SG7 Posted January 12, 2006 #1 Share Posted January 12, 2006 It is said that there is a tipe of "sea monsters" in san francisco bay. They have been seen alot and some drawings have been made and they look alot like japanese dragons. It does make sence. The animal mite be what they are based on. After all japanese dragons are said to come form the sea. They mite go in and out of the bay following fish. They may even go to japan looking for fish. If the animal is reel then there is some true to it all the legends. I can't find any pic. of them thow, so sorry. I would look to know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vidgange Posted January 12, 2006 #2 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I don't think you're far out! Never thought of it like that... However I don't believe that the SF bay serpent has been seen in japan, rather that the dragons are based on sea serpents...! Theoraticly they would be able to move on land, and there are sightings that confirms that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander CMG Posted January 12, 2006 #3 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I think that any large living creature in the bay area it would definately be seen more often than reports have suggested. This is one of the most monitored and bussiest waters on the surface of the planet by civil, naval ships and planes one of the heaviest in traffic and as far as I am aware I think they even have people counting the fish that travel through the bay araea for a living... in some underground facility they are sat in some channel counting fish 24 hours a day. Also the bay has a large build up of weed and when clumped together many people have mistaken that for a sea serpent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draconic chronicler Posted January 12, 2006 #4 Share Posted January 12, 2006 SG 7, If you look through the other threads on this forum you will see that the brothers who first made the sighting have discussed the creatures here, and did say there have been many more sightings than just their own. They actually said it was chasing seals in the bay when it was first noticed. There are common characteristics of many "sea serpent" descriptions, and some scieintists take their existence very seriously. "Japanese" dragons may have in some part been inspired by such creatures, and many sightings around the world describe a kind of "mane" like these dragons sometimes have. However, these dragons are virtually identical to Chinese dragons, which is not to say both were inspired by sea serpents. But contradicting this is the fact that the oldest chinese dragons actually look just like anicient western dragons with short bodies and wings. Becasue of their undulating humps, it is probable that these sea serpents, if ever proven real, will probably turn out to be a primitive whale, like the basilosaurus, which has a very long serpentine body. They could have even had a "mane", though we cannot tell from the skeletal evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vidgange Posted January 12, 2006 #5 Share Posted January 12, 2006 SG 7, If you look through the other threads on this forum you will see that the brothers who first made the sighting have discussed the creatures here, and did say there have been many more sightings than just their own. They actually said it was chasing seals in the bay when it was first noticed. There are common characteristics of many "sea serpent" descriptions, and some scieintists take their existence very seriously. "Japanese" dragons may have in some part been inspired by such creatures, and many sightings around the world describe a kind of "mane" like these dragons sometimes have. However, these dragons are virtually identical to Chinese dragons, which is not to say both were inspired by sea serpents. But contradicting this is the fact that the oldest chinese dragons actually look just like anicient western dragons with short bodies and wings. Becasue of their undulating humps, it is probable that these sea serpents, if ever proven real, will probably turn out to be a primitive whale, like the basilosaurus, which has a very long serpentine body. They could have even had a "mane", though we cannot tell from the skeletal evidence. Reading this I came up with a new theory - bare with me! I have not thought it out throughly yet... What if the sumerians and chines ppls had quite close conections and traded not only ggods but also ideas - such as the shape of dragons! and if the direct conections between sumerians and chines are there, maybe the thoughts traveled through outher civs... During sometime the chines sighted quite a few sea serpents (whether they are repetilian or some unknown whale) and changed their view of dragons to what is the modern chines dragon...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draconic chronicler Posted January 12, 2006 #6 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Vid, That's a good point, because they were not nearly the seafaring people in that early period as they were later on. They may well have seen the sea serpents, and as many legends attest, before the days of guns, they may have been quite bold, attacking ships at sea and even moving up rivers. However, the Chinese dragons since the earliest days have been regarded as benificent creatures of great intelligence, helping mankind etc, which is not suggestive of a mere, carniverous sea creature. We can attribute all of this to superstsition, yet the chinese were perhaps the most advanced of all ancient peoples, with great knowledge of astronomy and the world around them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted January 13, 2006 #7 Share Posted January 13, 2006 And if you noticed the footage they took of the "sea serpent", it was proven by FBI video analysts that the monster was actually a flock of birds...imagine that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #8 Share Posted January 13, 2006 And if you noticed the footage they took of the "sea serpent", it was proven by FBI video analysts that the monster was actually a flock of birds...imagine that I belive you are thinking of champ. The CIA look at the SS Bay video and said it was not a fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted January 13, 2006 #9 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) No, I'm not talking about Champ. I'm talking about the video that the brothers took in '98. The CIA never examined that video. The FBI did, and it was proven to be birds. Edited January 13, 2006 by frogfish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #10 Share Posted January 13, 2006 No, I'm not talking about Champ. I'm talking about the video that the brothers took in '98. The CIA never examined that video. The FBI did, and it was proven to be birds. Oh, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfseaserpent Posted January 13, 2006 #11 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) And if you noticed the footage they took of the "sea serpent", it was proven by FBI video analysts that the monster was actually a flock of birds...imagine that Grant Fredericks, foresenic video analyst for the FBI, expressed his opinion on the National Geographic Program "Is it Real?" that what we filmed was only birds. However, as of this date he has refused to provide us with any supporting documentation for his conclusion so that it can be examined and compared to the other analyses we have obtained. He also has refused to answer several questions we asked him regarding the behavior of the animals in the video which eliminate "birds" as a possible candidate. In contrast to Fredericks' verbal opinion, The in-depth analyses of Paiva/Slusher and Champagne both disagree with Fredericks' conclusion and they have provided supporting documentation in the form of in-depth reports which can be examined by others. Their conclusions are that what we videotaped are NOT birds flying or swimming in formation but rather several unknown serpentine marine animals 75+ feet in length. We have never personally spoken to Fredericks regarding our video or what we observed immediately prior to taking the video which in our opinion could not have been birds. We are hoping that sometime in the future Grant Fredericks will provide us with some type of written documentation supporting his conclusion so that it can be evaluated and compared to the other analyses which we recieved. Until he does provide us with some documentation we consider the conclusions of Paiva, Slusher and Champagne to be more valid than his since their findings can be evaluated by reviewing their documentation. At the present time we are making arrangements to have our video analysed by another independent expert image analyst and if they are able to analyse it we will provide you with their conclusion. Edited January 13, 2006 by sfseaserpent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfseaserpent Posted January 13, 2006 #12 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) No, I'm not talking about Champ. I'm talking about the video that the brothers took in '98. The CIA never examined that video. The FBI did, and it was proven to be birds. Our video was taken on January 26, 2004 at approximately 12:30 pm. It has NEVER been examined by the FBI or "proven" to be birds. As we stated in our above post it was "examined" by Grant Fredericks, a forensic video analyst for the FBI and he has not provided us with any proof for his opinion that it is only birds. He also has refused to answer any of the following questions that we asked him. How did you conclude that the above water segments of the object are no larger than a bird since some of the objects when compared to known measurable objects in the background appear to be much larger than any known bird? How can any bird make the 90+ degree turn that the objects in the video make? If it is your claim the objects are only birds flying in a straight line formation above the water would you explain to us why portions of the objects can be seen below the surface of the water? Why you think the objects are birds when there is no indication of any wings flapping by any of the objects and why the objects go underwater in the exact same spot? Why does the object appears to be one long telephone pole-like object in some segments of the video if it is not one continuous object? If it is your claim the objects were only birds flying above the water why are there indications of the water being disturbed? If it is your claim that it is only birds swimming in a straight line formation on the surface of the water how can they swim so fast against an incoming tide and make a 90+ degree turn in a split second and at the same spot? Why all of a sudden does a second looping object much larger than a bird emerge out of the water to the left of the first object when a moment earlier there was nothing there? How is it possible we could see a bird from a mile and a half away with our naked eyes and think it looked large enough to be a boat? Why do some of the black objects submerge and then reappear above the water without any reduction in their rate of speed? How fast do you calculate the objects were moving? Edited January 13, 2006 by sfseaserpent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfseaserpent Posted January 13, 2006 #13 Share Posted January 13, 2006 I think that any large living creature in the bay area it would definately be seen more often than reports have suggested. This is one of the most monitored and bussiest waters on the surface of the planet by civil, naval ships and planes one of the heaviest in traffic and as far as I am aware I think they even have people counting the fish that travel through the bay araea for a living... in some underground facility they are sat in some channel counting fish 24 hours a day. Also the bay has a large build up of weed and when clumped together many people have mistaken that for a sea serpent. The area where we have had our sightings is just inside the Golden Gate between the Golden Gate Bridge and Alcatraz Island. The depth of the water in the main shipping channel in that area is 150 to over 300 feet at the base of the Golden Gate bridge. All of our sightings except for when we took the video have been around dawn when there is very little boat traffic. We don't know where you got your information from but, according to the former harbormaster and several local fishermen who we have spoken with, floating clumps of seaweed are never found in this area of the bay. Also the objects we videotaped were moving against an incoming tide which is all documented and explained in both the Paiva/Slusher and the Champagne analyses. As you are well aware of, these are rarely seen animals and just because someone else hasn't seen this animal isn't proof that we didn't see what we claim to have seen. It is only proof that THEY haven't seen what WE have seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #14 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) It must be a cover up. Or he he does not belive so he mite not even have look at it and just said it was birds. Can we see your video? Edited January 13, 2006 by SG7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #15 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Is any one out there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfseaserpent Posted January 13, 2006 #16 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) It must be a cover up. Or he he does not belive so he mite not even have look at it and just said it was birds. All of that is possible since he won't communicate with us. Can we see your video? The video is available to the public through BSM Associates. The address is BSM Associates, C/O Clifford Paiva, 159 Camp Fire Drive, California City, California 93505. Contact them and you can obtain a copy of the Paiva/Slusher analysis and our video. Edited January 13, 2006 by sfseaserpent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #17 Share Posted January 13, 2006 All of that is possible since he won't communicate with us. {quote name='SG7']Can we see your video? The video is available to the public through BSM Associates. The address is BSM Associates, C/O Clifford Paiva, 159 Camp Fire Drive, California City, California 93505. Contact them and you can obtain a copy of the Paiva/Slusher analysis and our video. Do you have a website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfseaserpent Posted January 13, 2006 #18 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Do you have a website? We have a blog at http://home.access4less.net/~sfseaserpent/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #19 Share Posted January 13, 2006 We have a blog at http://home.access4less.net/~sfseaserpent/ thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfoot_Is_Real Posted January 13, 2006 #20 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Ur theory is great Sg 7....BRAVO!! DC i am not listen to u after all u got the biggest dragon thread closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #21 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) I my salf love dragons. That why I was shock whine I seer those animals in SS bay whine I was woching TV. Now Whats this about geting a dragon forum closes? How did he do it? :angry2: Edited January 13, 2006 by SG7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfoot_Is_Real Posted January 13, 2006 #22 Share Posted January 13, 2006 I my salf love dragons. That why I was shock whine I seer those animals in SS bay whine I was woching TV. Now Whats this about geting a dragon forum closes? How did he do it? :angry2: he copied something and said it was his own and got it closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #23 Share Posted January 13, 2006 He's no dragon lover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfoot_Is_Real Posted January 13, 2006 #24 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Here if u want to see the closed thread here it is Dragons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG7 Posted January 13, 2006 Author #25 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Here if u want to see the closed thread here it is Dragons thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts