Half a century ago, Belgian Zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans first codified cryptozoology in his book On the Track of Unknown Animals.

The Centre for Fortean Zoology (CFZ) are still on the track, and have been since 1992. But as if chasing unknown animals wasn't enough, we are involved in education, conservation, and good old-fashioned natural history! We already have three journals, the largest cryptozoological publishing house in the world, CFZtv, and the largest cryptozoological conference in the English-speaking world, but in January 2009 someone suggested that we started a daily online magazine! The CFZ bloggo is a collaborative effort by a coalition of members, friends, and supporters of the CFZ, and covers all the subjects with which we deal, with a smattering of music, high strangeness and surreal humour to make up the mix.

It is edited by CFZ Director Jon Downes, and subbed by the lovely Lizzy Bitakara'mire (formerly Clancy), scourge of improper syntax. The daily newsblog is edited by Corinna Downes, head administratrix of the CFZ, and the indexing is done by Lee Canty and Kathy Imbriani. There is regular news from the CFZ Mystery Cat study group, and regular fortean bird news from 'The Watcher of the Skies'. Regular bloggers include Dr Karl Shuker, Dale Drinnon, Richard Muirhead and Richard Freeman.The CFZ bloggo is updated daily, and there's nothing quite like it anywhere else. Come and join us...

Search This Blog


Monday, June 15, 2009


I have given Greg and Mike Warner the chance to present the remaining data from their expedition themselves and over the next few days they will be doing just that in their own words.

"This is one of the first satellite images I had privately commissioned during the research phase of the Napo/Amazon confluence. I believe it is one of the most important pieces of data that I have collected. I invite people to comment on what they see and I will respond with my personal theory later...Thanks, Mike Warner"

Greg also asked me to release the picture below because "it will give a sense of scale to the one released originally."


Dr Dan Holdsworth said...

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I think that those two images were taken at different times of year, possibly even of two different areas. The satellite image seems to show dark water with some very light areas which I think are white water rapids or waterfalls or similar, whereas the air photo is of a river that contains a lot of suspended sediment and is coloured muddy brown by this, and does not exhibit white water presumably because the features that were causing this during low water conditions are submerged below a metre or so of calmer water.

The annoying thing here is that I cannot see any obvious large animal in either photo; I know that I am fairly poor at pattern recognition and will miss mostly hidden things, but I honestly cannot see a 40-meter snake or part thereof in either photo.

Can anyone help here?

Bigfoot73 said...

The second photo merely gives the same sense of scale I got from the first anyway. All the Warners had to do is tell us how big the trees actually are.If the white water in the new pic is supposed to be the snake then it would seem to be about 300 feet long, and doesn't look like a snake any more than the mudbank did.

Bigfoot73 said...

I've only just noticed the scale at bottom right - which would make the bright water/snake around 600feet long.It was sent to someone called Nicholas for enhancement, by someone called Paul-not Greg or Mike.It is 2 years old.Did the Warners actually take any of these photos themselves?