strange sea creature ofund in sweden

www.unexplained-mysteries.com...


found in a box of shrimp, th head resembles a crocodile, but it has gills and is fish like.

anybody have an clue what it is?

caught in the pacific most likely near china.

[edit on 12-2-2005 by phantompatriot]

Your title sais cought in sweden but then you right probably off the coast of china. That doesnt make sence?

Maybe its a croc or alligater that evolved to have gills. Maybe some day Dolphins and Whales will have gills.

Interesting picture.
There have been sea and lake monsters that have been observed with powerful front legs, rather than fins. The ctryptids in Ireland and in lake Bykall in Russia for instance have been described this way.It does not look like the "Caddy" creature from British Columbia,Canada.

It would be interesting if an expert in aquatic life could age this picture of the creature forward say 5 to 10 years, like the FBI does with missing childrens photos, so we could see what it may look like as an adult.
Parker

you obviously didnt read the article because it said it was found in sweden packaged with a box of shrimp but the shrimp were caught near china.

Originally posted by phantompatriot
you obviously didnt read the article because it said it was found in sweden packaged with a box of shrimp but the shrimp were caught near china.

Youre right I didnt fully read the article I have a short attention span

Better image,larger anyway:

The day after the remarkable find, biologist Per-Erik Martensson got in touch. He is a teacher at Asbygdens Natural High School in the same county.

"It's a Chimera, a fish which lives in deep water", say's Per-Erik dead certain, but in the next moment he admits that he has never seen this fish himself. "Even though I lived in Norway, where they are common, I haven't seen one", he goes on. "But I'm sure they are caught once in a while they trawl for shrimps".

No one has apparently told him that the shrimps was either caught in the sea off Canada or off China, where Chimera monstrosa is not found!

Many strays

Anders Ivarssons excellent home page (only in Swedish) has this to say of where it is found: "South in Europe along the entire Atlantic coast, around the Azores and in western Mediterranean. Along Africa's west coast to Central Marocko and Madeira. Many strays has been done along western and southern Africa all the way down to the Cape".

The waters off both Canada and China are the Pacific and nothing else. Chimera monstrosa is a shark-like cartilaginous fish with a strange appearance. It could be one and a half meters long while two thirds of it is the finlike tail.

Upright thorn

In front of the dorsal fin is a large, upright thorn with barbs that are poisonous. Fishermen in southern Europe that has stung themselves on the barb has even died from the poisoning.

But if you compare Palmqvist's unidentified animal with the picture of a Chimera... you will find some similarities, but also a whole lot that doesn't add up!

Much more info and comments at Para-Normal.com

I think its funny that this person might get to name a new animal thanks to a find in a box of shrimp Most of the time you have to go out on the ocean to find new types of fish.

Id like to see more images of it before saying much.
It sorta looks fake,like a 'model' or sculpture.
Perhaps some other angles and maybe some dissecting images as well.
It almost resembles an early stage of something,like that of a tadpole.

Well it was likely frozen if it was in a box of shrimp. Perhaps that could explain its current condition.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Well it was likely frozen if it was in a box of shrimp. Perhaps that could explain its current condition.

Thats very true.
But would it not 'thaw' enough to cut it open?Perhaps they did and have not reported on it yet,if they even will.
Could just be another find in our very large and hardly explored oceans.There could be milions of these things living everyday lives and we just dont know it.

it's a load of crap the picture is obviously CG

Supply proof please?
Cant just say ' it's a load of crap the picture is obviously CG ' and not put anything behind it.Atleast give some sort of explantion as to why you say it is fake and CGI.Point something out atleast.

Originally posted by SMR
Supply proof please?
Cant just say ' it's a load of crap the picture is obviously CG ' and not put anything behind it.Atleast give some sort of explantion as to why you say it is fake and CGI.Point something out atleast.

the proof is in front of your face you gotta be an idiot or a novice in CG to miss the obvious, the picture is too shiny, the lighting is overdone and looks too good and fake like in CG, the obvious ambient glow on the hand and the actual creature specimen itself if you observe it on a whole lacks much detail and you'll see at the rear of the fish tail that the shadow cast on the hand is split in two distinct shades (one being a yellowy colour and the other one a normal shadow), which is another sign of CG. Finally you will see at the tail section of the creature where the hand is it is just a touch fuzzy to blend it in while the front section hasnt, which is also another sign of CG.

The final piece of evidence is the illusion of detail on the hand, present at the front of the picture on the right hand side, but as you move back towards the tail it gets more fuzzy and less detailed.

I actually can't believe no-one even noticed this was CG.

thanks,
drfunk

though i will say the detail they put into the hand may convince many, tis' a fine job!

You have to be kidding with the CG thing I hope. If thats CG then Lucas Arts needs to hire the guy or girl that made it.

You could argue that its photoshopped but CG I very much doubt it.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
You have to be kidding with the CG thing I hope. If thats CG then Lucas Arts needs to hire the guy or girl that made it.

You could argue that its photoshopped but CG I very much doubt it.

told you it was a good job

But it would be a hundred times easier to photoshop a image like that then to make it as a CGI.

Most CGI we see on the net done by normal people is really not even close to photo realistic. There are some very skilled people with photoshop though.

I have to say thats the first time I have ever heard someone on hear claim a pic was CGI.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
But it would be a hundred times easier to photoshop a image like that then to make it as a CGI.

Most CGI we see on the net done by normal people is really not even close to photo realistic. There are some very skilled people with photoshop though.

I have to say thats the first time I have ever heard someone on hear claim a pic was CGI.

well there are some heaps talented ppl on the internet go check out

www.cgchannel.com

for some great images

I'm not saying it's easy but it is possible and it does look CG to me!

anyways i'll give you an example of what someone can do with the human body



If someone can do that i'm sure a CG hand isnt out of the question on the internet (and this chick is fully animatible as well, over 100 influence objects took the guy 3 months!) .







[edit on 13-2-2005 by drfunk]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by drfunk]

Originally posted by drfunk
The final piece of evidence is the illusion of detail on the hand, present at the front of the picture on the right hand side, but as you move back towards the tail it gets more fuzzy and less detailed.

I thought that was known as focus, quite a common thing in pictures?

Maybe its just a bad camera, lol.

Originally posted by merka

Originally posted by drfunk
The final piece of evidence is the illusion of detail on the hand, present at the front of the picture on the right hand side, but as you move back towards the tail it gets more fuzzy and less detailed.

I thought that was known as focus, quite a common thing in pictures?

Maybe its just a bad camera, lol.

yeh well smartass it sure doesnt look like normal focus to me