Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Large eel-like creature filmed in River Ness

87 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Captain Risky
5 hours ago, stereologist said:

I would like to expand on my comment to Captain Risky. I was in a rush and did not express some important considerations.

There have  been cases where all sorts of things have been proposed and what is almost always lacking is any evidence. What we have here is evidence that there might be some long creature in the lake area. This was not in the Loch itself but in the waters that connect the loch to the sea. It is suggestive of something, but the existence of eels in the lake was well known.

There are some that might say that skeptics are wrong. That isn't really rue. As has been repeatedly pointed out, plesiosaurs are extinct and have been extinct for a long time. You might wonder how eDNA excluded something for which there is no known DNA. That would be a good question to research since it is at the heart of how eDNA operates. Sharks were excluded as well. Someone might propose that it might be a new and unknown species of shark. The same reason eDNA excludes plesiosaurs applies here as well.

Turns out skeptics have been right all along since they have applied logic and reason to the known evidence. It certainly has taken them a long way hasn't it. Now logic and reason can be applied to the eel concept. Are there large eels in the loch?  Eels is not the question but are there gigantic eels and do eels have the habits or ability to perform the situations people report? I'll let you propose some ideas along those lines.

You call people liars. Or demean what they saw. So take off the mantle of head forum sceptic. In this case the people that saw a lake monster, it would seem are vindicated if it’s an unknown large eel or shark and mistook it for a Dinosaur of sorts. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

You call people liars. Or demean what they saw. So take off the mantle of head forum sceptic. In this case the people that saw a lake monster, it would seem are vindicated if it’s an unknown large eel or shark and mistook it for a Dinosaur of sorts. 

To be clear I do not call people liars  unless they repeatedly lie about the same subject. I do point out lies. Often people make mistakes. I do t hat al of the time. If you point out a mistake and someone doubles down on that mistake what does it become. You point to a link that this is not true and those posters may decide to be tellers of falsehoods and not correct their mistake. That's right, they'd rather lie than correct an error. Personally, I think I give people more chances than they deserve. Someone pointed out I was suggesting the use of the wheel 1500 years before it was used. I corrected my mistake immediately. There are trolls that are never going to correct "mistakes".  There are also pinheads that refust to look into a discussion and decide if the evidence support one side or the other. They prefer to remain stupid, i.e. unwilling to learn.

Do I demean what they saw? No. I point out the limitations of what people saw and you should also understand that I have pointed out limitations to what I have seen. I am not going to take what story someone tells as gospel and neither should you. A story is a story. The story people tell of what they saw if more correctly the story people tell of their interpretation of events.  That is what human do.

Vindicating people is a rather pointless decision. The real issue would be vindicating their interpretation,  not what they actually saw. Your suggestion that they actually saw something living is without merit. Their interpretation is that it was living. You don't know that to be the case. Where I see a shadow someone sees a ghost. Where I see a satellite someone sees an alien craft. Where I see a wave someone sees a behemoth. We all saw the same thing. It's the interpretation that is so vastly different.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
1 hour ago, stereologist said:

To be clear I do not call people liars  unless they repeatedly lie about the same subject. I do point out lies. Often people make mistakes. I do t hat al of the time. If you point out a mistake and someone doubles down on that mistake what does it become. You point to a link that this is not true and those posters may decide to be tellers of falsehoods and not correct their mistake. That's right, they'd rather lie than correct an error. Personally, I think I give people more chances than they deserve. Someone pointed out I was suggesting the use of the wheel 1500 years before it was used. I corrected my mistake immediately. There are trolls that are never going to correct "mistakes".  There are also pinheads that refust to look into a discussion and decide if the evidence support one side or the other. They prefer to remain stupid, i.e. unwilling to learn.

Do I demean what they saw? No. I point out the limitations of what people saw and you should also understand that I have pointed out limitations to what I have seen. I am not going to take what story someone tells as gospel and neither should you. A story is a story. The story people tell of what they saw if more correctly the story people tell of their interpretation of events.  That is what human do.

Vindicating people is a rather pointless decision. The real issue would be vindicating their interpretation,  not what they actually saw. Your suggestion that they actually saw something living is without merit. Their interpretation is that it was living. You don't know that to be the case. Where I see a shadow someone sees a ghost. Where I see a satellite someone sees an alien craft. Where I see a wave someone sees a behemoth. We all saw the same thing. It's the interpretation that is so vastly different.

Liar liar pants on fire. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

I enjoy sushi ive had eel and its good its likely not my favorte but its not bad, and who cares if a person likes or hates it, people are not $atan for thinking a food is gross.

 

Why do some get ad hominem attacks for simply stating their opinion from people who want their opinions taken at face value as gospels, what a hypocritical double standard.

does anyone actually suggest any lake or loch is home to a plesiosaurs? how ridiculous considing we know a lot about them, they couldnt do many things people claim to see them do and they would do things seldom reported, not to mention they werent dinosaurs, and the idea they are a creature of loch ness is based on a hoxed fraud photo, one photo btw, some should do more research before posting and not be so fast to jump to troll mode and scold,

this threads video shows they might be an eel living in waters near the loch, so what? i fully believe lots of prosaic known and perhaps unknown creatures swim the loch it doesnt make them monsters,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma

quoted from article:

Quote

it's difficult to determine exactly how large it is

no sh!t, really? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
On 9/4/2019 at 8:47 PM, DirtyDocMartens said:

So do people choose to eat eels? Here in ETx we have large carp that no one fishes for, but you always hear that you can stew them. No one seems to know anyone who has actually tried it, though.

I love our eel. Fried, chilled and some teriyaki or rice vinegar. It's flaky and tasty.  @Iilaa'mpuul'xem is right about conger though. It taste like a slimey bicycle inner tube.

You have to cook carp just right so you can grab the top of the spine and pull it out with all ribs attached. If not you have a mouth full of ribs, which is why no one eats them but us Injuns. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
1 minute ago, Piney said:

I love our eel. Fried, chilled and some teriyaki or rice vinegar. It's flaky and tasty.  @Iilaa'mpuul'xem is right about conger though. It taste like a slimey bicycle inner tube.

You have to cook carp just right so you can grab the top of the spine and pull it out with all ribs attached. If not you have a mouth full of ribs, which is why no one eats them but us Injuns. 

yeah, in orlando certian folks would use throw nets, no license required, and catch nile perch, a trash fish more bones than meat, when i would catch big black catfish rhose folks wanted them, i couldnt say no, they were feeding their families,

i asked them how they eat the perch, they bssically do make a fish muddle with very little prep, heads left on, it sounds horrifying to me but with the right spice who knows,

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
15 minutes ago, the13bats said:

i asked them how they eat the perch, they bssically do make a fish muddle with very little prep, heads left on, it sounds horrifying to me but with the right spice who knows,

Pine Barren lakes and rivers are all sandy bottom and you have clear visability 7-8 feet down even thought the water looks like ice tea.

No muddy taste in perch or cats. :yes:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

Liar liar pants on fire. 

That's a simpleton's response. Try harder.

I am confident that you can post something well written and thought out.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twas Brillig
21 hours ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

Disgusting and the salt water ones are like rubber bands. By the way, there is nothing ignorant about personal taste.

Regardless, it's a very ignorant and biased response then. Conger eels both fresh AND salt are HIGHLY sought after and eaten by the millions every year. They are being over-fished as a result. If they aren't cooked properly they are like rubber. 

Check out this record sized 20 foot specimen of a conger. 

https://cdn.images.*** blocked ***/img/dynamic/128/590x/secondary/eel1-289204.jpg

eel1-289204.thumb.jpg.4d98830356eaa642d11d4e0241773902.jpg

https://www.*** blocked ***/news/nature/577311/Conger-eel-record-breaking-giant-Plymouth

Edited by Twas Brillig
attempting to add a photo
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
13 hours ago, Piney said:

Pine Barren lakes and rivers are all sandy bottom and you have clear visability 7-8 feet down even thought the water looks like ice tea.

No muddy taste in perch or cats. :yes:

the "muddle" isnt about taste, its a nasty fish version of scrapple type slurry....

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, the13bats said:

the "muddle" isnt about taste, its a nasty fish version of scrapple type slurry....

Put the sunnys,crappy and carp in a grinder and make a paddy out of it........

.......Some of the poorer members of my tribe use to do that. Send their kids down to the river, keep everything they catch in a 5 gallon pail and take it home...

Blecchhh....:o

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
On 9/5/2019 at 8:43 PM, Gwynbleidd said:

Ooh thanks Risky.  I must've totally skipped over DieChecker's reply doh - sorry DieChecker LOL

I'm not much of a fisherperson, I thought salmon was saltwater.  Actually I'm probably thinking of tuna :wacko:

Maybe you're thinking of Australian Salmon, which isn't really salmon.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
2 hours ago, Piney said:

Put the sunnys,crappy and carp in a grinder and make a paddy out of it........

.......Some of the poorer members of my tribe use to do that. Send their kids down to the river, keep everything they catch in a 5 gallon pail and take it home...

Blecchhh....:o

years back a best friend was a Japanese girl, she picked me up one night to go out and we were driving over an hours she hads me a bag of a snack mix of crisps and im eating it, in her dark car not looking, wasabi peas, fried stuff everything from who the hell can tell to a diddled eyed joe,

i keep hitting something very salty with an odd texture and weird taste, not good, i asked about it, she screams out laughing, it was dried fried full minnows...oh boy.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
4 hours ago, the13bats said:

i keep hitting something very salty with an odd texture and weird taste, not good, i asked about it, she screams out laughing, it was dried fried full minnows...oh boy.

Well, they are not actually minnows. I had to make them for my stepfather when he was sick. I can't remember the name of the fish but they came frozen in a bag and I had to roll them in flour and deep fry them in a wok with sesame oil.......

blecchhh..:o

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
23 minutes ago, Piney said:

Well, they are not actually minnows. I had to make them for my stepfather when he was sick. I can't remember the name of the fish but they came frozen in a bag and I had to roll them in flour and deep fry them in a wok with sesame oil.......

blecchhh..:o

i used "minnows" as its generic term for a small fish just for the sake of telling my tale...40038ef92fab6da1df6a6efe60ef6454--japanese-snacks-japanese-food.jpg.f83c269c4c34a7abbee499694bc36696.jpg

rather than saying small nasty fish ,

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
2 minutes ago, the13bats said:

rather than saying small nasty fish ,

Shishamo.......you call them smelts. I remember now. 

Thanks for the memory! ......

......bleccchh! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stiff
22 hours ago, Twas Brillig said:

Check out this record sized 20 foot specimen of a conger. 

Doesn't look as big as this one...

 

tumblr_mpfh9gQ0MX1sz0gwao1_500.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qxcontinuum

 so yesterday the whole internet was teaming with the news that scientists have publish the analyzes of the DNA taken from the Loch Ness and amongst a couple of hundred species they saw Eels.

  I was wondering all this time what if there was also an unknown DNA that they have not mentioned about?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gwynbleidd
12 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Maybe you're thinking of Australian Salmon, which isn't really salmon.

Yeah fake salmon LOL :P 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gwynbleidd
6 hours ago, the13bats said:

i used "minnows" as its generic term for a small fish just for the sake of telling my tale...40038ef92fab6da1df6a6efe60ef6454--japanese-snacks-japanese-food.jpg.f83c269c4c34a7abbee499694bc36696.jpg

rather than saying small nasty fish ,

What are the other things in there apart from the little fish Batty?  Is that all pieces of seafood or pasta or something - I can't make out what the other things are.  OH wait, duh it's rice crackers isn't it - totally forgot from previously I'm such a dork! LOL :wacko:

 

Edited by Gwynbleidd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
4 hours ago, Gwynbleidd said:

Yeah fake salmon LOL :P 

I also forgot about Threadfin Salmon from up here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
9 hours ago, qxcontinuum said:

 so yesterday the whole internet was teaming with the news that scientists have publish the analyzes of the DNA taken from the Loch Ness and amongst a couple of hundred species they saw Eels.

  I was wondering all this time what if there was also an unknown DNA that they have not mentioned about?

In a podcast I listened to the speaker who does DNA analysis says there won't be "unknown DNA". He stated that people who know nothing about DNA use that term. He stated that DNA can be connected to different branches of life easily. The issue is the exact species. If DNA is too degraded  it becomes not unknown, but too degraded. That DNA is not useful for analysis because it cannot be connected to anything. A sequence of something like 1000 base pairs was good enough to determine if it was DNA from a fish or reptile. That is why plesiosaurs were rejected. They did not find any DNA that would be a reptile. They did not find any DNA that would be a shark.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

Loch Ness kaiju?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
On ‎9‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 3:41 PM, Captain Risky said:

You call people liars. Or demean what they saw. So take off the mantle of head forum sceptic. In this case the people that saw a lake monster, it would seem are vindicated if it’s an unknown large eel or shark and mistook it for a Dinosaur of sorts. 

When did anyone say "lake monster" in any statement when reported?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.