Okay. And what do you conclude based on that evidence? That the existence of the myth is sufficient to assume the existence of the creature?
I conclude that one must look at all evidence with an open mind. Myths may indeed be myths. On the other hand, myths may be based upon actual events. Pictographs may be works of imaginative art. On the other hand, they may be representations of living creatures, actually seen and hunted by the artist.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
Open mind.