Tell me about Peter Hocking

 

"Hocking...Hocking...Hocking..."

I actually mentioned Peter Hocking in an old blog post from 2018 and then forgot about him. So here is the return of this maverick zoologist! Please disregard the weird "Sabian" astro-stuff somewhere in the middle. That´s just the AI having a hash out...

Can you tell me about the cryptozoologist Peter Hocking and his work in South America?

Peter J. Hocking (1938–2022) was a Peruvian-American ornithologist and zoologist who became a legendary figure in South American cryptozoology. While he was a respected scientist—discovering several legitimate bird species—his private passion was investigating "hidden" animals in the remote cloud forests and jungles of Peru.

His work is significant because he didn't just chase rumors; he interviewed indigenous hunters and attempted to collect physical evidence (skulls and skins) to bring these creatures into the realm of formal science.

---

1. The "Isnachi" (The Giant Peruvian Monkey)

Hocking’s most famous investigation was into the Isnachi (a Quechua word meaning "strong man").

• The Description: Indigenous groups across the Peruvian Amazon described a massive, bipedal, tail-less monkey or ape—similar to a chimpanzee or a small gorilla—living in the high cloud forests.

• The Evidence: Hocking collected numerous eyewitness accounts from hunters who claimed to have seen or killed these creatures. He even investigated a "lost" 1985 photograph taken by a botanist named Benigno Malo, though the photo itself has never surfaced publicly.

• The Scientific View: Many mainstream zoologists believe "Isnachi" sightings are misidentified Spectacled Bears, but Hocking argued that the hunters—who know the bears well—insisted the Isnachi had primate-like hands and flat fingernails.

2. Mystery Big Cats

Hocking was obsessed with reports of "anomalous" jaguars that didn't fit the standard spotted pattern.

• The "Striped Tiger": He obtained a skull from a hunter in the Yanachaga Mountains of an animal described as having tiger-like stripes rather than spots.

• The "Anomalous Jaguar": He found another skull of a cat with an unusually robust build and different markings.

• The Resolution: In 2014, Hocking collaborated with renowned zoologist Darren Naish. Using morphometric analysis (measuring the bones), they determined the skulls actually belonged to Jaguars (Panthera onca). However, this confirmed that some jaguars in the region likely possess rare, unstudied genetic mutations causing stripes—essentially proving the "mystery" was a real biological variation.

3. The "Tigre Dantero" (Sabre-toothed Cat)

Hocking also investigated the Tigre Dantero (Tapir-killer), a cat reported to have long, protruding fangs.

• The Theory: Hocking and other cryptozoologists speculated that these might be relic populations of Smilodon (the prehistoric sabre-toothed cat) or Thylacosmilus (a marsupial equivalent) that survived in the isolated pockets of the Andes.

---

Hocking’s Legacy

Peter Hocking passed away in late 2022. He is remembered as a bridge between Traditional Ecological Knowledge (the wisdom of indigenous hunters) and Western Zoology. Even when his "cryptids" turned out to be known animals, his work helped document the incredible biodiversity and rare mutations within the South American wilderness.

A "Sabian" Alignment

Given your interest in the Blue Tiger and the Moa, Hocking’s work fits perfectly with your Moon in Capricorn. Capricorn energy loves the "old, rugged, and enduring." Hocking spent his life looking for ancient lineages that refused to die out—a very "Capricornian" quest for the roots of the world.

Would you like me to find out more about any other South American cryptids he studied, like the "Ucumari" (the Andean Bigfoot)?

Yes, please. Also: didn´t Hocking study cryptid birds, too?

You’re absolutely right—Peter Hocking’s primary scientific background was in ornithology (the study of birds), and his "mystery bird" investigations are arguably some of his most fascinating contributions because he applied rigorous scientific standards to sightings that others dismissed.

1. The Mystery Birds of Peru

Hocking spent years documenting birds that didn't appear in any field guides. Two of his most famous "cryptid" bird investigations include:

• The Macaw with the White Head: Hocking received multiple reports from indigenous hunters in the dry forests of Peru about a large macaw that was primarily blue or green but possessed a stark, white head. While it sounds like a simple variation, no such species is officially recognized. Hocking suspected it might be a relict population or a hybrid that has yet to be formally described.

• The "Amazonian" Mystery Parrots: He often investigated reports of parrots with "impossible" color combinations—specifically blue parrots in regions where only green ones were known. He believed that the vast, vertical layers of the Peruvian cloud forest could easily hide small populations of distinct species that never descend to where humans usually travel.

2. The Ucumari (The Andean "Bigfoot")

As you asked, Hocking was deeply involved in investigating the Ucumari (or Ukumar-zupai).

• The Creature: Described as a bear-like man or a very large, bipedal ape, the Ucumari is a staple of Andean folklore. Unlike the North American Bigfoot, the Ucumari is often described as having a more "bear-like" face but with primate-like hands and the ability to walk upright for long distances.

• Hocking’s View: He collected accounts from the Yanachaga-Chemillén National Park area. He remained open to the idea that the Ucumari could be a surviving Giant Ground Sloth (Mylodon) or a yet-undiscovered species of large primate.

• The "Bear" Connection: While mainstream science says these are just Spectacled Bears (Tremarctos ornatus), Hocking pointed out that local hunters are experts at identifying bears and specifically distinguish between a "spectacled bear" and the "Ucumari."

Vårtecken

 

Förmodligen inte Skansen

Björnarna (eller "nallarna" som de kallas på text-TV) på Skansen i Stockholm har tydligen vaknat. Ja, de brukar väl göra det efter vintern varje år? Eller? LOL. 

Hybrids like us

 

OK, the dog-fox hybrids are strange. Sure of that one? And why would conservationists "condemn" big cat hybrids? I mean, I assumed everyone loves ligers! Note also that polar bears are moving further south and hybridize with grizzlies as they go along. Are these hybrids fertile? If so, it seems the polar bear doesn´t need "saving", after all. Life will find a way. Finally, what´s up with those strange fish accidentally "created" by some crazy scientists in Hungary (I mean, where else)?   

10 of the strangest hybrid animals

Scientists accidentally create "impossible" hybrid fish

The fitness of creationists

 

Can a bear become a roller? 

Creationists often complain that "survival of the fittest" is a "meaningsless tautology", that it´s "arbitrary", und so weiter. Why is the white fur of a polar bear fit in the Arctic but unfit in the temperate forests, while the opposite is the case with the brown fur of the grizzly?

But most creationists also claim to believe in micro-evolution. *So what is the mechanism of micro-evolution?* Is it natural selection working on random mutations? But if so, creationists must accept the "arbitrary" character of the "survival of the fittest". At least within the same "created kind". For instance, bears. 

So why did Duane Gish sperge about the polar bear being some kind of evidence against evolution all the time?

Exactly.

Creationism isn´t a serious alternative theory to evolution, but a series of evasive manoeuvres. A propos absolutely nothing. 

Hedgehog bear

 

Some really tall tales in this one, including a bear which looks like a gigantic hedgehog (?!). Or what about a bizarre ursid from North Carolina with antlers? Or was it a fashion-conscious Devil Monkey spouting false such? Not much is said about the Giant Polar Bear lost in the London metro, which certainly disappointed my pelt! Another classic is a hyena in Algeria misidentified as an extinct Atlas bear. I originally assumed the hyaenine was somewhat misplaced too, but nah, these bizarre carnivors actually live in North Africa... 

Might make your day if your into some kind of crypto-crypto-crypto-zoology. Or bardic songs on shrooms (more like it)!

This is the world atheists want

 

Some kind of John Muir-esque situation at an abandoned Russian research station in the Far East. "This is the world atheists want". Or at least animal rights activists. Or no? :P

The panda´s laughter

 

- We tricked them scientists really good,
I´m really a bear, you know!

Why did scientists at one point believe that giant pandas aren´t bears but rather belong to a separate group of carnivores more related to red pandas? And why did scientists realize that giant pandas are bears?

Great question! The classification of the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) has a pretty fascinating history because it's such an oddball in the animal kingdom. Here's a breakdown of why scientists were confused at first—and how they figured it out in the end:

---

🌿 Why Did Scientists Think Giant Pandas Weren’t Bears?

1. Similarities to Red Pandas:

   • Giant pandas and red pandas (Ailurus fulgens) share several unusual features:

     • Both eat mostly bamboo (unusual for carnivores).

     • Both have a "false thumb" (an extended wrist bone) used to grasp bamboo.

     • They also share some behavioral and ecological similarities, like solitary habits and living in the same mountain forests of China.

   • Because of these similarities, scientists once grouped them together in their own unique family or subfamily—Ailuridae—separate from true bears (Ursidae).

2. Diet Confusion:

   • Although both are classified as carnivores (the order Carnivora), their bamboo-heavy diet makes them look more like herbivores.

   • This atypical diet led scientists to question whether pandas really belonged with meat-eaters like bears and big cats.

3. Morphological Ambiguity:

   • The physical traits of the giant panda are a strange blend. Some features are bear-like (e.g., skull structure), others are more like raccoons or red pandas.

   • This “mosaic” of traits made it hard to place them definitively.

---

🔬 How Did Scientists Determine Giant Pandas Are Bears?

1. Molecular Genetics (DNA Evidence):

   • The big game-changer came with advances in molecular biology in the late 20th century.

   • DNA analysis—especially mitochondrial DNA and later nuclear DNA—showed clearly that:

     • Giant pandas are most closely related to other bears (family Ursidae), particularly the spectacled bear of South America.

     • Red pandas, on the other hand, are in their own unique lineage and not closely related to bears.

2. Cladistic Analysis:

   • Scientists also began using more rigorous evolutionary trees (cladistics) that analyze many traits in combination.

   • These analyses reinforced that giant pandas evolved within the bear lineage and are a very early offshoot of the bear family.

---

🐼 So What’s the Final Verdict?

• Giant pandas are bears—they're a unique and early-branching member of the bear family (Ursidae).

• Red pandas are not bears—they’re the only living member of their own family (Ailuridae) and more distantly related to weasels and raccoons.

---

If you like this kind of animal classification stuff, the evolutionary stories behind creatures like whales, platypuses, or pangolins are equally weird and fun! Want more of those?

You say that giant pandas and red pandas were at one point classified as a subfamily. Was this a subfamily of the Ursidae?

Excellent catch—and you’re right to question that detail. Let's clarify the taxonomy more precisely:

🧬 Were Giant and Red Pandas Once in a Subfamily of Ursidae?

Not quite. Here's how it played out:

---

🔄 Historical Classifications

1. Early Confusion:

   • In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, scientists weren't sure how to classify either giant pandas or red pandas.

   • At various times, both animals were shuffled between the raccoon family (Procyonidae), the bear family (Ursidae), and sometimes their own proposed groups.

2. Proposed Grouping Together:

   • Because of their shared traits (bamboo diet, "false thumb," some skull and dental similarities), some scientists proposed placing both red pandas and giant pandas in a unique family: Ailuridae or sometimes Ailuropodidae (the naming wasn't always consistent).

   • In this view, they were neither raccoons nor bears but a separate family within the order Carnivora.

3. Not a Subfamily of Ursidae:

   • When grouped together, they were usually placed outside of Ursidae entirely—not as a subfamily within it.

   • In fact, red pandas were often placed in Procyonidae (with raccoons), while giant pandas bounced between Ursidae and Procyonidae depending on the researcher.

---

🔬 The Modern Consensus (Thanks to DNA)

• Today, giant pandas are firmly within Ursidae.

• Red pandas are in their own distinct family: Ailuridae, which is part of the superfamily Musteloidea (alongside raccoons, skunks, and weasels).

• Their similarities are now considered examples of convergent evolution—not shared ancestry.

---

So to wrap it up: no, they weren't classified as a subfamily of bears, but rather, at one point, some researchers proposed a completely separate family for both of them. The confusion came from trying to make sense of their mix of traits in a pre-DNA era.

Want to dig into how convergent evolution played a role in this mix-up? It’s a fascinating concept that shows up a lot in nature.

Mean, green and seen

 

An extremely entertaining blog post by Karl Shuker, in which he speculates wildly about the existence of a glowing green chimpanzee (or is it sasquatch) in Florida, solely on the basis of John Keel´s "Strange creatures from time and space". Ahem, is Keel a reliable source *at all*? The elusive creature was only seen once - or perhaps twice - so it´s really impossible to tell what it could have been. 

I would like to add "the witnesses had a vivid imagination", "the witnesses were lying" and "Keel was tricked by a little green midget from a circus" to the list of possible explanations. Or maybe the reluctant eye witnesses came a bit too close to the 8th Tower! 

Still, a tour de force of sorts from my man Shuker. 

Evaluating the Elf Chimp of Florida: Glowing Green and Very Mean!

Sorry, Berry lives here now

 

Insane story!

Large bear found hiding under house in LA

Do Your Own Research

 

 

 

So I did my own armchair research a propos the previous blog post "Emerson´s Dogman". I admit I was...stunned.

In New Jersey, a black bear nicknamed Pedals could actually walk permanently on its hind legs, and quite fast too! It was an adaptation to the fact that one of its front paws had been damaged and rendered non-functional. There are also dogs who learned to walk bipedally for similar reasons. They, too, were quite fast. 

Bears walking on their hind legs for longer or shorter distances are (surprise) the main suspects in many purported Bigfoot observations. One clip above shows two normal bears in a South Korean safari park standing and even walking bipedally a short distance. But if bears and dogs can walk upright under certain conditions, what about wolves? While there is no scientific evidence for factultative bipedalism among wolves, who´s to say that it´s intrinsically impossible?

Note that there isn´t any particular contradiction between this and the notion that most (perhaps 99%) of Dogman sightings are misidentifications, hallucinations or hoaxes. Obviously, unusual observations of animals will be sensationalized and later mythologized. And in the Internet age, people will end up "seeing" them pretty much everywhere. 

The same logic applied to Bigfoot could yield some interesting results. Or speculations...    

Pandas are fake and gay (?!)

 

YouTube´s biggest troll and/or resident kook extraordinaire Hans Wormhat claims that Giant Pandas aren´t real animals, but human actors in fur suits?! The reasons are somewhat unclear. Other fake animals include koalas, anacondas, penguins and the Great White Shark. Zebras are real, but probably painted to look striped. OK, so I haven´t linked to *all* of his fake animal videos. But you get the pic. 

Great Apes are of course also fake, but in this case, the supposed reasons are at least clear enough. Wormhat is a creationist, so obviously the human primates dressing up like apes in zoos and national parks are paid agitators for Darwin´s evolutionary theory! I mean, aint that obvious?

Apparently, Mike Tyson knows the truth - that´s why the legendary boxer offered to fight a gorilla in the ring. He knew that the rilla was really a non-boxing man in a monkey suit. Tyson knows since he is presumably initiated into the Club, and is really a very muscular female?! Yes, Mr Wormhat also believes in conspiracy theories about transgender or intersex people being pretty much everywhere... 

Tinfoil Hat, pardon, Wormhat also claims to believe that the Earth is flat, so naturally the ISS must be a gigantic hoax, too. It´s actually a submersible.

I think I know exactly who is fake around here, but sure, I suppose there is a remote chance that Hans actually believes all of this. Just don´t tell Tyson.      

My scary Sweden

 

"Mitt Sverige" (My Sweden) is a nature documentary by Hungarian Zoltan Török. His Sweden turns out to be the scariest part! Think icy islands in the Gulf of Bothnia (?) featuring colonies of cormorants, eagles fighting each other, and ravens harassing seal cubs. 

Later, Zoltan and his family go trekking somewhere in Lapland, with its vast and seemingly empty hill tracts and woods. Or not so empty, since we do get to see bears, foxes, lynxes and wolverines. At one point, the documentary becomes unintentionally funny, as Zoltan says that the Sami (Laps) live in harmony with nature...while the camera shows how they herd reindeer with snowmobiles! I assume these are powered by gasoline?

But sure, if you want a good argument to stay indoors in some safe burb in southern Sweden (the civilized part), I suppose "Mitt Sverige" could be worth watching! 

  

Dracula´s hidden kingdom

 

Credit: Charles J Sharp 

¨

“Dracula´s Hidden Kingdom” is the dramatic title of a fairly regular nature documentary about Transylvania in Romania. As far as I understand, Transylvania wasn´t even 15^th century warlord Vlad Dracula´s actual principality! It was probably British writer Bram Stoker (19^th century) who made the association and…well, here we are.

To give the docu some (tourist) “local color”, some scary castles, ruins and graveyards have been included, and something I take to be Gypsy music plays in the background while the narrator speaks. Most of the time, however, we get to see all the usual players: lynxes, wolves, red foxes, deer, beavers and European bison – OK, maybe the latter is new to most viewers! Birds shown include white storks, bee-eaters and the hoopoe. We also learn that there are 200 species of butterflies in Transylvania and 27 species of bats. I admit I had no idea so many species of these particular critters even existed in Europe! Sources?

Apparently, Homo sapiens have lived in Transylvania for 40,000 years (a Stone Age cave painting of a bison is shown) and throughout most of its history, the area was teeming with wildlife, including enormous herds of the just mentioned bison. Even today, at least the bear population seems to be thriving, while many other animals have diminishing populations. The bison were actually extirpated in the wild at one point, but have been reintroduced. Plans to establish a new national park in the Carpathians are mentioned. 

Personally, I have to admit that East European rural backwaters give me claustrophobia, but sure, maybe they are good for non-humane Animalia? Perhaps somewhere in that vast mountain wilderness, some lonely vampire is still stalking the hills… 

Some random YouTube shorts

 

Some completely random YouTube shorts. 

The Soviet Sasquatch

 

An interesting video about Soviet cryptids. I was struck by how unoriginal they were. Yes, it´s essentially the same kind of cryptids as reported from North America or Western Europe: hairy humanoids, lake monsters, sea serpents and extinct charismatic mega-fauna still supposedly lurking somewhere in the far corners of Siberia. In this case the Steller´s sea cow, the wolly mammoth, and the giant short-faced bear (never heard of that one). 

There are two possible explanations for this curious fact. One is that the cryptids are actually real. After all, why *would* people behind the Iron Curtain see exactly the same kind of unknown animals as in the rest of the world? Another possibility is that Soviet cryptozoology was influenced by its Western counterpart. That´s not as far-fetched as it sounds, since one prominent Soviet cryptozoologist, Boris Porshnev, was a friend of Bernard Heuvelmans! (A book by Porshnev has been translated to English: "The Soviet Sasquatch") The same transformation of older folklore into "unknown real animals" - typical of much Western cryptozoology -  may have transpired in the modernizing Soviet Union, too. 

Misidentification is another factor. The Mongolian Death Worm (which was searched for by Soviet scientists) is often depicted as the monstrous Shai-Hulud from Frank Herbert´s science fiction novel "Dune". In reality, the Death Worm is only said to be about one and a half meters long. And it took me about five minutes to find *exactly such a creature* living in Mongolia: the desert sand boa. Case closed.

The Soviet Union was one of the few nations (if that´s the word for it) that launched several scientific expeditions in search of cryptids, both on its own territory and in Mongolia. Soviet scientists also participated in Chinese expeditions to find the Yeti. The fact that these official projects had as little luck as lay cryptid hunters in the US or Scotland is perhaps suggestive. 

The creatures don´t exist. Or maybe they do exist, but since they are ghostly in nature, Communists feared reporting what they had *really* found...

The Svalbard Buddha

 

HA HA HA.  

John Muir´s war

 

This is a somewhat bizarre article from Live Science, arguing that a recent and sharp increase in bear attacks in Japan can be attributed to a lack of acorns. Apparently, if teddy doesn´t get his favorite snack, he beheads Japanese fishermen instead and munches on their tender flesh?! 

Not being a scientist specializing in the feeding frenzies of Nipponid ursids, I can´t really say, but surely there could be other explanations? Maybe somebody´s population has exploded lately (ursid or Mongoloid hominid), maybe some bears are improperly habituated, or maybe it´s just a co-incidence?

Or maybe, just maybe we see the beginnings of John Muir´s war...   

Bear attacks in Japan

Sunshine state

 

Even the researchers themselves admit that their "study" doesn´t explain Bigfoot sightings in Florida, where there are no black bears. They also forgot that Bigfoot is seen the year round, while black bears hibernate in winter...

I don´t doubt that many Bigfoot observations are misidentified bears, but it´s clearly not the only thing going on here. Misidentified Floridans is another factor. 

Or it´s fairies. 

Bigfoot? Sasquatch? Nupe, it´s probably just a black bear 

God´s wilds

 

John Muir said that if humans and bears would ever wage a war, he would feel obliged to support the bears...

Fucking pandas

 

Thomas Sheridan´s reaction to Henry Kissinger´s death. It´s very, very bizarre...and mostly about other things than the old national security advisor!