Cryptids relate to creatures which attract claims of existence albeit the absence of proof to substantiate their survival. Hence, skepticism surrounds claims of the animal’s existence. Cryptids account for the characters highlighted in various ancient myths attracting the interest of cryptozoologists. As a pseudoscience, cryptozoology encompasses the endeavors made by cryptozoologists to source the evident necessary for qualifying the existence of cryptids including Bigfoot and the chupacabra. In 1950, Bernard Heuvelmans and his counterpart Ivan Sanderson were the zoologists credited for developing the field (Sax 456). Myths associated with the chupacabra are common in various American regions. The descriptions of the creature indicate a heavy animal with the stature commonly attributed to a tiny bear. Moreover, its single file of spines begins at the neck. The creature is reputable for its attacks on livestock with the aim of consuming their blood. Initial reports of chupacabra sightings emanated from Puerto Rico.
Thesis statement:
The chupacabra exists does not exist which is qualified by the lack of physical and visual evidence despite the currently available anecdotal accounts.
Physical evidence
Currently, a sample of a chupacabra’s body does not exist. The retrieval of numerous bodies purported to belong to the chupacabra is a frequent occurrence. In 2000, the National Autonomous University of Nicaragua obtained a carcass from a rancher. Its death emanated from an attack on the rancher’s goats. The incidence marked the first occurrence in which a body attracted some association with the folklore. The remains indicated some affiliation with those of a chupacabra attracting tests to confirm the identity of the hairless canid. Experiments on the animal’s genetics confirmed the creature as a mange-stricken common dog (Radford 53). The sarcoptic mange relates to a disease which infects the skin and it is also highly contagious. The infection commonly accounts for the hairlessness of the creatures mistaken as the chupacabra. Other examinations aimed at approving the survival of the chupacabra simply affirmed the involvement of raccoons as well as coyotes with regards to the numerous attacks which farmers in different regions endured. Such examinations include the analysis of available forensic evidence by scholars such as Benjamin Radford.
Moreover, no records exist of the chupacabra’s fossils. Fossil records facilitate the retrieval of preserved remains to ensure the effective tracing of living things (Mehlhorn 173). In most cases, they include the bones or imprints traceable to a specific organism. The classification of the available specimen becomes a possibility particularly where they are dated back to 100000 years which is often the requirement for remains to qualify as fossils. Some of the fossils acquired are estimated to have been around for 3.48billion years. Scientists have often uncovered many remains with the objective of obtaining stone imprints necessary for qualifying the existence of the chupacabra. Excavation efforts fail to indicate the permineralization as well as carbonization of its fossils. Most of the fossils unearthed by scientists point to the existence of other creatures other than the chupacabra (Sax 456). The accounts encompassing the involvement of the chupacabra emanate from diverse regions not limited to Mexico, the Caribbean, Florida and Mexico. Even so, different parts commonly described as part of the chupacabra’s anatomy are currently unavailable to render some credibility to the myths. Evidence with the regards to the existence of other creatures has often emerged from different continents or even locations which applicable in the case of the chupacabra.
Audio/visual evidence
Source: Elbein
Source: Godschalk
The pictures provided depicting the chupacabra frequently indicate some variations in the overall appearance of the creature. The first pictorial indicates a creature with canine-like qualities. Moreover, the spikes commonly associated with the chupacabra are absence. The second diagram is consistent with some of the descriptions which qualify the chupacabra as a creature which is bipedal. The height commonly illustrated for the creature is 4-5 feet (Mehlhorn 175). The creatures in the diagrams possess at least four limbs. However, other pictures available depict the chupacabra as a cryptid in possession of three limbs. Moreover, the cryptid supposedly possesses large eyes further highlighting the disparities in the photographs provided to approve the claims about the chupacabra’s existence. The inconsistencies serve to render the assertions invalid. Scholars including Turner claim that the sources of the differences in the appearance of the chupacabra emanate from genetic mutations (28). However, photographs which indicate extensive similarity with regards to the form a chupacabra is required to assume are rare.
The videos as well as the audio evidence available on the chupacabra are insufficient. Numerous videos such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p1YCwf9IXg (KFDANewsChannel10) are available on platforms such as YouTube. The record indicates a four-legged creature which is running on the side of a dusty road. Moreover, it bears some resemblance to a dog. However, the images depicted are quite blurry which portends numerous difficulties in deciphering the identity of the creature involved. For example, it is hard to tell the color of the fur or the skin of the animal. Other videos present the subject in a similar manner presenting some unexpected challenges in qualifying the existence of the chupacabra. Moreover, audio recordings are also available attempting to indicate the sounds made by the chupacabra. They include https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySG66FxGDL0 (Hoopart). The audio encompasses some sounds made by a creature which are akin to the hoot produced by an owl or the howling of a wolf. Hence, the record is not a definite proof of the existence of chupacabras. Most accounts include various conflicting descriptions of the sounds a chupacabra is bound to make.
Historical/folkloric/anecdotal accounts
Although the accounts indicating the devastation wrecked by the chupacabra are numerous, other predators are often involved. In 1995, dead goats with bodies completely drained of blood surfaced in different regions located in Puerto Rico paving the way for accounts aimed at describing the involvement of the chupacabra (Mehlhorn 173). Similar incidences in Texas raised the concern of farmers in 2014 resulting in the death of the creatures spotted. The occurrences paved the way for the recovery of many carcasses of the alleged chupacabras killed. However, other predators such as the red wolves in addition to coyotes exist in the regions affiliated by chupacabra sightings. The opportunistic animals prefer smaller livestock which are easily available on farms. Moreover, they often indicate a great propensity to migrate in search of easily available prey. The descriptions which are commonly given by farmers often allude to the involvement of other wild creatures and not necessarily the chupacabra. In some instances, the natives in the regions inhabited by the carnivores are forced to implement measures aimed at controlling the prevalence of the predators. Other descriptions of the cryptids indicate their preference for corn in addition to the livestock they attack. Hence, the validity of the claims made against the chupacabra concerning the livestock lost by ranchers or even farmers is questionable.
Moreover, the descriptions rendered to the overall appearance of the creature features numerous discrepancies by witnesses. Madelyne Tolentino initially provided the details concerning the anatomy of a chupacabra. The account indicates a creature with an alien-like head which is oblong shaped. In addition, the description aligns with the appearance commonly attributed to aliens as well as human hybrids (Radford 54). The narratives assert that the creature’s eyes are either red or black. Furthermore, the stories applauded its capacity to walk on two of its limbs. Further scrutiny by scientists underscore the alignment of the specification provided on the chupacabra with those availed in movies which focus on aliens. Over time, the experiences recounted by witnesses indicate the activities of a creature with four legs. Furthermore, its body is devoid of hair. The differences serve to disqualify the chupacabra’s survival.
Conclusion
The evidence examined indicates that the chupacabra’s existence is highly unlikely. More specifically, its origins emanate from various conspiracy theories and its attributes exhibit a continuous change. Regardless of the bodies associated with the cryptid, further tests allude to other animals with predatory tendencies. Moreover, challenges emanate from measures attempting to recover the fossils indicating the existence of the cryptid from the past. Such circumstances further underscore the existence of the chupacabra as a myth commonly described to logically explain the occurrences the inhabitants of different regions chanced upon. The individuals in the regions where the creature is purported to exist experience attacks from other wild animals which leave behind a trail similar to what is associated with the chupacabra. Hence, the chupacabra qualifies as a cryptid owing to the absence of factual data to serve as proof of its existence.
Works cited
Elbein, A. "Chasing the Chupacabra, a Lone Star State Legend." The Texas Observer. N.p., 27 Oct. 2016. Web. 17 Nov. 2018.
Godschalk, B. "Californians Believe the Mythical Chupacabra is Stalking Their Pets." Lost At E Minor: For Creative People. N.p., 13 Sept. 2017. Web. 17 Nov. 2018.
Hoopart. "Sounds of the Chupacabra." YouTube. N.p., 4 June 2010. Web. 17 Nov. 2018.
KFDANewsChannel10. "Chupacabra Caught on Tape - 08/12/08." YouTube. N.p., 12 Aug. 2008. Web. 17 Nov. 2018.
Mehlhorn, Heinz. "Unsolved and Solved Myths: Chupacabras and “Goat-Milking” Birds." Bats (Chiroptera) as Vectors of Diseases and Parasites. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014. 173-177.
Radford, Benjamin. "Mistaken memories of vampires: Pseudohistories of the chupacabra." Skeptical Inquirer 40.1 (2016): 50-54.
Sax, Boria. "Animals in Folklore." The Oxford Handbook of Animal Studies (2017): 456.
Turner, Stephanie S. "The place of cryptids in taxonomic debates." Anthropology and Cryptozoology. Routledge, 2016. 28-47.
