Is the loch ness monster real ?

goldfishlover

is it a danger to people ?

meglome

goldfishlover wrote: »

is it a danger to people ?

A real danger to tourists pockets I'd imagine.

6th

Moved from Conspiracy Theories.

Woger

If it's a thought to be extinct reptile it should be seen more often as there would need ot be dozens for a breeding population and they would need ot surface regularly to breathe.

MooseJam

Scotlands too cold for reptiles so I say no

Mahatma coat

ah, but, Dinosaurs became birds, so its possible that it might be some Distant cousin of the Penguins

pipsqueak

come on ! who is the drunkest perssoon here?? lough ness monster??wtf:eek:

mysterious

6th wrote: »

Moved from Conspiracy Theories.

Loch ness monster is a conspiracy theory not a paranormal scene.:rolleyes:

Shakes head

6th

mysterious wrote: »

Loch ness monster is a conspiracy theory not a paranormal scene.:rolleyes:

Shakes head

HaHa. Yes and the Government are using ghosts to spy on us in our homes. :rolleyes:

6th

6th wrote: »

HaHa. Yes and the Government are using ghosts to spy on us in our homes. :rolleyes:

Remote viewing !!

mysterious

6th wrote: »

HaHa. Yes and the Government are using ghosts to spy on us in our homes. :rolleyes:

I think you missed the point,

Loch ness commotion is not a paranormal term. Seems like you were bored, and move threads like it's a hobby.


I have no idea what your above post was about.
Seriously Loch ness is more suited for conspiracy. It is basically a theory. If it were true that it exist then it would not be anything of spiritual/ghostly nature now would it:rolleyes:

Duff

mysterious wrote: »

I think you missed the point,

Loch ness commotion is not a paranormal term. Seems like you were bored, and move threads like it's a hobby.


I have no idea what your above post was about.
Seriously Loch ness is more suited for conspiracy. It is basically a theory. If it were true that it exist then it would not be anything of spiritual/ghostly nature now would it:rolleyes:

I thought Cryptozoology fell under paranormal?

6th

mysterious wrote: »

Loch ness commotion is not a paranormal term.

In fact its not a term at all.

6th

Duff wrote: »

I thought Cryptozoology fell under paranormal?

It does. For about 99.99% of people with an interest in the area.

Nerin

study of hidden animals.

or

The study of creatures, whose existence has not been substantiated.

or

the study of evidence tending to substantiate the existence of, or the search for, creatures whose reported existence is unproved.

Since they've actually discovered and proven the existence of previously forgotten/undiscovered/unclassified creatures (such as small leaf deer,rhinos,hobbits<lol> and sharks) i wouldnt be so quick to discard or ridicule cryptozoology or cryptozoologists...or at least not as much as other so called pseudo sciences.

Overblood

Yes it's real.

stevenmu

Can we please keep this on-topic?

bigeasyeah

I dont think so.Loch Ness has long being associated with being home to large mythical creatures.It has been mentioned since the time of St.Columba(565AD),that will inevitably lead to some sort of precedent.
Many lakes across the globe are said to be inhabited a type of hereto unknown class of creature.
Lakes have and will be always regarded as enchanting places thus its not hard to imagine them being home to mysterious creatures.
It would be sweet though!

mysterious

There is no lock ness monster its a money scam. An animal of it's size cannot surivive there, it's too cold, and there isn't an ecosystem to sustain such a beast. It's a freshwater lake for crying out loud.

I looked into this, the only signifance of it, is the amount of money this nonsenses makes.

Deception isn't knew to humanity:rolleyes:

Fairdues

It's about as real as the leprechauns!

Diabhal Beag

Just a log in the Loch It would be so cool if it was real though

PJW

was'nt nessy confirmed as an ellie?

MooseJam

"Monster" is so 60's, a think a name change is in order, it's unfair on the creature at best

shqipshume

And penguins fly













Oh wow what do you know they do :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrxmpihCjqw

Oryx

MooseJam wrote: »

"Monster" is so 60's, a think a name change is in order, it's unfair on the creature at best

But "creature" is so 50s. Maybe he would like to be called the artist formerly known as Nessie.

Its hardly a conspiracy theory though, unless you also consider kissing the blarney stone part of a conspiracy. Its a money maker, like all theme parks and resorts!

meryem

It appears Loch Ness monster is real for the news has once again erupted of their existence toraise the attention of Cryptozoologists and common masses alike. This time in Alaska. Check the link given below:
http://news.discovery.com/animals/sea-serpent-sighting-alaska-hillstranded-110718.html

_______
To mods if I have wrongly bumped this old thread than please remove my post. Thanks!

Riamfada

There is an old legend of a lake monster in Lough Sheelin spotted around 1910

raveni

meryem wrote: »

It appears Loch Ness monster is real for the news has once again erupted of their existence toraise the attention of Cryptozoologists and common masses alike. This time in Alaska. Check the link given below:
http://news.discovery.com/animals/sea-serpent-sighting-alaska-hillstranded-110718.html

It looks like a wave to me.

Doc Farrell

I thought it was settled that Nessie is a landlocked eel? they can grow to 3 metres , possibly more and can live to be at least 80 years of age. A quick google will bring up photos and clips.

meryem

Yeah but we people still have to catch the live animal body for scientific proofing purposes.

Kess73

Doc Farrell wrote: »

I thought it was settled that Nessie is a landlocked eel? they can grow to 3 metres , possibly more and can live to be at least 80 years of age. A quick google will bring up photos and clips.

A land locked eel can indeed grow to a very big size could easily be mistaken for poart of a much larger animal is it was seen in shallow waters.


Another potential suspect would be a sturgeon or a number of sturgeon. The species of Sturgeon, Acipenser sturio which used to frequent UK waters and coasts is almost extinct now, but it is a fish that could reach 14 foot in length, and a number could easily have survived over time in Loch Ness.

To give an idea of scale, the pic below is of a closely related species.




Now imagine a fish maybe six feet longer than the one in the pic and a few hundred pound heavier, and you get an animal that could create swells when near the surface and that would look massive to most folk, and is also a creature that would not be spotted very often as it generally is a bottom feeder.

Now also factor in that the species of sturgeon in the picture has recently been found in UK waters after one came up a river, and factor in that that species, Acipenser oxyrinchus, has been recorded to length over 15 foot and to weights of close to 1,000lbs.


They also can live to over 100 years and some real giants in the Sturgeon have been caught in the Caspian sea which were around the 20ft and 4,500lbs mark. The Russian species have also been found in UK rivers.

Kimbot

Loch Ness monster is real and as soon as he/she gets their 3-fiddy then it will disappear :P

fontanalis

There are either Loch Ness Monsters or one very old monster. If it was some type of air breathing creature it should be seen a lot more often due to it having to surface to breathe and the numbers required for a breeding population.

meryem

I don't think it's a air breathing creature otherwise we did have caught him by now. It might come up for other specific reasons unknown to us till now.

steddyeddy

Duff wrote: »

I thought Cryptozoology fell under paranormal?

It is definatly possible that something lives in the loch, its big enough, deep enough and has enough food to support large creatures living there. The problem for me would be the large differences in individual witnesses descriptions of the creature.

jpm4

steddyeddy wrote: »

It is definatly possible that something lives in the loch, its big enough, deep enough and has enough food to support large creatures living there. The problem for me would be the large differences in individual witnesses descriptions of the creature.

Possible but not very likely - there has never been any solid evidence produced that there is anything unusual living in that loch.

steddyeddy

jpm4 wrote: »

Possible but not very likely - there has never been any solid evidence produced that there is anything unusual living in that loch.

True I would agree with that.

LordSutch

A new sighting, August 2013.

> > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2402134/Could-finally-proof-Nessie-exists-Amateur-photographer-snaps-large-black-object-moving-beneath-waters-Loch-Ness.html

As usual with Nessie there is a questionmark? Is it a wave/large ripple on the surface, or what . . . . .

kylith

It's a wave. Looks like from a turning boat.

There is no way that a breeding population of an animal as big as Nessie is reputed to be could remain undiscovered in Loch Ness.

Myrddin

Hasn't the entire lake been sonar combed, & nothing was found?

steddyeddy

EnterNow wrote: »

Hasn't the entire lake been sonar combed, & nothing was found?

Sonar contacts where found at some point but nothing substantial followed the investigation.

kylith

I didn't think they found anything that would lead them to believe it was more than a sunken log.

Oink

Lads, lads... You're complicating things with your facts and your science. The Daily Mail wouldn't still be talking about it if it wasn't true.

steddyeddy

kylith wrote: »

I didn't think they found anything that would lead them to believe it was more than a sunken log.

Really depends on the sonar used.

Actually just looked it up:

One sweep of the loch made contact with a strong, animate echo for nearly three minutes just north of Foyers. The identity of the contact remains a mystery. Later analysis determined that the intensity of the returning echo was twice as great as that expected from a 10-foot (3 m) pilot whale. On returning to the University of Chicago, biologist Roy Mackal and colleagues subjected the sonar data to greater scrutiny and confirmed dimensions of 20 feet (6 m)

Could be a known animal or an unknown animal. We don't know. I personally don't see enough evidence to propose a new animal but I'm open minded.

PJW

PJW wrote: »

was'nt nessy confirmed as an ellie?

Wow this thread is 4 years old now, just looking at all the banned posters, lol.

Anyway as I said back then......

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0309_0603009_loch_ness.html