Comments on: BREAKING NEWS: Montauk Monster found at Gurney’s Inn

By: right

right — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 23:20:39 +0000

the skull is definitely a sheep, the body is probably a sheep as well. the skull has no flesh or meat on it at all, but the body is still completely covered in hair… gimme a break.

By: Ginger Kay

Ginger Kay — Sun, 28 Aug 2011 18:40:01 +0000

Look at the skeletons of the capabarra…a water rodent species that has gone wild in the southern part of the us. It has adapted too well to its new envirnment. It came from argentina . Someone brought it here to breed and sell ,I think for meat. Then let them loose on purpose or not. Capabarra(not sure of the spelling)in argentina have hairy coats….maybe these are mutated or toxin created branches of them???

By: noaheadshot

noaheadshot — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:26:50 +0000

the skull looks plastic and 2 get a skull that white uve got 2 boil it cuz bones yellow this obviously fake

By: TheMontaukMonster

TheMontaukMonster — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 08:40:32 +0000

i am the 4. Monster . You think we are Monsters ? No no we are´nt Monsters. We live at the ground of the ocean .

By: Jimmy-boy

Jimmy-boy — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 21:52:28 +0000

Definitely some kind of dog. googled ‘dog skull’ and found immediately many very similar skulls. there’s a lot of species and this is probably one of them. If you’re thinking “that doesn’t look like any dog I’ve ever seen!” that is because it’s dead and bloated, and has lost a lot of it’s skin. Dead creatures exposed to water and possibly other creatures feeding off them will look very bad very fast. The fur fits(if it covered the whole body), the skull is almost identical to several types of dogs, and the paws are also very similar, just feel your dogs paws and feel it’s skeleton, identical.

By: sam

sam — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 23:45:51 +0000

the skull looks fake,its to white and clean.also thats defininatly a dog.the body structure is that of a dog which must have been seriously abused

By: Jack

Jack — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 05:50:26 +0000

From the shape & size of the creature, it’s likely too say that this thing that might have been a regular animal isn’t any more, but there’s also a chance that it wasn’t a regular animal too begin with considering the physical anatomy of the creature, I believe that this thing should be considered as one of two things. it should either be classifeied asa a genetic mutation, otherwise known as an experiment gone wrong, or the second option could be that this creature is a failed B.O.W, but at the moment those seem like the only two options

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 19:30:09 +0000

I, for one, agree with John. in my opinion this “new monster” looks like a dog.

By: bailey

bailey — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:15:25 +0000

it looks like the mouth has severely decomposed a as opposed to the rest of its body. It is some sort of animal we know of, we just can’t tell from the pictures. I think it is a dog with some sort of disease. Its not unlikely.compare it to the pictures of the chupacabra it is what had happened to wild dogs with a severe case of mange.

By: JAMES

JAMES — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 00:55:28 +0000

at first i thought that it was a chupacabra but i took a closer look and thought it was a fox or wolf but then realized that it must be the montauk monster for the idiots out there who think thats a raccon get you f***ing eyes checked