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

Couple spots bus-sized creature in Loch Ness

118 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

papageorge1

I googled 'eels'. Even the largest type found in the loch doesn't seem nearly big enough or have the head type to match the Nessie reports. They don't get bus sized for example.

My leading theory is still a cousin species to the Plesiosaur.

 

Edited by papageorge1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThereWeAreThen
2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I googled 'eels'. Even the largest type found in the loch doesn't seem nearly big enough or have the head type to match the Nessie reports. They don't get bus sized for example.

My leading theory is still a cousin species to the Plesiosaur.

 

You do realize scientist have explored the loch countless of times right? Yet there is still no evidence of the Loch Ness monster or anything related.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
3 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I googled 'eels'. Even the largest type found in the loch doesn't seem nearly big enough or have the head type to match the Nessie reports. They don't get bus sized for example.

My leading theory is still a cousin species to the Plesiosaur.

 

How do you explain that the pre-surgeon's picture event that Nessie was seen on land walking on 4 legs?

How do you explain that there is no enough food in the loch to feed such an animal?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 hour ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

You do realize scientist have explored the loch countless of times right? Yet there is still no evidence of the Loch Ness monster or anything related.

You do know that the searches are not conclusive. Eyewitness evidence is evidence. Scientists can't find ghosts either but I consider the eyewitness and photographic evidence overwhelming. Could Nessie even have paranormal attributes?

So, there we are then.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 minute ago, stereologist said:

How do you explain that the pre-surgeon's picture event that Nessie was seen on land walking on 4 legs?

What do I need to explain? It just makes things and possibilities more interesting.

2 minutes ago, stereologist said:

How do you explain that there is no enough food in the loch to feed such an animal?

They eat  a lot of big eels? Not a full time resident of the loch? Paranormal attributes?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
Just now, papageorge1 said:

You do know that the searches are not conclusive. Eyewitness evidence is evidence. Scientists can't find ghosts either but I consider the eyewitness and photographic evidence overwhelming. Could Nessie even have paranormal attributes?

So, there we are then.

When all else fails throw in nonsense. Way to go!

Eyewitnesses are poor evidence. They have no idea what they saw. They tell a story trying to make sense of what they saw and they fall back on the latest meme.

In Vermont there is the story of Champ. Around 1960 a story came out about the first recorded sighting being Samuel de Champlain reporting seeing a serpent creature with a head like a horse sticking out of the water. And sure enough for 2 decades the reports in the 60s and 70s reported a head like a horse. Lots of as you suggest "Eyewitness evidence is evidence"

There is a problem. A check of Champlain's log shows that the 1960 magazine article lied. He did not report seeing a lake monster. So all of t he reports after that article claiming to shore up the Champlain explorer story are based on a lie.

So what do people report today? They report the meme, the creature in the surgeon's photo. That fake photo has people think fins and long neck and not the animal  on land reported before that.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

What do I need to explain? It just makes things and possibilities more interesting.

They eat  a lot of big eels? Not a full time resident of the loch? Paranormal attributes?

That plesiosaurs had magical limbs that transformed into legs?

What "lot of big eels"? There is not enough biomass in the loch to support a large animal. You should learn about the world before making up stories unrelated to reality.

Paranormal attributes? There are none. So that's a failure

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 minutes ago, stereologist said:

When all else fails throw in nonsense. Way to go!

Eyewitnesses are poor evidence. They have no idea what they saw. They tell a story trying to make sense of what they saw and they fall back on the latest meme.

In Vermont there is the story of Champ. Around 1960 a story came out about the first recorded sighting being Samuel de Champlain reporting seeing a serpent creature with a head like a horse sticking out of the water. And sure enough for 2 decades the reports in the 60s and 70s reported a head like a horse. Lots of as you suggest "Eyewitness evidence is evidence"

There is a problem. A check of Champlain's log shows that the 1960 magazine article lied. He did not report seeing a lake monster. So all of t he reports after that article claiming to shore up the Champlain explorer story are based on a lie.

So what do people report today? They report the meme, the creature in the surgeon's photo. That fake photo has people think fins and long neck and not the animal  on land reported before that.

Eyewitness evidence is evidence for consideration. I tend to think something is going on that we don't understand.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Nessie was nothing at all until the surgeon's photo. The focus was on the monster in Lake Champlain. But then the BBC, the biggest news outlet of its time, had a monster at home to report on. Why push that yanks monster they had been pushing since the 1880s. After 50 years they pushed their focus to something at home. They were rooting for the home town monster and not some over the ocean beast.

Suddenly the legs go away and its a swimming creature. No more on land walking reports. Eyewitnesses do their best and conform their stories to what they know. Once it was a beast on land, and then suddenly it was a water beastie.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 minutes ago, stereologist said:

That plesiosaurs had magical limbs that transformed into legs?

What "lot of big eels"? There is not enough biomass in the loch to support a large animal. You should learn about the world before making up stories unrelated to reality.

Paranormal attributes? There are none. So that's a failure

I said a cousin species to a plesiosaur if you check.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Eyewitness evidence is evidence for consideration. I tend to think something is going on that we don't understand.

It's called neuroscience. How does the brain work? How do people formulate ideas.

As I already pointed out eyewitnesses conformed to a lie for Champ the lake monster. Eyewitnesses conformed to a photo for Nessie.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

I said a cousin species to a plesiosaur if you check.

None of the cousins have legs. You might want to learn some basic science.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 minute ago, stereologist said:

None of the cousins have legs. You might want to learn some basic science.

Where have I said Nessie has legs? And a relative with legs wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities anyway. Maybe there's more that one type of Nessie too? Maybe they are normally North Sea dwellers?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Look, I've been an eyewitness and the more I have learned about eyewitnesses I am ashamed to say my certainty of the situation was probably wrong.

It's all about being human. People make mistakes and they can't believe that their observations are so very wrong.

Take bird watching. Out with a group today and people were calling out field marks out loud  and getting confirmation or nay saying until the bird was identified. Even excellent birders made mistakes because being an eyewitness is prone to error, even by experts.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Where have I said Nessie has legs? And a relative with legs wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities anyway. Maybe there's more that one type of Nessie too? Maybe they are normally North Sea dwellers?

Apparently you have not read the thread. Until the surgeon's photo came out Nessie was reported walking on land. That makes your plesiosaur suggestion wrong.

Suggesting multiple unfindable monsters in one place is kind of a joke. That's the fall back of those pushing a failure. They did that with the Phoenix Lights too. Eyewitness accounts don't match. Couldn't be the witnesses. Not at all. Protect the witnesses and come up with a lame excuse.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

One of the classic sightings of Nessie was the hairy hippo sighting of Nessie. That's right it had hair making it a mammal.

https://www.lochness.co.uk/sightl.html

Lots more sightings  on land listed in a somewhat official sounding domain name.

Here is another

Quote

Description: Animal with long legs looking like a camel with a long neck moved into loch and vanished. Yellow in colour.

Hippo or camel? Long necked hippo or short necked camel. Does it matter?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThereWeAreThen
26 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

You do know that the searches are not conclusive. Eyewitness evidence is evidence. Scientists can't find ghosts either but I consider the eyewitness and photographic evidence overwhelming. Could Nessie even have paranormal attributes?

So, there we are then.

The fact that searches haven't found a Loch Ness monster in the Loch is strong evidence that such a thing doesn't exist. Much as the same way the latest discovery of phosphine gas detected in the Venusian atmosphere is evidence that life MIGHT exist on Venus, the difference? Evidence.

Eyewitness testimonies aren't evidence. Doesn't matter if you think they are, they aren't. This day and age with the technology we possess, we'd find something.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rashore

Pretty sure busses are smaller out by the loch than here in the U.S... something for folks to consider about. But still, I'm fairly certain that there aren't eels that get even as big as small busses, lol. Particularly in an environment as small as Loch Ness. 

Still a fun story at any rate :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 minute ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

The fact that searches haven't found a Loch Ness monster in the Loch is strong evidence that such a thing doesn't exist. Much as the same way the latest discovery of phosphine gas detected in the Venusian atmosphere is evidence that life MIGHT exist on Venus, the difference? Evidence.

Eyewitness testimonies aren't evidence. Doesn't matter if you think they are, they aren't. This day and age with the technology we possess, we'd find something.

Hmmm.....not a full-time resident of the loch? Just an occasional visitor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThereWeAreThen
1 minute ago, rashore said:

Pretty sure busses are smaller out by the loch than here in the U.S... something for folks to consider about. But still, I'm fairly certain that there aren't eels that get even as big as small busses, lol. Particularly in an environment as small as Loch Ness. 

Still a fun story at any rate :)

Well you may need to consult the Papameter on that. :ph34r:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThereWeAreThen
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Hmmm.....not a full-time resident of the loch? Just an occasional visitor?

Explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 minute ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Explain.

Enters from the North Sea with high water levels. I've heard there are even underground passages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rashore
Just now, ThereWeAreThen said:

Well you may need to consult the Papameter on that. :ph34r:

Nah, no need for that old meter. Correct or not, it gets trotted out far too often and argued about far too much for it to be much of a useful tool for me. I don't really care what side of beliefs folks are on, everyone got their own meter- every one as overdone, under utilized well, and as side tracking as a new cat toy to a kitten on nip for beliefs or their meters to be useful. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
5 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Hmmm.....not a full-time resident of the loch? Just an occasional visitor?

Have you seen how shallow the waterway is to the sea? Probably not.

  • Like 2

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.