Bizarre remains of "dragon skeleton" discovered in Chinese Sea

Originally posted by TheFinder
Very strange....

Why is it so preserved if it was found in water?

It may only be a few days old.
The muscle tissue is soft and eaten fairly quickly by smaller fish and crustaceans. The tougher connective tissues and cartilage must be broken down by micro-organisms in order to soften up and fall apart.

Let's work with what we know.

The bizarre skeleton was found in the water on March 28th by a Chinese fisherman

Before we start pointing to the sky/mountains for explanation, let us turn to the water from whence it came!

Additionally it has been suggested (www.cryptomundo.com...) that the remains belong to a type of shark.


Then again if this was a shark why did the fisherman react the way the article mentioned, in surprise. Surely they would have seen shark skeletons before. As seen in the video, people have gloves on and are obviously taking precautions to preserve the specimen. With that said, it already looks really clean and ready for the cameras.

This leads us to two possibilities
1) Newbie fisherman reeling in exotic shark
2) Fake either planted by fisherman or recovered by fisherman

Sharks and most other fish are cartilaginous. That is most likely mammalian as it appears to be a boney skeleton. The total absence of signs of a rib cage or appendages is odd though. It could be a boney fish of some sort, but I really think it is mammal.

The skull appears to reveal a hole atop the head, which would indicate a whale or dolphin species.

I hate to say this, but this was debunked a few days after its discovery. I nearly made a thread on it myself before I realised it was nothing special. (I still have the half-finished thread on my computer, and the uploaded photos are still in my ATS gallery.)

The skeleton here is a giant oarfish.

en.wikipedia.org...







Click here for news link. Remove the space after clicking on it. I'm not sure how the space got there.

Nice thread anyway; you did a better job of it that I'd have.

reply to post by diqiushiwojia


Thank you for that info, much appreciated!

Originally posted by StoicMystic
It actually appears very much so to be a frilled shark.

Frilled Shark

edit on 7-4-2013 by StoicMystic because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-4-2013 by StoicMystic because: Added image.

Give the Man a cupie doll...you sir have won a prize!

Almost certainly the correct creature

Good work

Originally posted by jude11
How was it brought to the surface in one piece? All soft tissue connecting the skeleton would have been gone long ago. And since he was fishing I doubt he was able to dive for every single piece as it should have been scavenged and scattered by sea life long ago.

Just my thoughts but it does seem like a possible hoax.

Peace

This or a whale. Whale skeletons are just like that, they look like big snakes, but are in fact whales. Thsi skeleton seems to be way too fresh to be real in my opinion. I vote for hoaxes. Pic of a whale skeleton down, i'ts pretty similar nope?





Edit: After watching the photos i have no idea, it looks like more a fish than a whale indeed.But whale skeletons are know to get snake like after some. i don't think it's a frilled shark because they look like more a fish than an actual shark. The biggest one is 6.6 feet. This animal seems to be way bigger than 3 meters and larger in weight. frilled shark pic:

reply to post by Frocharocha


Definitely not a whale, shape of the head is all wrong. Whale skulls are usually dished out in front of the nasal canal (blowhole) to provide space for the melon. I'm quite doubtful that it's an oarfish as well, the skull is again completely wrong.

So what do I think it is? The shark hypothesis looks very good. Probably not a frilled shark as was suggested earlier, but a shark nonetheless. See how the ribs look more like gelatin than bone? Sharks don't have ossified structures outside the jaw region, their skeletons are almost all cartilage. The vertebrae match a shark's, particularly the weird striations or holes in them. The jaw is missing, which fits because shark's jaws aren't a part of the skull like a mammal's. My rough guess is that we're looking at the skeleton of a rather large requiem shark here.

reply to post by ShadeWolf

My rough guess is that we're looking at the skeleton of a rather large requiem shark here.

This is most likely the correct answer.

The skull is a very good match to that type of shark.