Not all were fooled by the media's preposterous claim that there was a living plesiosaur in some Patagonian lake. There were many articles published that refuted his claim. One, published by the Ottawa Field-Naturalists' Club is copied below. It appeared in The Canadian field-naturalist, published in May 1922 (Vol. 36, No. 5, p. 97) by
Notice the incorrect dating used at the time (3 million years for the Cretaceous vs. at least 65 Ma as we now know). You can read it online, below we transcribe the article:
Not a Plesiosaur. — The newspapers of late have had a great deal to say about the strange animal which has been seen in Patagonia, and in nearly every case it is spoken of as a plesiosaur. What the strange animal will prove to be, the writer would not attempt to guess, but a few remarks about plesiosaurs will show that there is little chance of Prof. Onelli capturing a live plesiosaur.
The plesiosaur lived from Triassic to Cretaceous times, but not a bone of any genus of the order has been found in rocks of more recent age than Cretaceous. This means that plesiosaur has been extinct for more than three million years. The Patagonian monster is reported as being very huge, so heavily armoured that a bullet could not penetrate to the vital organs, and as having made a great path through the forest. Some plesiosaurs were very large, though many were of moderate length, some being less than ten feet long, and none were covered with a bony dermal armour. The fore and hind limbs both constituted flippers or paddles similar to those of a whale and were not adapted for walking but were purely swimming organs. Most genera of the order Plesiosauria had long snake-like necks and small heads with sharp conical teeth suitable for catching living fish, which were probably their main diet Smooth pebbles, which it is thought were used to aid digestion, have been found in the stomach. The paddles were the main means of propulsion, the short tail probably serving as a rudder.
— CM. Sternberg.
Not a Plesiosaur. 1922 article in a Canadian magazine.
Onelli didn't believe it was a Plesiosaur
The Pathfinder, published in Washington DC, in its April 22, 1922 (No. 1477) has a lengthy article about the animal, it cites Onelli, is critical and considers it to be a yarn, tale, show. It does mention Onelli as stating that the creature is not a reptile, but an edentate (megafaunal animal) that survived extinction in the past 10,000 years. This of course was far more feasible than a surviving reptile from the Cretaceous. Below is an image from the article which you can read online.
" Prof. Onelli believes that if one such animal exists there must be two or more. He comments that “Martin Shetfield, who wrote that he saw the animal in a lake in the Esquel region, is my friend and is trustworthy. He is not a scientist, but I have not the least doubt that he saw a large and strange aniamal with a swan-like neck swimming the lake as he asserts. Sheffield is American who has been prospecting and hunting in that region for years. I have received a report that a similar beast was seen in 1913 by an Emglishman in a lake in Santa Cruz further south. These reports tend to confirm the previous rumors of the existence in Patagonia and other unexplored places: of animals unknown to moderns. Plesiosaurus is a pseudonym the newspers have given it,” he corrects. “! believe it is a huge animal of the edentate family, of which ancient remain -not fossils— were found in Patagonia 1897, and one of which was fired upon and hit by the explorer Ramon Lista in 1890 without hurting it. He says that from 1890 to the present time there ha been 12 places in Patagonia alone, between latitudes 38 and 52, where the mysterious creature has been reported alive and well.”
Prof. Onelli thinks they constitute a few surviving descendants of the armored glyptodon or the megatherium that lived in the pleistocene period. If you can imagine a creature resembling the armadillo, with strong limbs an short, broad feet and of the size of an ox you have some idea of the glyptodon, while the megatherium was a more or less gigantic toothless sloth about 20 feet in length which, with its short neck, heavy body and powerful tail, lumbered over the landscape, and with its strong prehensile tongue tore away leaves and twigs for food."
So, to be fair, it seems that the media named the animal a "plesiosaur" while Onelli insisted that it was an surviving megafaunal creature, in line with the Mylodon of 1898-1901.
Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-202 5by Austin Whittall ©
A very curious, and also bizarre story from the local history of science…and an excellent coverage from yours of it along several posts…!!
ReplyDeleteRefering to your final paragraph on this post; Yes… Of course, Clemente Onelli never believed that the creature was a plesiosaur…Even at 1922 standards, this would be as unacceptable as it is nowadays. And being him a very cultured person (who was far from being an improvised naturalist), he was well aware of this… Instead, he strongly considered the feasibility of a surviving Edentate, like a Mylodon, as the candidate for this, and also for other similar supposed sightings…a presumption that , as you have observed, would not be so, so reckless…
Respect to the version of “an extinct Cretaceous aquatic reptile swimming in the lakes of Patagonia”, it is believed that it became into public domain unintentionally; most probably due to a casual appreciation of astonishment he made after reading the detailed description that Martin Sheffield sent to him… something along the lines of “only a Plesiosaur would fit into this description...!!”, a comment that somehow transcended the limits of his working office, and then became viral… And soon, the public opinion was firmly believing that Onelli wanted to capture a alive Plesiosaur…
The idea of an expedition to Patagonia to improve the scientific knowledge on a region that was relatively unknown, had been always on his mind... and at the light of this situation, Onelli glimpsed his best opportunity to carry it out.
Obviously, he needed funds to organize it; something difficult to get from the Government, but feasible to get from private donors, particularly if they were properly incentivized… So, he took advantage on the media´s furor, and was careful enough to not explicitly or definitely deny what was already firmly established in the public opinion…because, as the clever person he was, he perfectly knew that a Cretaceous Plesiosaur would be much more “profitable” than a 10 Ka Mylodon, at the time to get all the needed funds…aspect in which he had no major problems.
As far as it is known, Onelli´s expedition indeed reached, at least, its main original goal…as, although there was no Mylodon (a possibility in which he was genuinely interested in), and of course, no Plesiosaur…instead, an important number of unknown vegetal and animal species were there found (including many animals that were brought alive for the Buenos Aires Zoo, and also for the Zoo´s of other localities), and an interesting assemblage of paleontological and archaeological remains was too collected from there, to enrich the Museum´s collections.
Best regards
Marcelo
Thank you Marcelo. Yes, indeed. Onelli was well aware that there were no Cretacean dinosaurs or reptiles in Patagonia. He had always supported the need for further exploration and he did support the mylodon theory. The fact that Nahuel Huapi National Park was created as Parque Nacional del Sur in 1922 shows that there was an interest in promoting the region.
ReplyDelete