Nessie

[LOBOREX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22125981

[timetraveler]

Just about any event generates merchandisers and such (i.e. Royal Wedding collectors plates, World Series T-shirts, ect, ect). That doesn't invalidate the real thing. So what if vendors make a fuss as well as a buck. Its a big world and there is in it room for the P.T. Barnums as well as the Barnum Browns.

I've communicated with people that have seen Nessie, and some that have seen Champ and there is no doubt they saw something unusual.

Lake monsters are real.

[cire-neivk]

We live in a very big world, and lot of it that has been unexplored. Who knows what's out there? I'm sure a majority of sightings of creatures and u.f.o.'s can be explained, but there's also a large amount of cases that go unexplained. Besides, it's fun to believe in.

[razorwyre1]

you folks should read the book titled 'lake monster traditions'. its premise is that both the 'its a plesiosaur' believers and the 'its a log' skeptics arent looking at it properly: what it is isnt as important as the folklore driving the legend. (they study a number of small lakes that supposedly have monsters, even though those lakes are too small to support even a creature as big as a huge muskie.)
its kind of like u.f.o.s: if you observe at the sky long enough, you will eventually see something that you cannot explain. same goes for any sufficiently large body of water, and loch ness is huge (about 1 mile wide and 25 miles long). are the witnesses sincere? yes indeed.
alas, i used to believe in nessie, but having studied the matter over the decades, i have come to the conclusion that its a myth. even with the size of that lake, theres no way that a population of animals of the size reported in the sightings could remain unidentified, especially when they have been the focus of so much study.

[LOBOREX]

Just about every piece of so called evidence has been debunked, as to eyewitness testimony in study after study it's been proven that people see what they want to see, whether it's someone identifying the wrong suspect in a crime or seeing a log as a large beastie. If your excited and scared your eyes will lie to you or if you want to see something bad enough you will. Example you've heard stories seen movies about Nessie, bigfoot, ufo's and your in an area thats famous for sightings of nessie you see something at a distance suddenly break the surface of the water, your eyes cant see what it is apart from a general shape your mind will use all the stories, films, pics, you've seen to try and make sense of what your seeing so a log becomes a serpent or a large otter becomes a monster. There are so many real animals on this planet that are truly amazing that we know so little about maybe we should focus more on that before there gone.

[cire-neivk]

I don't know if the "Loch Ness Monster" is necessarily real, and you're right, it probably isn't (but then again who knows? LOL). What I do know is that many new species of animals are discovered on this planet every year, and as man goes deeper into the oceans we have discovered many "alien" looking animals that we never knew existed.

[timetraveler]

I think there is enough evidence to conclude that large, unclassified aquatic creatures exist, particularly in the ocean. Cryptozoology is not a distraction from other forms of nature awareness, but a stimulus. We live in exciting times for science and big mysteries are a logical objective for inquiry.

Case in point. Unless we are being totally duped, the Ghost Hunters and similar TV shows have amassed an impressive amount of data that "ghosts" whatever they may be, exist.

Keep watching the skies...and the waters.

[Brian McGuire]

Honestly, there will never be a Nessie/Sasquath/Chupacabra discovered. Why?? Well, because if something was found, it would be classified as a new animal species. They wouldn't say "Oh, Sasquatch discovered!". They would just say they found a primate, give it a scientific/common name, and that will be that. Case in point, the Billy Ape. Same goes for sea monsters.

[LOBOREX]

I think there is enough evidence to conclude that large, unclassified aquatic creatures exist, particularly in the ocean. Cryptozoology is not a distraction from other forms of nature awareness, but a stimulus. We live in exciting times for science and big mysteries are a logical objective for inquiry.

Case in point. Unless we are being totally duped, the Ghost Hunters and similar TV shows have amassed an impressive amount of data that "ghosts" whatever they may be, exist.

Keep watching the skies...and the waters.

What evidence are you talking about for large aquatic creatures? and again what data for ghost? yes we do live in exciting times for science but cryptozoology is not a science. Science demands proof not conjecture. Extraordinary claims call for extraordinary proofs.

[timetraveler]

In the case of sea monsters there are hundreds of reports going back centuries.

Regarding ghosts, the Ghosthunters themselves use various recording devices to detect paranormal sights and sounds. Every week they present data to prove or disprove the presence of paranormal activity in their investigations.

Actually, the idea that there may be be living things in the sea that haven't been fully documented yet doesn't sound like that extraordinary a claim.

[razorwyre1]

In the case of sea monsters there are hundreds of reports going back centuries.

Regarding ghosts, the Ghosthunters themselves use various recording devices to detect paranormal sights and sounds. Every week they present data to prove or disprove the presence of paranormal activity in their investigations.

Actually, the idea that there may be be living things in the sea that haven't been fully documented yet doesn't sound like that extraordinary a claim.

with the ocean, all bets are off. lakes like ness are another matter entirely.
the shows like "ghosthunters" only seem scientific. when you look at their "evidence" and "data" with a skeptics eye, it all begins to fall apart rapidly.

i would direct you to penn & tellers series "Bull$#!+". i believe ghost hunters and cryptozoology (sp?) were both tackled in the second season.
i would also ask you to look up the works of Dr. Susan Blackmoor. she spent many years as a professional parapsychologist. after every phenomenon she studied failed the scientific tests, she became a psychologist studying why our minds interpret what we see out of the corner of our eyes as ghosts, monsters, ufos, etc.

[timetraveler]

I enjoy looking at phenomena from many perspectives. The bottom line is that I find the possibility of unknown creatures very interesting and I keep an open mind about their existence.

[LOBOREX]

In the case of sea monsters there are hundreds of reports going back centuries.

Regarding ghosts, the Ghosthunters themselves use various recording devices to detect paranormal sights and sounds. Every week they present data to prove or disprove the presence of paranormal activity in their investigations.

Actually, the idea that there may be be living things in the sea that haven't been fully documented yet doesn't sound like that extraordinary a claim.

As razorwyre1 has said when it comes to the ocean all bets are off, being so vast the oceans will hold all kinds of creatures we don't know about. In lakes no way is a breeding population of giant aquatic beasties present. And because the oceans are vast does not mean anything is possible you will not find cities filled with mermen and women. Because for that to be would mean all we know of biology, evolution, the fossil record is false. As for hundreds of reports of sea creatures so what? There are hundreds of reports made by Spanish invaders to America saying that they encountered whole tribes of giants and tribes of two headed people.

[LOBOREX]

I enjoy looking at phenomena from many perspectives. The bottom line is that I find the possibility of unknown creatures very interesting and I keep an open mind about their existence.

And thats cool, as a belief system your entitled to believe anything you want but that is not science. As to keeping an open mind, just don't keep it so open your brains fall out.

[XOFACTO2]

Well, I can't speak toward UFO's or Giant Lake Monsters but I have seen a ghost. I know that's not scientific but seeing is believing.

[temperflash]

In the case of sea monsters there are hundreds of reports going back centuries.

Regarding ghosts, the Ghosthunters themselves use various recording devices to detect paranormal sights and sounds. Every week they present data to prove or disprove the presence of paranormal activity in their investigations.

Actually, the idea that there may be be living things in the sea that haven't been fully documented yet doesn't sound like that extraordinary a claim.

As razorwyre1 has said when it comes to the ocean all bets are off, being so vast the oceans will hold all kinds of creatures we don't know about. In lakes no way is a breeding population of giant aquatic beasties present. And because the oceans are vast does not mean anything is possible you will not find cities filled with mermen and women. Because for that to be would mean all we know of biology, evolution, the fossil record is false. As for hundreds of reports of sea creatures so what? There are hundreds of reports made by Spanish invaders to America saying that they encountered whole tribes of giants and tribes of two headed people.

The Inca thought Spanish knights on horse back were a single two headed creature that could continue fighting if broken in half. When people have never seen anything like what they've just seen their mind tries to explain it, and often fails to get it right.

I've seen a phenomena in the near by lake that some would believe was a long serpentine creature swimming. My much older brother who was an avid fisherman had seen it many times before. He called it "the lake turning over".
What it appeared to be was a current of dead bottom water rising to the surface in the center of the lake forming a low but distinct stationary wave that curled and frothed and seemed to undulate.

When this happens to a lake that hasn't had a turn over in decades there may be massive amounts of CO2 held in the bottom waters. A village in Africa was wiped out by such a turn over, the CO2 gas released from the water replacing all the air along the shores for some minutes.


As for Nessie I don't doubt that there was some aquatic beast present in the lake in the ancient days when it was first recorded. But modern sightings are most likely bogus.

The Dragon of Malta as described in the legend was almost certainly a giant Crocodile. Kings and princes of the day paid huge sums to merchants who brought strange creatures for their private beastiary. A large Croc or even a egg or two might be washed into the sea marshes from a shipwreck.

Giantism is a known phenomena, as is dwarfism. Dwarf mastodons are believed to have existed well into historical times on isolated islands.
Cave drawings in Australia show Aborigine hunters fighting the giant Butcher Lizard. So these monsters did encounter men.
Were it not for photographs and film of the Tasmanian Tiger when these still lived future generations might believe these were mythical creatures.

Living example of the prehistoric "Dragon Shark"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koPu1PYVHDE

PS
The old saying "miracles are not contrary to nature, they are only contrary to what we know of nature" seems to apply to Cryptids.

[LOBOREX]

(The old saying "miracles are not contrary to nature, they are only contrary to what we know of nature" seems to apply to Cryptids.)
Since the saying you quote comes from the epistemic theory of miracles then yes it applies to crytids they are both belief systems not science.

[swriojas]

Well, I can't speak toward UFO's or Giant Lake Monsters but I have seen a ghost. I know that's not scientific but seeing is believing.

But now we have to believe you.

[XOFACTO2]

But now we have to believe you.

Not asking anyone to believe me, smart guy. Just sayin', I know what I saw. Guess you'd need to see one for yourself.

[timetraveler]

When "science" starts being invoked to squelch discourse, it isn't science anymore.

There is no final word in science.