The Energon Pub

KoH4711 wrote:So, that's the Mexican thing that sucks the goats? =p

Seriously, though, I heard a specimen got delivered to a university in Columbia not too long ago, but hadn't heard anything more about it recently. I actually find crypozoology real interesting, when it doesn't slip into the paranormal stuff. Gorillas, giant pandas and okapis were all cryptids at one point.

To be 100 % correct the creature's myth began in Puerto Rico but was quickly picked up by other latin American countries.

Psycho Warrior wrote:just looks like a bloated hairless dog to me. hell foxes did something similar to that to roosters we had, eat the head and leave the body.

Except that Chupacabras are supposed to drain the blood of it's victim through two puncture wounds(and that's what the bodies of animals supposedly killed by one are supposed to look like). I'm not a Zoologist, but the arguments I've always heard from them don't make any sense to me: that is, that it's wild dogs; if it were wild dogs, wouldn't this kind of phenomena have been more prevalent? Not to mention that I've never imagined wild dogs killing prey with a single bite, without leaving any marks of their lower teeth; and leaving the corpse otherwise alone.


Of course, that's not to say that every supposed victim of Chupacabras weren't killed by dogs or something, and the blood flowed out overnight; but it's the ones that only have two puncture wounds in their necks, are drained of blood(I think I may have even heard of some missing entire organs), and are otherwise intact that make me think there's something more to it than wild dogs.


As for this, the picture looks more like a hairless dog that died a while back. I seem to recall a similar thing happening last Spring.

So it sucks blood true two wounds?
Vampire, Vampire! Someone is a Vampire and invented the Chubacabra as an excuse!