"JAWS" Revisited - what do YOU think?
 |
 |
JAWS was an unknown animal which was discovered washed up on a beach in Western Australia quite a few years
ago now. The images have been "doing the rounds" in CZ circles ever since.
But what to make of it? One idea that has had a lot of currency is that JAWS was a deceased Macaque Monkey. But there are those who disagree with that diagnosis.
The sketches presented here were recently drawn from the original JAWS photograph by Jeff Johnson, who says :-
I took one of the photos and drew a line separating the right side of the face from the left. In my opinion, what some people see as a canine tooth
on the shadowed side of the face (on the left of the photo), I believe to be a carnassial from the upper jaw. If it was a canine, the position of the teeth would be all wrong in the mouth.
Look at the distance from what is seen to be the first canine on the right: there is a large distance from that tooth to the corner of the mouth. Now if you look at what is seen to be a canine on the left, the distance is much shorter to that corner of the mouth. In fact, what is seen to be the first canine on the right is almost directly under the center of the snout. So why would the other canine on the left be in the side of the mouth?
The creature is almost facing directly to the viewer, yet the canine perception of the jaws would have the beast looking right at you, but the front of the upper jaws facing to the left, shifted under the nose. All that you have to do is look at the placement of the teeth against the curve of the lips. I personally think that the right "canine" is actually an incisor with a shorter one right next to it. Which would put both of them where they should be right under the center of the nose. And besides, if it has two canines one is short an scoop shaped, and the other is long and pointed, to me the long one is the underside of the upper jaw teeth in the cheek.
If it has two small incisors between the canines if you view it as such, I know of no flesh eating mammal that has just TWO such teeth between the canines, and no matching teeth in the lower jaw. There are no small incisors between the large fangs on the lower jaw, they must be the incisors. And to top it all off, it has no molars in cheeks, only blade-like processes, if it was a primate, it would have molars.
So whatever it is in the photo, it is strictly a flesh eater. The only thing that bothers me is that one lower jaw fang is straight out, and one is pointing in a strange direction, but that could be caused by many things.
Jeff Johnson, Date: Wed, 10 July 2002
So ... what do you think JAWS might be? Please post thoughts at Thylacoleo's Forum.
I better mention that Jeff Johnson (dinoman@attbi.com) is a palaeo-artist and model maker. He knows what he's talking about so you can't casually dismiss his opinions. Check out his web site at http://home.attbi.com/~dinoman/
See also Darren Naish's excellent blog ..
What was the animal in the 'Jaws' photo?
Be sure to see also the Ozenkadnook Files in the Special Topics Section before you decide -
