anybody with a ounce of common sense or intelligence wouldnt even entertain neither of these urban myths. the loch ness monster urban myth, first off for a animals its supposed size wouldnt it need big/sizeable prey to sustain it? and in lake nessie its not big enough prey, also the biggest and most simple thing is, does 1 animal of the species live at once? something to think about


big foot, ok you have an allegened speicies almost 7 feet tall which walks around upright, but nobody can find anything but a few fake pictures, the patterson video one of the guys admitted it was fake and big foot lovers still try to use that as creditable evidence

neither one of these urbran legends make any sense to me, although UFO'S/ALIENS are something different

I agree, there’s little to no evidence either are real... UFO's are definitely a real phenomenon, but are they space ships operated by aliens?

I think Bigfoot has a better chance of existing than the Loch Ness Monster does, but it is improbable that eithier do exist ( ;__; )

i thought the person who first "spotted" nessie admitted it was a hoax...

i believe nessie is falsified... the only reason it's hype probably still exists in Scottland is because it allows for a lot of tourist income.

Well, just imagine that you could classify Bigfoot as a primate. South America and Asia both have them, so the possibility of them being here is not too far fetched, especially if you look at the myth of the Yeti, maybe they could have crossed the land bridge and taken over territory here. Now, I am not saying they are real, but, the idea of them getting here is not far fetched.

Yes, there is a better chance for a huge primate then there is for a monster in the loch.

Actually the legends of both Big Foot and Nessie go farther back then current memory or trend. The legend of Nessie can be compared to the older legends. One said that the lake monster was exercised by a village priest after the theft of cattle it may correspond to the legends of the kelpie.

Nessie however may have died out. It is impossible to know what its food source is/was. If it lived on fish or other water based food the lack of life in the loch may have contributed to it's demise. But there is no guarantee where it derived/derives its food. It may only live in the water and graze or hunt on land? The famous photo of Nessie has been revealed to be a fake but sightings of Nessie existed prior to the photo. There are other large bodies of water that are said to contain Nessie type creatures, Ogopogo and Champ are two others.

Big Foot is similar to ogres in European myth. Ogres were supposed to be large, hairy and smelled of sulfur, similar to modern descriptions of Big Foot. Almost every culture has a 'Big Foot' type animal in it's culture. Yowie, Yeti, Windego are but to name a few. The legends exist from Russia, Australia, China, Tibet, USA and so on. For so many people to have encounters of a large shy primate type animal isn't impossible. The person responsible for sighting the first orangutans were thought to be mad/liars until one was killed and brought back for study the same with mountain gorillas and a lot of other creatures that are now well known but rarely seen. We are still discovering new species.

Bob Heironimus the gentleman that came forward to claim that the Patterson film was a hoax (who also claimed to be the person in the suit) never produced enough evidence for his story to be other than one who wants attention in my opinion. His name is now linked with the film and anytime someone mentions the PF they will mention him. He made claims but never produced a suit, he never donned the/any suit and allowed for people to go back and film him for comparison study. If he really wanted to debunk the film I would think that he would have done something along those lines. Yes he did walk in a odd way, which is what a lot of people fixate on but his odd gate is not conclusive evidence. Plus why did his stories not come out until after the fact? If he was such a joker I don't know if he would have been able to keep such a prank to himself. He would have donned the suit for Halloween and handed out candy or something and gleaned more fame for himself and proved once and for all that he was telling the truth.

Mabon.

The Loch Ness Monster is more unlogical. Because the dinosuars have all died off. I could go on, but my sentences wouldn't make much sense.

I see Bigfoot more logical, because there are things out there. We haven't discovered yet. And Bigfoot might be one of them.

BULL bigfoot is just as stupid, its one thing to not be able to find a small animal, but a 7 foot animal thats walk right, shouldnt be hard to find

That's your opinion/belief. I mean found a new spieces of big cats. It's possible that there is a new animal or whatever out there.

it was a 50 pound clouded leopard, not the same as a bigfoot

Anybody with an ounce of common sense or intelligence would give each the benefit of the doubt until they had been conclusively disproven.

So if I claim I saw a flying spaghetti monster in my backyard should you give me the benefit of the doubt until I am disproven? It's one thing to not totally denounce it as nonsense, but you shouldn't believe it until you have good reason to.

True, however, this isn't a flying spaghetti monster we're talking about. It's two creatures that resemble (almost exactly) creatures that have previously dwelled on this planet. I think that's reason enough not to believe, but do as I do and take the "you never know" approach.

By the way, I'm 50/50 on both these creatures existing...I have my theories...

Nessie is more unlikely than BigFoot, IMO.

The Nessie stories stem back from when St Colomba supposedly scared away a monster in the lake that had been killing villagers ( the Picts). There are many stories and myths of Saints and holy men driving away serpents. Probably just metaphors for satan or pagans.

People have seen strange things in the loch, but it's probably just been wood, strong waves, or the most likely explanation; really big eels. I watched a documentary a few years ago about a researcher that was looking for Nessie, and he found a massive dead eel washed up from the loch. it's just not possible for lake Monsters to survive this long.

True. Yet the bigcat was still undiscovered until we found it.

Saw Loch Ness on a trip to the UK back in 1987. Monster or no it's still a great place to visit, quite scenic.

Nessie is much less beleivable...as for the 7 foot guy we can't find? Not suprising....we can't find a 6ft 5 inch arab hooked up to dialysis machine either....

isn't the word illogical not unlogical, and yu said a thing of that sise would need large things to eat, what about whales that eat nothing but krill (dunno bout spelling)

Both are urban myths with a following of people willing to hoax & 'fib' to keep both myths alive, & nothing more.

Wether they're real hoaxes or "fibs." People have reported seeing both for a long period of time. People are going to continue to believe in both.

its funny that LIERS and ILLUNIST never see a family of big foot,

Ogopogo I beleive in. WHY? How about my idiot uncle seeing it when he was younger and tried to shoot it.

LOL....

I think Nessie is more illogical because plesiosaurs have been extinct for quite a while and also I don't think Loch Ness could support an entire species of the monsters. Bigfoot are easier to notice in my opinion. I do think the evidence, while not being perfect I think is better than the evidence for Nessie. I am not saying I believe in Bigfoot or Nessie but I just think Bigfoot makes more sense.

I can only speak for Washington State since I've lived here for my entire life (all 40 years of it) and it's not a modern mythology, the native Americans here have stories that go back centuries about Big Foot. I'm still jury out on Big Foot, BUT consider this, the woods and mountainess regions of the Cascade mountains here are DENSE and unoccupied. World War II aircraft and other more modern aircraft have crashed in those woods and mountains and have never been found. I think the last time one was found was about 2 years ago. A prop plane from World War II that had been missing since 1944. If they can't find a downed plane in those mountains, I could see how footie could live there a LONG time and be rarely spotted.

True, a dinosaur could hide in those forests. I have relatives who live in the Seattle area whom I've visited and we've traveled in the areas east of the city and I've often thought that if Bigfoot does indeed exist I can see why it is not seen so often given the height and density of the forests. I'm traveling there again in August. MMW, do you live in that area? Are you familiar with an old community known as Lester?

One of the things that I've often wondered is people who say that no large creature could exist and remain hidden for as long as bigfoot. I grew up in the country surrounded by woods (woods not forests) and even though I knew growing up there were; skunks, squirrels, hawks, deer (in abundance) fox, mountain lion, muskrat, opossum to name a few I rarely encounterd the living creatures (deer, opossum and squirrels) in the woods and with the exception of the road kill critters (those being mostly deer, skunk and opossum) I never once came across a carcass of a dead animal in the woods. And I was in the woods a lot! LOL! Scavengers make short work of remains plus bones contain vital nutrients for rodent type as well as help them keep their teeth filed down.

I found a pair of shed antlers once and they had to be fresh because they were still together and were bright and clean, even so they already had gnaw marks on them. Had I not found them when I did I suspect that in a matter of days they would have been gone.

That has always made me wonder when people go on about not finding remains of a cryptid is just how much they understand how big woods/forest are and how economical the woods/forest are as well?

Mabon.

Yep, I know where Lester is, it's our near Stampede Pass and Enumclaw... I think Lester is an old logging or mining town isn't it?

I think it was a railroad community. I've been wanting to see it as I'm into ghost towns. I went out there with my cousin and husband who live in Bellevue when I was visiting two years ago, but we came to that part of the road that is closed to vehicles and since their two infant sons were along that ruled out hiking. Would like to try and see it when I come this August. It's a beautiful area.

Have their been any Bigfoot "sightings" in that area?

Who says Nessie has to be a Plesiosaur? There are several accounts of Nessie walking across roads! For over 1000 years Nessie was called a "dragon". Plesiosaur may sound more scientific, but this name contradicts the fact Nessie has been seen to clearly leave the water. On the other hand, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of accounts of people seeing dragons in the British isles. Sometimes hundreds of people describing the same creature.

And these thosuands of sightings are supposedly more illogical than the dozens attributed to Bigfoot?

NESSIE IS FREAKING A CRYPTOZOOLOGICAL CREATURE!
(note THE logical in Cryptozoological!)
Bigfoot is fake! But Nessie, is unconfirmed, foo! I hope it's real, otherwise I have to change my username!
Ufo's/Aliens are utterly false! You dont believe that fake light? It like, twelve flashlights in someones living room! JEEZ!

Bigfoot is fake to you. But million of people believe he exists. Like me.

Yes, Nessie is "unconfirmed" for now. But I hope she's real.

Tell that to St. Patrick.... He banished serpants from Ireland.... funnily enough it is the only place in the UK without any wild snakes.

They both make perfect sense until proven otherwise.....until you can prove to me 100% that it is impossible for the existence of a large dinosaur type creature in Loch Ness and a large ape/man type creature I will have to assume they are real...

What else would they be operated by? Certainly not by humans. Do you honestly believe that as infinite as the universe is and how small earth is that were the only actual intelligent beings ? I think not.

I agree. There are ongoing projects on exploring loch ness using sonor, submersible robots among other things to find proof. As far as bigfoot goes, Isuppose it's possible for an unknown species to thrive in deep uncharted forest.

Your going to feel really stupid one day

It would be illogical to believe they don't exist. There is no evidence proving they don't exist. It would be illogical to believe they do exist. There is no evidence proving they do exist.

Do two negatives make a positive here?

Or do two negatives make 2 positives?

Both Nessie and Bigfoot sounds implausible, but if I have to make a choice between which is the more believable I'd say it was Nessie. The reasons being : 1. There are vast parts of oceans and lakes that have not been properly explored(2/3 of the earth are water bodies). 2. According to scientists the celocanth was destinct millions of years ago, but it was rediscovered a few Years back (suppose to be extinct).

Whereas bigfoot: If they really existed you are bound to find some bones or signs of their existence. There are alot of explorers and campers in the woods and they are bound to see or find some evidence of it's existence. With deforestation we are bound to find some evidence...