Comments on: Christina Pampalone: Releases New Pictures.

By: seraph

seraph — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:31:03 +0000

well its a animal. duh. It might be a pig cant be a bulldog because its bottom cannines potrude way to far out the mouth might be a mutation of a pig but dog you gotte be dumb if you think a bull dog has that type of shaggy fur and color their mainly brindle,white with brindle spots, white , or blondeish brown . and they are a short straight hair breed. but whatever it is its a carnivore all the teeth are to sharp to eat plants . but its a mystery

By: Jade

Jade — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 06:04:39 +0000

people,cant believe our country made this creature by experamental bio-hazards instead they are being allowed to expand inland ,to test out , how many more animales,or people can or will be afficed. if some one who has as little education as I can see it ,kansas will be there first inland geniepigs

By: arv

arv — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 07:07:13 +0000

it’s pretty much obvious that the montauk monster you’ve talking is on a bull dog..

By: Keziah

Keziah — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:52:29 +0000

Excuse me … I just threw-up in my mouth … a lot!

By: Brenda

Brenda — Mon, 18 May 2009 19:20:59 +0000

The first one from last summer looked like a mutilated racoon. This one looks like a mutilated domestic dog. The key word here being mutilated. It really doesn’t matter what type of animal it is, It’s clearly an animal, and clearly mutilated in some manner.

There is someone out there with a sick mind, mutilating animals for attention. This is the beginning of a serial killer. All serial killers start with animal cruelty, abuse and killing. Proven fact. If we continue to give this cult attention, the culprit will move on to bigger targets for more attention. What needs to be done is the person responsible needs to be found, and quickly, before he or she has any more victims.

I personally don’t want to read years from now, about a serial killer, who admits that his early work was the Montauk Monsters. Are the authorities even concerned about this? I’m sure that I’m not the only one who has thought about this.

By: Yvonne

Yvonne — Sun, 17 May 2009 04:25:46 +0000

after seeing these pictures i do believe that this is a dog that probably has some kind of disease and got bloated

By: Allie

Allie — Sat, 16 May 2009 15:16:46 +0000

And of course people are selling the pictures! Would you rather do one thing for free, or the same thing for money? It’s like paparazzi photos, of course everyone is selling them.

By: WHOCARES

WHOCARES — Sat, 16 May 2009 06:01:26 +0000

Thats a freaken pig or a dog -.-

By: lowlikebeingstoned

lowlikebeingstoned — Fri, 15 May 2009 00:33:20 +0000

This is a dog, clearly. The discoloration and bloating are from sea water.

another thing to note: no flies/maggots or birds….. Beaches typically have a slew of insects such as “no see-ums” And seagulls? They may not have finished the carcass but, there would be evidence of consumption.
and if this “creature” washed up on shore. where are the tide lines? kelp/seaweed? The sand is too smooth as if it were dropped on the spot rather than brought on shore by tide waters.

By: Cat

Cat — Thu, 14 May 2009 22:32:29 +0000

I got no problem with the quality of the photos, I have a $300 Canon and get much better quality shots with it. I also carry it almost everywhere and would certainly taken shots of such a thing seen on a beach I was at. My problem is that it is obviously a dead boar or maybe a big dog. I have no doubt about this at all. This is not something new, just a dead (Earth!) animal.