Mason Bishop- Kaiaimunu

Appeal to Misleading Authority	The page begins by telling the reader that the content of the page is provided by an Australian man who is investigating the Kaiaimunu. Because he is investigating the Kaiaimunu, his authority should be respected.
Anecdotal Fallacy	All of the information presented is from one man who gathered information from other people who have supposedly seen the cryptid. No real evidence other than anecdotal.
Appeal to Ignorance	The author is unsure why there is a lack of evidence for the cryptid and suggests that it is nocturnal to explain how little evidence there is.
Bandwagon	The people in this area of Papua New Guinea report seeing the cryptid because they believe that it is real. There are people that have seen it, and so they are more likely to join in on reporting sightings of the cryptid. All of the people are in one area where sightings of the cryptid are popular.
Hasty Generalization	The cryptid is said to be a good climber based on a small piece of evidence that is presented in the text. The creature stood on a rock, so it must be a good climber
Begging the Question	There has been a sighting of a Kaiaimunu. Why does this matter? There have been sightings of sauropods in this area before. Why does this matter? The Kaiaimunu is classified as a sauropod.