Were Elephants Mistaken for Mokele Mbembe?

Many of you familiar with cryptozoology will know the stories of Mokele-Mbembe, the living fossil of the Congo. For anyone uninitiated, Mokele-Mbembe is said to be more or less a "brontosaurus like" creature that hides in the deep jungles. Some say it's a real flesh and blood creature, and some say it's more like a water spirit. It's one of my favourite cryptos, I like the mystery of a living dinosaur hiding away... somehow... SOMEHOW... not being found and also maintaining a breeding population. (😂)

I think part of the truth of the Mokele-Mbembe sightings in the 1900's that sparked the greater legend is shown in this photo I came across while browsing National Geographic wildlife images.



Here you have an elephant reaching for some vegetation, and wouldnt you know, the trunk really resembles a slim brontosaurus head and neck!

This is just a wild guess of a theory, but imagine it's the early 20th century, Africa is WILD, you're a white guy with little knowledge of the Congo, a beastiary to write, stories from the locals meant to scare you floating in your head, and a bourgeoning interest in the hot new thing... DINOSAURS!
Also you have no money for spectacles.

You're in the jungle, and you see this! With dinosaurs on the brain and no experience of elephants, I think you just might see a potential monster. When you describe it to your local guides, the language barrier gets in the way, and when they say..."Ahh, Mokele-Mbembe!", nodding their heads like they know exactly what you've seen... there you have it (maybe).

So who knows, but does anyone see how it could be misconstrued?

That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

No, I doubt African natives would be confused by elephants
They make noise, are hunted for food, Rome in beards
African natives don’t look at elephant photos on ats to often to get confused

a reply to: Atsbhct

A history lesson is in order than...

1909 saw the first mention of a brontosaurus-like creature in Beasts and Men, the autobiography of famed big-game hunter Carl Hagenbeck. He claimed to have heard from two independent sources about a creature living in Rhodesia which was described to them by natives as "half elephant, half dragon."[5] Naturalist Joseph Menges had also told Hagenbeck about similar stories. Hagenbeck speculated that "it can only be some kind of dinosaur, seemingly akin to the brontosaurus."[5] Another of Hagenbeck's sources, Hans Schomburgk, asserted that while at Lake Bangweulu, he noted a lack of hippopotami; his native guides informed him of a large hippo-killing creature that lived in Lake Bangweulu; however, as noted below, Schomburgk thought that native testimony was sometimes unreliable.

If you read the whole article (recommended), it'll point out that pretty much every story we have is second or third hand.

I do realize that having independent reports that coincide closely tells us something is amiss, and I believe there's something to the myth myself.

But in terms of source info we have very little to go by, it's mostly just campfire stories. One author claimed to see it's skin and said it had no scales, for example.

With cryptozoology you need to bring a huge barrel of salt. Keep your mind and eyes open though because strange things exist.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

Also seems cave paintings were no mistake

There have been some attempted expeditions, but the area is plagued by so much civil unrest and dangerous jungle.

Mokele Mbembe was the first cryptid I read about and it was that moment that I became interested in Cryptozoology since that pivotal event in 2nd grade, up until the present.

I think the Natives know more about what is in the area we can't deny the fact that pictures were shown to the natives.

It is of my opinion that a small group of animals do exist that resemble the stories of a bronto, perhaps it is some hybrid elephant or hippo, with an elongated neck, spends most of its time underwater and can reach up when need be. I don't think they possess the long slender neck, rather a thick truck like one, not too long, but long enough to give some pause. They are highly aggressive, as all hippos and

***This is strictly opinion and not backed by science and research, purely a personal assessment based upon everything I read and heard about it.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

And short-term human memory has been tested in situations of "seeing-something" with multiple groups, as well individual scenarios. Guess what the result was? Not a single person saw the same thing, some descriptions were similar, but none being the same. Going further, the individuals were asked to recall their events, and in more than 50% of recollections, they were completely inaccurate, meaning our brain filled in the gaps.

I'll have to find the video, but it's really an eye opener. These people believe what they saw/experienced, then when shown video of themselves they become speechless.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

And short-term human memory has been tested in situations of "seeing-something" with multiple groups, as well individual scenarios. Guess what the result was? Not a single person saw the same thing, some descriptions were similar, but none being the same. Going further, the individuals were asked to recall their events, and in more than 50% of recollections, they were completely inaccurate, meaning our brain filled in the gaps.

I'll have to find the video, but it's really an eye opener. These people believe what they saw/experienced, then when shown video of themselves they become speechless.

While I don't doubt the results and validity of the test, can we honestly apply those same standards to a native populace of a radically different society, frame of reference and experiences, as lets say first world citizenss?

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

And short-term human memory has been tested in situations of "seeing-something" with multiple groups, as well individual scenarios. Guess what the result was? Not a single person saw the same thing, some descriptions were similar, but none being the same. Going further, the individuals were asked to recall their events, and in more than 50% of recollections, they were completely inaccurate, meaning our brain filled in the gaps.

I'll have to find the video, but it's really an eye opener. These people believe what they saw/experienced, then when shown video of themselves they become speechless.

While I don't doubt the results and validity of the test, can we honestly apply those same standards to a native populace of a radically different society, frame of reference and experiences, as lets say first world citizenss?

Why not? Are their brains that radically different then our own?

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

And short-term human memory has been tested in situations of "seeing-something" with multiple groups, as well individual scenarios. Guess what the result was? Not a single person saw the same thing, some descriptions were similar, but none being the same. Going further, the individuals were asked to recall their events, and in more than 50% of recollections, they were completely inaccurate, meaning our brain filled in the gaps.

I'll have to find the video, but it's really an eye opener. These people believe what they saw/experienced, then when shown video of themselves they become speechless.

While I don't doubt the results and validity of the test, can we honestly apply those same standards to a native populace of a radically different society, frame of reference and experiences, as lets say first world citizenss?

Why not? Are their brains that radically different then our own?

Not at all, but frame of references and perceptions manifest differently in different societies, I can see that in this case.

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
That is like saying a Texan doesn't know what a Longhorn steer looks like. The account I read was that locals were shown pictures of animals, extant and extinct, and they reacted to a picture of a long-necked dino. Your attempt to gloss over it is a big fail, IMHO.

And short-term human memory has been tested in situations of "seeing-something" with multiple groups, as well individual scenarios. Guess what the result was? Not a single person saw the same thing, some descriptions were similar, but none being the same. Going further, the individuals were asked to recall their events, and in more than 50% of recollections, they were completely inaccurate, meaning our brain filled in the gaps.

I'll have to find the video, but it's really an eye opener. These people believe what they saw/experienced, then when shown video of themselves they become speechless.

While I don't doubt the results and validity of the test, can we honestly apply those same standards to a native populace of a radically different society, frame of reference and experiences, as lets say first world citizenss?

Why not? Are their brains that radically different then our own?

Not at all, but frame of references and perceptions manifest differently in different societies, I can see that in this case.

The video I cant find to save my life involved groups in jungle environments as well as Saharan plain style environments. The basic overall of the study is that humans have more of a flight tendency in unknown situations.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
No, I doubt African natives would be confused by elephants
They make noise, are hunted for food, Rome in beards
African natives don’t look at elephant photos on ats to often to get confused

No wonder my chin itches!!!

a reply to: Raggedyman

Rome in beards

What? Do you mean "roam in herds"?

originally posted by: Skid Mark
a reply to: Raggedyman

Rome in beards

What? Do you mean "roam in herds"?

Yes that may have been a bit of a spelling error 🙄

a reply to: Raggedyman

Just a bit. Auto correct sucks. My phone does stuff like that all the time if I don't catch and correct it.

I received a post card from the Congo. It said "Having a nice Holiday, wish you were here." It was signed "Nessie".

originally posted by: Atsbhct
Many of you familiar with cryptozoology will know the stories of Mokele-Mbembe, the living fossil of the Congo. For anyone uninitiated, Mokele-Mbembe is said to be more or less a "brontosaurus like" creature that hides in the deep jungles. Some say it's a real flesh and blood creature, and some say it's more like a water spirit. It's one of my favourite cryptos, I like the mystery of a living dinosaur hiding away... somehow... SOMEHOW... not being found and also maintaining a breeding population. (😂)

I think part of the truth of the Mokele-Mbembe sightings in the 1900's that sparked the greater legend is shown in this photo I came across while browsing National Geographic wildlife images.

Here you have an elephant reaching for some vegetation, and wouldnt you know, the trunk really resembles a slim brontosaurus head and neck!

This is just a wild guess of a theory, but imagine it's the early 20th century, Africa is WILD, you're a white guy with little knowledge of the Congo, a beastiary to write, stories from the locals meant to scare you floating in your head, and a bourgeoning interest in the hot new thing... DINOSAURS!
Also you have no money for spectacles.

You're in the jungle, and you see this! With dinosaurs on the brain and no experience of elephants, I think you just might see a potential monster. When you describe it to your local guides, the language barrier gets in the way, and when they say..."Ahh, Mokele-Mbembe!", nodding their heads like they know exactly what you've seen... there you have it (maybe).

So who knows, but does anyone see how it could be misconstrued?

This seems more plausible to me than a surviving dinosaur living in the jungle or any other theories I've heard to date. Don't get me wrong, I would love for this creature to actually exist just don't believe the odds are in our favor for that to be the case.

a reply to: smurfzilla

I'm in the same boat as you on this one. Imagine an elephant that has some deformity that misshapes the trunk, it wouldn't be a stretch for it to be mistaken for a brontosaurus like shape.

originally posted by: smurfzilla

This seems more plausible to me than a surviving dinosaur living in the jungle or any other theories I've heard to date. Don't get me wrong, I would love for this creature to actually exist just don't believe the odds are in our favor for that to be the case.

Why do you presume Mokele- Mbembe must be a member of a family of dinosaurs that has survived? Why should any creature unknown to zoology have to be a descendant of some species of dinosaur!? Your argument about the unlikelihood of that seems reasonable until someone reminds you that everyone thought the same about the coelacath until it was fished out of the sea off the coast of South Africa in 1938. Just because some rarely seen creature looks like a dinosaur does not make it the descendant of an actual one. It could be an unknown species that just happens to look like a dinosaur - just as the rhino and the crocodile do.

Your argument about improbability begs too many questions to be reliable.