[Oswald2001]

I think it's fake.

Or maybe he was killed the the 1970's gay bar scarf around his neck.

[Sharon]

Pedigree Chum not good enough eh? Have to go and eat the owner? BAD dog!

That is an astounding picture hun

[winnn420]

def real..good post Kel!

[winnn420]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

I think it's fake.

Or maybe he was killed the the 1970's gay bar scarf around his neck.

that's his shirt...

[azdesertsnake01]

Originally Posted by johnleeknoefler ↗

I guess you didn't notice the dirt smear on the face? Or the fact that the left arm is all covered in dirt and shows it was UNDER the body? Or the gravel impressions on the cheek? Or the stains on the dirt where the moved the body from? Or the smeared doggy tracks on the shirt? Or the partial doggy tracks in the dirt? It's not sand but hard caked gravel and dirt.. Very hard to get even a hint of impressions. You don't even see foot prints of the people who moved him. But you do see finger scrapes in the dirt where he tried to escape before he was over come. Obviously you have not seen many carcasses that have been eaton by dogs. I have. Depending on the situation dogs can be finicky eaters. I am thinking there were not too many dogs here and they were domesticated dogs. Maybe poorly fed but well socialized. They avoided the face. Wild dogs wouldn't care what part they ate.

I could dispute pretty much all of your statements here, but I think this one is SO OBVIOUSLY fake that it's a waste of time to further dispute every point.

The marks on the face, etc. that you speak of are still clean looking in appearance. They aren't random in appearance. These are HIGHLY photoshopped pics with WAY too many flaws to begin to list here.

There are plenty of real death photos on here that no one doubts the validity of. Yet this one has so many flaws that they can't all be listed. Come on, don't fall for it.

When you find yourself making a lot of excuses as to why something is what it seems, chances are it's NOT what it seems!

I repeat my previous request, does ANYONE have any other info on these pics? A SINGLE news article, etc? I seriously doubt it, but I have been wrong before!

[Oswald2001]

So, the dogs pushed his shirt up around his neck so that it looks like a 1970's gay bar scarf? And with litte to no blood staining.

Also, the skin is obviously photoshopped.

Unless the dogs employed the latest lazer technology to cut the skin.

This fake job is good enough to show in a B grade horror flick if they show it for 1 second or less. Quick enough to get the gore impress, but not long enough to see how fake it is.

[kjohnson28]

Originally Posted by azdesertsnake01 ↗

I'm calling this one out as fake. The color of the face doesn't appear correct. The skin just above the waist appears to be photoshopped.

Typically when dogs eat a human, one of the first things they go for is the face. The face appears untouched. There isn't an appearance of fat around the skin as there should be. The skin where it is supposedly torn appears smoothly cut and thin. There appears to not be a single drop of blood on the ground (unless I am missing a drop somewhere? My eyes aren't the best sometimes.) Is there any proof it's real? News article or anything?

If you look at his right leg in pic 3, it appears no bigger than a broom handle (which is probably what it is). But it's definitely not big enough to be a humans leg.

And last, but NOT least, drum roll, drum roll! Where are the doggie foot prints in the sand???

Shall I go on?

Yeah I was thinking the exact same thing...his waist area looks completely photoshopped.

[ghostrider2112]

fake indeed...

[bombed]

AWESOME POST!

[The Driver]

iv seen dogs eat ppl before and they norm dont eat the face and hands. mans best friend