Montauk Monster Update
A new picture of the Montauk monster was released on Friday. This new picture makes it seem like the 2nd picture takers rolled over the creature. Also, the legs seem to have been unbound by that small leather strap. This picture seems a little shady already because of the missing strap.
There are some things that do make a lot of sense about this picture though. The new picture definitely makes it look like a bloated, decomposed dog. On the underside where it was laying against the sand it’s not as dark seeing as how it was out of the sun. It also still has some fur on this side. There are 2 flies more visibly shown on this picture giving proof to its actual size being around that of a dog.
The Gawker and I are still not convinced along with many other people. A new interview with the 3 girls that were the “first” picture takers is also out. They show Plum’s Nick Leighton their camera with the picture in it and also the 2nd angle shot which is different than the rolled over pictures (That’s 5 pictures now including the new 3). The face looks different in these new pictures as well if you ask me. Nick Leighton also reveals that they’ve checked with several scientists who all think it’s neither a dog nor a raccoon (Still can’t believe you said it was a raccoon Jeff…). Anyways you can watch the interview for yourself and see what you think about it (And notice the dumb girls who supposedly took the pictures).
Check out my previous Montauk Monster article here.
Edit: Check out the newest Monty news here.
grey fuzz 
Montauk Monster=Half dog half turtle? « GreenCS’s Weblog said,
August 2, 2008 at 7:27 pm
[…] Montauk Monster Update « GreenCS’s Weblog pingbacked on 0 minutes ago […]
Christine said,
August 2, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Very sketchy all together, I mean, the thing doesn’t have sand all crusted on it like it should if it has been decomposing on the beach.
garth said,
August 2, 2008 at 8:58 pm
it’s a DOG! Google a dog skull and compare the teeth. Look at the nasal cavity as well. You are all dorks if you think this is some kinda of “monster”
greencs said,
August 2, 2008 at 9:12 pm
I actually did say that it looked quite like a dog in the second picture. Maybe if you would have read past the first paragraph you would have seen that.
Matthew said,
August 3, 2008 at 7:54 pm
whatever it is it’s gross, let it decompose then compare the whole skeleton instead of speculating from a half rotted body, that’s my theory.
greencs said,
August 3, 2008 at 8:04 pm
yeah supposedly some guy is like holding it in his grill right now or something to hide it…
Fran said,
August 3, 2008 at 9:33 pm
I think it’s a badger – look at this: http://www.gpnc.org/badger.htm
greencs said,
August 3, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I don’t think the snout is long enough for it to be a badger personally
Tristan said,
August 4, 2008 at 7:51 pm
well it defenitly is weird..kinda looks like a dog but i think its not a dog ive never seen a dog that was that fat so its not a dog or badger (badgers dont get that big)but i would like more updates on this picture (ive been really interested in cryptids lately)
Tristan said,
August 4, 2008 at 7:53 pm
is there anyother site simalar to this? i must hav to see more
greencs said,
August 4, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Hmm a lot of sites are covering it right now. I would just search Montauk Monster or Turtle-dog monster or similar things :).
Also, remember when things start decomposing, they tend to bloat. Its rather gross but it would make sense that it is just a bloated dog’s corpse then.
Tristan said,
August 5, 2008 at 9:37 am
hmm yea i joined a forum u might wanna check out ill give u the link just hld on
Tristan said,
August 5, 2008 at 9:38 am
http://www.americanmonsters.com/monsterforum/index.php
there it is ita great we disscuss everything cryptid and supernatrul
greencs said,
August 5, 2008 at 10:39 am
I removed the link from my spam. (WordPress spam catcher is sorta paranoid when it comes to posting links.) I’ve gotten a few referrals from there as well so I’ll be sure to check it out later. Thanks
Tristan said,
August 5, 2008 at 11:38 am
yw
Martha said,
August 6, 2008 at 1:25 pm
i’m sorry but these girls are fucking retarded, how can that thing be a raccoon?? it looks nothing like a raccoon!!! now it looks like a dog!
greencs said,
August 6, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I think people are only referring to the old picture as being a raccoon. For instance
http://gawker.com/5032730/the-2008-montauk-monster-yearbook# following that link will take you to the gawker photo gallery and in there is a picture of someone editing the first picture to be a raccoon. Also, all claims that I have seen stating it as a raccoon are using that picture. I do agree with you though that those girls are probably really stupid and just uploaded the picture from the internet onto their camera without necessarily taking the picture themselves. They just wanted their 5 mins of fame :).
Montauk Monster Rumors « GreenCS’s Weblog said,
August 8, 2008 at 6:07 pm
[…] out my previous Monty update here. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Mysterious ’Monster of […]
Shelby said,
September 13, 2008 at 10:23 pm
whatever this thing is its old news. its probably just a dead dog get over it.
Kadeem said,
May 14, 2009 at 7:27 am
Its really weird looking. It kinda looks like dog, maybe tiger/lion, small kind of bear thing just without hair. Its just really different.
Jack said,
May 20, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Dude, check it out the Australian Link because a new almost similar monster has been discovered in Canada on May 2010. There are some photos too.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/glance/1055212/mystery-monster-in-canada
susie said,
October 18, 2010 at 2:44 pm
that looks NOTHING like a dog skull his hed is to round and pushed in how would the add the beak if it were a dog skull idk mabye a bull dogs but im still not convince becuase how the beak is in place i tryed to match the 2 images on my pc and got nothing
plus does any of you people live i or near pums island i hear the cost guard follows you if you get to near now why would they do that ?
Jessika said,
October 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm
Sadly, It looks like a breed of dog that would have a promenent underbite, such as a bull dog or pit bull. In the picture, it appears to have some leather around it’s front legs, and because of the majority of the body missing hair, and it being found on the beach, one can assume that it was a dog, that some asshole bound it’s front legs together, and tossed it off their boat. Front legs bound, the dog cannot swim, therefore drowning. Body creates bloat from decompisition, therefore the body floats, and is able to be brought onshore by high tide. Tide recedes, and four ladies stumble upon the partially decomposed k9 victim of fatal animal abuse. They take pictures, and everyone on the internet with no imagination gets freaked out. I live on the gulf coast and have personally seen a dog that washed ashore, and it looked very similar to this, except a different jaw line… although I train dogs for a living and I am very educated on dog breeds and skull structure per breed.