PDA

View Full Version : The Loch Ness Monster


William One Sac
01-11-2004, 07:00 PM
I have long been fascinated by the subject of lake monsters. The idea of living dinosaurs has been a subject I have had great interest since I was a child. Most eyewitness testimony of lake monsters have seemingly always characterized the cryptids as <i>plesiosaurs</i>, long necked creatures thought extinct for millions of years.

<IMG SRC="http://www.subversiveelement.com/files/Pa270034.jpg">

This subject has been debated for years, with mainly only eyewitness testimony to back it up, as well as a few pictures, mostly very questionable. However, creatures like Champ, of Lake Champlaign, have been reported as far back by the native Americans who inhabited the area, well before settlers came to the region. So can it be that all of these so called witnesses are lying, misidentifying something else (a log or a wave for example), hallucinating? It seems unlikely as well, even if you consider a combination of all three choices as the answer, given that there are many instances of <i>credible</i> eyewitness accounts, as well as a few videos and photographs that are a little harder to discount. But then, several years ago, a skeptic came up with a seemingly bullet proof argument against lake monsters in general, the Loch Ness monster specifically.

There are not enough fish to support a viable breeding colony of these large cryptids. Case closed.

Or is it? There are a couple of possible explanations, in my opinion, that leave me open to the possibility that lake monsters exist. Firstly, that argument depends on the fact that the creatures eat fish. This is not neccessarily a fact, especially when dealing with a species we know nothing about, that might not even exist. And there exists another possibility, one that intrigues me even more. It can be argued, very logically, that if these creatures exist and spend their entire lives in lakes, there should be at least some evidence of a carcass, a bone, something to lend credence to the fact.

However, what if these so called lake monstgers are really deep ocean dwellers, who travel to lochs and lakes via deep underground rivers. Maybe they are semi-intelligent, and have learned to avoid man. Could these creatures come to the lakes to raise young, or even to breed? I am not going to claim I say this is a fact, I only offer it as a possible explanation. There are many things we dont know about the deep ocean. Only recently, have proof of the collosal squid been uncovered. They are deep sea dwellers.

At any rate, the discovery of one of these cryptids would be a great boost for science and our understanding of the planet we live on. For example, if this scenario is correct, and the creatures do travel undergound through rivers, what does drilling water wells and such effect these creatures habitats?

Perhaps the creatures use something like sonar to navigate the deep trenches, and only surface at night (if at all) because light hurts their darkness adapted eyes. Of course I realize this is all just speculation on my part...

Jewboy-Soapurb
01-12-2004, 07:00 PM
Interesting, but the Guy who started the whole Loch Ness Monster thing confessed it was a hoax on his death bed.

It is however quite possible that such things could live deep in the oceans... And intelligent enough to avoid man? If this is true, then what happens when man can't be avoided?


Jinkies...

agentmoulder254
01-12-2004, 07:00 PM
That wasn't the guy who <U>started</U> the claims. I think it was the guy who took the Surgeon's Picture, which was the most important evidence we have of the creature. There could also be other creatures too, other than the Nessy. I have a lot of well said out points in the conversation with fridgy and Subrosa, but if don't want to read the large argument than you can stop at a point, but it sure is funny. http://pub173.ezboard.com/fsubversiveelementfrm7.showMessage?topicID=38.topi c LOL.

William One Sac
01-12-2004, 07:00 PM
Champ picture, from Lake Champlain, upstate New York..

<IMG SRC="http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/champ/graphic/champ.gif">

agentmoulder254
01-12-2004, 07:00 PM
That's awesome

SkepticJo
03-12-2004, 07:00 PM
I think probably there are such things as the Loch Ness
Monster. Just because we haven't captured one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. These things have been reported since way back there and frankly I am more inclined to believe something that has a starting history from way back and continues til today as opposed to something more current. I remember reading a story about a certain type of fish that scientists said was extinct by so many millions of years (ha!)and then they discovered that one had recently been caught and eaten in some remote location. Later I read (if I'm not mistaken)that that they weren't so extinct at all! Science is proving that some of our long held beliefs are not necessarily carved in stone.

William One Sac
03-12-2004, 07:00 PM
I agree. There may yet just be such creatures as bigfoot's, chupacabra's and lake monsters. The creatures may well be cunning and stealthful...

agentmoulder254
03-13-2004, 07:00 PM
i dont really think big foot is very stealthy i just think hes stupid and lazy and he just stays in one place eating as much ants as possible

SkepticJo
03-13-2004, 07:00 PM
Bigfoot may not be brillant but he's smart enough to stay out of the way most of the time. Specifically I mean no one has ever been able to sneak up on one but Bigfoot seems to have crossed paths more than a time or two with humans. And Bigfoot is smart enough to turn and try to attack if being followed from the accounts I have ever read. That's pretty smart to me...and no one has yet to come across any skeletal remains-so is he smart enough to bury the remains of his pack? Indications are he does just that or else we would have found a skeleton by now. I think he is pretty clever at hiding since most encounters are just chance encounters as opposed to a team of hunters going out and finding a Bigfoot creature. I don't think he's as dumb as we're giving him credit for here.

freemasonx
03-21-2004, 07:00 PM
Sac, your open mind on the subject is great if not semi republician. Why is it that any time the unexplained is to be believed in, it's due to some elaborate maze of underground tunnels etc.....why do we have the ability to believe, yet not the ability to throw out reasoning when it comes to the unexplained? Lets agree that plesiosaurs exist today in fresh water. We must then submit that we still know nothing about it. Its feeding habits (not to mention digestive/metabolism), gestation rates, reproduction, etc...For all we know lake monsters are asexual, have a lifespan of 7000 years, and require three lake trout per week. However if you want to connect loch ness and lake champlain via miles of underground rivers, thats cool too!

agentmoulder254
03-21-2004, 07:00 PM
good idea man, never thought of it that way