The Chupacabras

Could the Nicaraguan Chupacabra incident possibly be a Government connected experiment? Since adding a hit counter to this article, we received no less than 114 Government and Military hits in 4 days!

Cosmic Conspiracies analyse the photos
Having studied the photos for many hours we have noticed several anomalies that appear between the original photographs and the ones taken in the lab.

Why did scientists discard the protective masks and hats in this picture?

If you compare the two photographs of the lab autopsy (left), the surgeons/pathologists appear in the first photo wearing gloves, masks and hats. However in the second picture (right) we see they have discarded hats and masks - why? This seems odd, surely they would have taken full precautions in dealing with an unknown species? not knowing what diseases it may carry. Why has the blue cloth been removed from underneath the creature? The position of the creature has been moved around in both shots. Is it normal medical procedure to allow two completely different groups of surgeons to perform an autopsy? The group in the left picture are different to those on the right?

	If you compare the pictures here you will see that the one on the left shows that the back leg (in box) has been eaten away. If the picture above right claims to show the same creature why are the back legs intact? There doesn't appear to be any front right leg on the black and white picture, however, it has miraculously appeared on the lab photo? The front leg that we do see in the black and white picture seems to be missing from the elbow to the foot. The lab photo shows it complete? Look at the size of the spikes that are visible running down the spine in the left hand picture below, why are they not visible on the lab pictures?

Compare the pictures below of the skull in the field and the skull on the operating table. The skull in the field has a smooth thin neck, yet the skull in the lab has a normal backbone? Notice how the top canine tooth in the left picture is missing.

Finally, here are a group of skulls so that you can compare them with the 'Chupacabras'. The authorities are claiming that the creature is a dog. Compare the skulls below and make up your own conclusion!

After uncovered the Nicaraguan 'Chupacabras' story, Cosmic Conspiracies received numerous emails, as well as getting 4,000+ hits in one day for this story alone!

Not sure what pictures you have, but these came via S American TV. Hoax ? , I don't think so , but it's definitely vertebrate and "of this world" I suspect it's a chimera , the product of some type of genetic experimentation carried out in one of the Central American "establishments".

This could well explain the reports some years ago about military activity following sightings. Of course it could be the Nicaraguan version of the Duck Billed Platypus ! Whoever produced these creatures must have had a reason...the question is, what else have they created?

Excellent reporting. Contact Linda Moulton Howe if she hasn't already been. Occasionally the "cat" gets out of the bag!!!

There's a guy at Edinburgh University, Professor Davies I think, who more or less admitted that he had info relating to human cloning in an establishment in New Mexico since the early 1960s .....That means they probably had it sorted by 1990. Even UK establishments have been messing with ape/human genetics so it would come as no surprise if this was a hybrid of some sort "escaped the fold"...again the ET/Alien umbrella acts as a nice cover.

DNA tests would quickly reveal the origin,,....but will we ever find out? I'll keep an eye on the Central/ South American channels for any further info.

Someone just sent something interesting my way. Looks like an unknown animal may have been found. While this creature doesn't really seem to fit most eyewitness accounts (i.e., from Puerto Rico) of the original Chupacabras, it is interesting nonetheless. The head and mouth, and other parts of its physiology, don't mesh with more numerous and earlier reports. If it's not "the" chupa, it might be a relative or something from a similar environment and with similar feeding habits. It apparently exhibits both mammalian and reptilian characteristics, and seems to have physical attributes which might prove it to be a cavern-dweller, except for those times when it ventures forth for purposes of predation:

My first impression, by the way, was that it looks like a "constructed" chimera made from the parts of various animals. The skeletal structure looks like a dog, for instance. Any additional info, opinions, etc., would be appreciated. Hoax or reality?

Does anyone have any further info on this creature, or on the factuality or verifiability of this report, and pictures?

There is a small cowboy museum in downtown San Antonio that has a very similar skeleton...unidentified and claiming to contain no DNA. I do not remember the particulars, but recall that it also had a crested backbone and looked to be the same size.

Amazing article (do the posted pictures come in any greater resolution?) I've been following the Chupacabra phenomenon for quite a while and I'm hopeful this could lead to a major breakthrough... I think what first and foremost should be done is DNA analysis and of course the creature's chemical and molecular makeup should be established and compared to known species. I would very much appreciated it if you kept me informed.

Question: "Are these creatures in any way reptilian? From what I've seen here, the head and eyes look like they could possibly be reptilian. Where am I going with this? David Icke claims the planet is being ruled and manipulated by a race of reptilian hybrids. I read many accounts from people on David's site who claim to have seen these beings and the 'lower level' reptilian creatures resemble something like the chupacabras. Just thought I'd ask."

Thanks Dave ! Shall do...check out your site :) Glad to see that you also came to the same conclusion ie: one of the pic's was a dog as I did...and believe me I'm no expert! :) Others that I have spoken to etc re: both pic's agree that both are not of the same 'animal'....and that perhaps one of them is 'something?'.

One: Look at the length and shape of the ribs. that is NOT the same corpse as the one in the hospital photos.

Two: The size and 'width' of the skull. also the missing 'fang' in the original b/w photo, why is it missing? it was either never there (in which case what was?), lost to scavengers (seems unlikely unless it was a desirable food source for some reason) or it was removed before the picture was taken by one of the original finders (as a souvenir perhaps, but if so why take it before the picture when it would have been, presumably, a glaring indication of the general 'oddness' of the corpse').

Three: It has always interested me (if you take the victim autopsy at face value) how the creature would/could feed. i.e. to drain the victim of blood yet leave so little evidence of that blood on the victims corpse. one obvious answer is to siphon off the blood. could it be this 'fang' is, in some way, hollow and even malleable/soft? could this be the reason it's missing on the original photo, it was eaten by the scavengers because it was edible unlike your average tooth? oh and a question you may pose. does ANYONE know of any kind of mammal that has large spikes on the back of its vertebrae, I don't but then I'm not a zoologist.

The farmer who shot the animal insists the skeletons were switched at university, and has a section of retained leg bone to prove it. It seems to me outrageous cheek, to think they can get away with pulling a stunt like that... letters of complaint to the university administration, plus the unwelcome glare of publicity, would seem an appropriate response to what is quite evidently a blatant cover-up. You can already sense the next move waiting to happen; an attempt to discredit the farmer... This kind of suppressive activity has happened before, in Israel when what appeared to be a 500,000 year old section of polished plank 'got lost in the system' of the antiquities department.... fortunately, a photograph was retained by the lady archaeologist involved. It is unacceptable for any civilised society that prides itself on maintaining some semblance of democracy, to allow this kind of behaviour to pass without comment. The university deserves every scrap of unwelcome publicity heading their way, in my opinion.

>From: "A. Hebert" >To: littlegreys@hotmail.com
Subject: Chupacabras Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 13:48:13 -0500

The alleged discovery of the remains of a Chupacabras looks like a hoax to me because:

1. The neck in the fourth picture (insert with the man squatting next to the carcass) is too smooth - no vertebrae - whereas the neck in the photograph allegedly taken at the Department of Morphology at UNAN-Leon obviously has many vertebrae.

2. The rib cage in the first photograph of the carcass is much larger than the rib cage in the photograph of a carcass allegedly taken at the Department of Morphology at UNAN-Leon (which resembles a canine skeleton).

3. The lower section of back bone in the photograph of the alleged Chupacrabras is not the same as that shown in the photograph taken at the Department of Morphology at UNAN-Leon. The lower section of the vertebrae shown in the first photograph more closely resembles that of a cow's.

4. There is no indication of unusually large eye-sockets in any of the photographs and no indication of any long "fangs" as would be present in the UPPER jaw according to the descriptions presented (the teeth shown are on the bottom jaw as would be present in a normal canine).

5. All photographs appear posed, not natural as would occur in a real discovery and examination of such a carcass.

6. Close-ups are blurred which makes it more difficult to discern details and accurate identification (reminds me of the techniques used in the "Alien Autopsy" footage).

7. Several photographs show nothing but a pile of jumbled bones which could be anything and not the way in which a carcass would be moved for forensic analysis. This smacks of yellow journalism. However, I will give Cosmic Conspiracies credit for printing the preliminary report from the Department of Morphology at UNAN-Leon which indicates this was a hoax. If I were Cosmic Conspiracies, I would have stopped there to save face rather than adding more fuel to the fire. (Betcha don't print THIS comment. )

Cosmic Conspiracies wrote to Miss Hebert about our analysis of the pictures and below is her reply.

Cosmic: Just had another look at the first photo of the Chupa. You state that it doesn't have large canines as first reported. If you look closely you'll notice that the canine teeth at the top have been removed. odd?

Miss Hebert: Yes, I noticed this initially. And you know, the more I thought about it the more it seemed strange. Since my background is in psychology (M.Ed.) I pick up on behaviours faster than anything else. IF the carcass found on the ranch was a hoax, they would have glued or added large "fangs" to make the remains resemble the Chupacabras witnesses have been describing. The fact that one of the most important pieces of evidence - the alleged "fangs"- are missing does not fit with the way one would stage a hoax. Unless, of course, the "fangs" were removed before the picture was taken but again that does not fit the profile for the hoax. Also, if someone were trying to stage a hoax, the carcass found on the ranch would have had more of the distinguishing characteristics associated with the alleged Chupacabras including the large eyes or eye socket.

What puzzles me is why they left the hide over the eye sockets rather than pulling it back. Skin shrinks and dries as it is exposed to the sun which might account for the smaller eye openings in the photograph. But if it were a hoax, they would have shown the eye sockets to make it look like it had big eyes. This was not done which makes me wonder what really happened. It does not make sense. These are not the normal behaviours of a hoax. However, the snout does not quite fit with descriptions I've read from witnesses.

Cosmic: I would suggest to look at my site in the next few days. Because we have come up with some evidence that proves that the 'dog' that we see in the lab is not the same as pictured in the field?

Miss Hebert: As I wrote my observations to you initially, these discrepancies did indicate some kind of hoax involved because the photos ARE so different. The more I examine the photographs, the more I must wonder what IS going on. There appear to be three sets of photographs and none of them are of the same "creature". The photographs of the carcass allegedly found on the ranch do not match the 2 photographs of the carcass supposedly examined in the Lab. And even the photographs of the carcass being examined in the Lab do not match. And if you study the front "legs" on the carcass in the second Lab picture you will notice that the front legs are longer than the back legs. Can you imagine how such a creature would walk? It would have to walk with it's hind legs in the air.? And that lower vertebrae in the first picture of the carcass allegedly found on the ranch just blows my mind. That is either the lower back bone of a larger animal spliced to the back bone of a smaller being to create a hoax or a creature with an abnormally large lower back bone/abdomen?

If this were a real creature, it would be incredibly heavy in the lower portions of it's body. Have you compared it to the skeletal structure of a kangaroo or similar being with heavier lower extremities? Those "spines" on the back of the carcass in the picture allegedly taken on the ranch also seem exceptionally well placed. If it is a hoax, they would have had to take the back bone of a large reptile and spliced/glued it together with other bones because the structure is too well spaced and designed to have been glued together one piece at a time. That is something only Nature can create. Either this is the worst constructed hoax ever or some of it is true while the rest is not. Either the hoaxers are incredibly stupid or someone thinks WE are incredibly stupid. I'll have to let you work on this one as it has me totally puzzled. (Amy shaking her head in confusion.) Have you or someone tried to contact the sources listed in the article? If it IS a cover-up, you won't find much information to follow-up but good luck anyway.

We will print your letter, because we totally agree with you. We also think that the specimen in the lab pictures are different to the ones that were took out in the field, both in size and shape. The ones in the lab look like a dog to us. Where did the spikes on the backbone go? and what about the head? If you look closely at the blown-up picture that we have produced, there appears to be large ears or frills, not unlike a dragon? If you look closely at the picture of the surgeons performing an autopsy at the table, the lower half of the animal is cover in fur which looks very much like a cat. If you compare this with the very first pictures (the black and white ones) there is no fur visible on the hind quarters of the creature, just smooth skin?

Are we all being fed yet another cover-up story? If this creature is just a common dog, why did the vet that first examined the beast think that it was a different species. Also why didn't they want a normal dog corpse in the hospital?

QUOTE: "The creature could be a hybrid of several species, created in a laboratory by means of genetic engineering."

If this is just a common dog corpse why did the hospital make such a fuss when asked to store it in their morgue?

You comment that no canine teeth are visible, but if you look closely at the picture with the person with the gun, there is a magnified view of the skull where you can clearly see that the upper fangs have been removed.

You have pointed out yourself that the vertebrae of the animal in the field is different to that in the lab, we agree, surely this must point to the animal in the lab probably being a normal dog and not what was originally photographed.

You say that if you were us you wouldn't have released the second batch of photo's and article, because we could lose face? We feel that it would be the other way round. We believe that fair journalism should provide you with all the facts, good or bad. I'm sure we would have been criticized if we had released half the facts, and then later have to try explain why we released only half the story which didn't mention any hoax or dog. The plot thickens...stay tuned

First off, thank you for making the latest developments in the discovery of the alleged Chupacabra corpse and subsequent autopsy of 'said' corpse available to the guests on your site. I personally applaud Cosmic Conspiracies decision to keep updating this story whether it proves to be a hoax in it's entirety, partially, or something else. Your analysis of the photos has given much to consider. And while I am not qualified to provide my own analysis of said photos I do believe you may be correct in that we are looking at two different corpses. This is an interesting story and please do keep us updated in your findings, as you said either "good or bad." There is no use in investigating/reporting any strange phenomena if one is restrictive in their views, possibly due to the fear of being taken in by a hoax. This is a detriment and not an enhancement of one's ability to remain objective. Just my own humble opinion.

Max Panteleyev sent us this Russian video of the Chupacabra incident in Nicaragua. Here is the accompanying letter.

Although the quality of the video is not very good, it is still quite easy to compare the images and video represented in the ORT's news item to those being shown to the public. I suspect they won't match. If so, then I suspect a cover up/whitewash being a result of a U.S.? government/security forces (CIA, FBI, NSA, you name it...) pressure on the National University of Nicaragua to change the skeleton and "play down" the situation (If I'm not mistaken with the name of the institute in which the autopsy took place).

Why do I suspect U.S. government/security forces you ask? Because as reported previously, three alleged chupacabra were captured in Chile and then the locals mentioned of some U.S. special forces personnel (with NASA written on their clothes) arriving at the scene and taking them away. So I conclude that U.S. government/security forces probable, very probably, have A LOT to lose in order to start such a cover up campaign. The reasons could be different, so I will leave others to speculate on that. Additionally I don't see any logical reason to cover up the finding of a new animal specie. If, of course, as in this case, the announcement of a new biological specie, or results of the autopsy, could lead to some sort of very disturbing results to either of the parties involved in producing it, or in the knowledge of it's origins... Fortunately there are so many more Chupas running around, so one day sooner or later, we will be able to get another one, and then taught by the lesson of a previous whitewash, we will give it to an unannounced totally independent (like there is anything in this world totally independent) laboratory to research the specimen.

I did a substantial analysis on the photo's also. After the original photo on the exam table, which looked very much like a greyhound, and after serious manipulation in Photoshop, these other photo's shown with the rancher look quite different indeed. I also predicted that this would be switched with a dog skeleton when the story first broke. I have quite a bit of involvement with the US Government, and I just knew that somehow the skeleton would have to be switched. This is their way to avoid a panic, by leaving this in a controversy.

I suggest that the NEXT one shot is sufficiently photographed and documented well prior to giving it to a government agency. It also seems strange that the video that was on a Russian web site, has the server down (we have it here-Ed). I suspect that anyone displaying such video will be subject to certain type of DOS (denial of service), and other attacks to shut down their servers. There are a lot of people interested in NOT having their opinions and the TRUTH all over the net. A lot of careers will go down the tubes, and it will also open up a lot of questions that the New World Order does not want coming out right now. There will be disclosure in the near future about a lot of things, but right now they are not ready to have this and other stories break. You are very close (within a couple of years) to having several truths revealed to you. It will seriously unsettle the entire World when these truths are disclosed. The World governments want to have the capability to contain and quarantine the countries, and people that they deem unsuitable to handle the civilization altering change that both the disclosure, and the release of extremely advanced new technology will bring to the World. As a matter of fact, it has been stated that either this civilization altering change will take place or the World will witness World War III. I am not at liberty to go into any detail on the subject, except to say stay tuned, it is about to get very interesting indeed. :)

The following Email was a reply from one of the newspaper reporters in Nicaragua who has been working on this story. We wrote to ask her the latest developments. This had to be translated from Latin American Spanish to English. (Hope I've done it right )

Thank you for writing, the new thing to me which I can tell you is that the owner of the property in San Lorenzo where they killed the alleged Chupacabras, says that there is another strange creature still there... They say: "He is very wild, I am going to leave a few dead ewes so that it may give us the opportunity to throw it to him and to kill it like I did with the previous one, he has visited every night since and we are waiting for him".

UPDATE (6/2/2001)
Several Chupacabra sightings have been made in Calama and Chile within the last few weeks, including a collection of hair samples and a skull. Click the button below to read the latest update

Chupacabras Skull	Chupacabras Skull	Skull of lab animal

Dog Skull	Chupacabras Skull	Cat Skull

Coyote Skull	Iguana Skull	Wolf Skull