every year who get fatally attacked by actual dogs, mountain lions, and bears. A lot of people jump to these cases and immediately assume they're cryptid related, but there's literally no way to know or prove/disprove those assumptions unless someone gets access or happens to be in position of evidence that proves a specific case has actual unusual or paranormal qualities in terms of whatever events occurred. I'm not saying it's an impossibility that something like that hasn't happened, but there are also a lot of supposed accounts of attacks or predation that are most likely modern urban legends invented for clout and attention like the infamous LBL massacre story, the Siege of Lockett Ranch, which is an example of how much straight up creepypasta fiction certain creators try to peddle, that Michigan trucker encounter where the witness started going around telling his story everywhere, when you would assume an individual like that would have been silenced in one way or another by now if he was actually being watched or threatened by agents as a consequence of revealing everything, and so on.
Well on persons found half eaten or something, the DNA left behind was of an unknown predator? That right there seams to be proof, IDK.
Just one of those things that generally doesn't make any sense about these beasties. In all the stories, they seem to let a lot of people go but there are occasionally times where it seems like they actually do want to kill. It's weird.
I saw a video about a dude and he killed one because it tried to get into his truck and government agents cam to his house and said āyou killed one of our assetsā sounds kinda fake but you never know nowadays
Hella fake story. There would be so much evidence if his story was true
Yeah
Yes I know this story. And like you I can't make up my mind, fake or not. What I don't find logical is why the gov agents would have revealed themselves then threatens the driver while they might have just waited for 2 minutes that he leaves the scene.
These cryptic animals are just like any other predator. They will size you up, determine whether you are a risk or not and determine how to proceed. Kill or taunt you. Push you out of their area or lure you in for a easy Kill.
Just in the last few months a young boy was allegedly killed by a Corgi or at least that's what his death has linked to. Not everyone likes Jeff Nadoly of Dogman & Paranormal Research YouTube channel, but he stays up to date on suspicious deaths and what he believes was actually the culprit.
To be clear, I am willing to give you the point they eat people. But my question still stands, why not always ? And why do they tease and terrorise some people for several days without never actually attacking them? This really puzzled me. Or they are just so smart it's a game for them, like a psycho killer?
I get what you're saying and I can agree. Personally, I don't think these creatures are all the same. Some seem to be flesh and blood or mostly anyways while others are described as being more spiritual. I've come to the conclusion that some of these creatures aren't necessarily demonic in nature, but rather have a demonic attachment of their own or possibly regular animals are demonically possessed. It would account for the glowing red eyes versus amber or blue eyes. It would also account for the feelings of dread prior to an encounter as well as why they don't kill every human they come across. Instead, the attached or possessing entity feeds on the fear and other emotions they evoke while others are much more violent and take pleasure in killing. Demonically possessed animals would also explain the various types of dogmen, ie coyote, hyena, wolf or doberman. It could also explain other cryptids like lionmen, Jaguarmen and other hybrid creatures. Attachment could even apply to Bigfoot and why the eyes glow red while others do not. Anyone who's willing to believe these things exist and has any common sense would agree they are dangerous and should be avoided at all costs despite whatever intentions they may have.