Breton Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Originally posted by Datheus And besides, just because it's there doesn't mean we have to know about it... We know the giant squid exsists, but we have yet to see one that's alive, even with our scanners and little submarines Ok, they haven't seen giant squids (yet), but they have found remains of it in whales stomachs and also proof that the whale has batteled it. So there is proof that the giant squid excists, but there is no proof that Nessie excists. And also, giant squids live far more deep that Loch Ness is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt_Dancer Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 I took a Documentary class here at the university last year that was quite interesting. First thing you have to recall when you get information from any source whatsoever is that there is always an angle put on the story based on biases from many different sources (this includes the 6 o'clock news). Who produced the show, bought advertising, owns the station/channel and studios all lend their own slant to a story. So be careful in trusting to news and documentary. The prehistoric Coelacanth fish was though to have gone extinct 65 million years ago and was discovered alive and well in 1938! Nessie could be another pre-historic fish that has survived without us knowing. I think there was also a species of gilled deer or some such thing that they believed was extinct for many years until they happened upon it in the woods. Previous to that point there was no evidence that it was still alive. In the documentary class we had three professors and one of them was a cryptozoologist. Thats someone who is looking into stories like Nessie and Bigfoot with the idea that they may be species living just outside our well traveled routes and therefor not coming into regular contact with human beings. This guy did some consulting work on the movie Mothman Prophecies which is a whole different story. Here's what I think... I have seen some weird things go down since I have been alive so I am not ready to discount stories like these just out of hand. To me, however, it is just as ignorant to deny something in the absence of proof as it is to accept it as real in the absence of proof. I guess that sort of makes me an agnostic... Just because humans don't have conclusive proof of Bigfoot's existence doesn't mean he doesn't exist... but I'm not ready to start taking people's word for it either. Jury's still out. I do believe its possible but I also believe that a lot of the stories out there are coming from people buying into the hype (or trying to get some attention). As to Nessie being in a lake... Isn't Loch Ness attached to the sea? I thought it was.... Still, to say that we have searched that entire lake is ridiculous. The Loch is large and so cloudy and the water is so black that it would be like you looking for me in a football stadium, in the dark with a penlight. I could easliy slide right by you as you pass by. Yeah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted September 23, 2002 Author Share Posted September 23, 2002 I can understand how people dissbelieve Lochness... but BIGFOOT? Dear GOD! How can you say no to somthing that has a story in EVERY CORNER OF THE EARTH! Ever Country,Jungle,Forest... all of them have a story of a bigfoot like creature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 The difference between finding Coelacanth fish and finding Nessie is that Coelacanth is much smaller, and it lives in the sea, and therefore is much harder to find. Plus, no one was looking for it, while people have looked for Nessie for many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt_Dancer Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Good point.... very valid. Though, serendipity, raw chance, can sometimes break the laws of probability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehomicidalegg Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 There are thousands of undiscovered specis, its just that none of thrm are spectacular. the nessie is harder to believe out of the 2 as it is in a small environment/habitat. it may not be enough to sustain a large enough gene pool for the any species to survive. However, it is possible, and since there have been sightings of the "nessie" on land, we can also assume it may yet reach the ocean. Besides no one really knows what the bottom of lockness is really like. the bigfoot or variations of this have been seen all over the world, eg the yetis around the himalayan plateau, this makes its existence more believable as theres a greater scope of environments and diversity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted September 24, 2002 Author Share Posted September 24, 2002 People say Lochnes is small... freakin heck! its only 26 miles long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 it would be like you looking for me in a football stadium, in the dark with a penlight. I could easliy slide right by you as you pass by. Yeah? More like me lookin for you in a 50 acre corn field in the dark And If there are lochnes monsters, they're probably very timid creatures, and they swim away from anything witha light attached to it. They see the lights on those little subs, they swim the other way. It's a natural instinct. THe loch nesses would see the subs long before the subs could see them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 The Loch Ness Monster is a true example to quote MGM's classic Title,Forbidden Planet, "Monsters From the ID". The fact that the lake is so black, and the fact that even after technology as advanced as we go, man continues to instictively fear what he does not know or understand. It is a conveinent assumption that something large like Nessy could be real because it is too hard to prove it is non-existent. I tend to belive it does not exist, becuase after this long of a time, The original "Nessy" would have had to die out and to give birth to another animal without another memeber of it's own kind is a bit much to except isn't it? Also after this much of a time lapse animals in that much darkness would have to develope some formm of self iluminesence which just might make her/him to be able to see from a certain point of view. It wasn't that long ago that scientists have discovered an entire ecosytsem living on the ocean floor, which popular belief and biased studies have lead us to believe life was sparse in population. They have sharks, fish, jellyfish, and most importantly animals that make their own light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivy Posted September 24, 2002 Share Posted September 24, 2002 i was watching a documentary the other day on the carcharodon megalodon. oh god is that scary!! a great white shark that's 10 times bigger than the ones we have today. a shark with teeth the size of adult hands. they thought that the megalodon lived 2 million years ago, but they are finding fosilised teeth that some experts are saying are from only about 1000 years ago. some experts even believe there might be some still swiming about in the depths of ocean now. this just shows you that anything is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted September 24, 2002 Author Share Posted September 24, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Groovy The original "Nessy" would have had to die out and to give birth to another animal without another memeber of it's own kind is a bit much to except isn't it? I totaly understand what your saying, but seeing as we know NOTHING about the creature it could very well have a life-span of 100-?000 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorganfloss Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 I think that nessy is a bio-mechanical fish placed their by our own government to destroy Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 ... wtf... Are you on drugs? Loch Ness is no where NEAR Canada.. It's in SCOTLAND, I'm assuming you're American... An American on drugs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehomicidalegg Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 Originally posted by ZDawg People say Lochnes is small... freakin heck! its only 26 miles long. 26miles long IS pretty small to sustain an entire specie of 6m long carnicores Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 Err... it's not a self contained body of water. It's a loch. It's almost land locked but not quite. Of course it wouldn't contain the entire species and if these creatures do exist I doubt any of them actually live in loch ness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leXX Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 Some believe that Nessie enters the Loch by way of an underground tunnel. However, considering the fact that Loch Ness is 16m above sea level, any tunnel large enough to contain the monster would also drain the Loch to sea level. btw: it's 24 miles long, not 26 Did you know, in 565AD, Saint Columba is said to have encountered a water monster in the River Ness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted September 30, 2002 Share Posted September 30, 2002 Beh, I'd float on Loch Ness at night on Friday the 13th in a dingy with a six pack in my lap. I could care less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted September 30, 2002 Share Posted September 30, 2002 Bah, I'd wait beside the loch with a high powered BB gun and take out you're dingy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted September 30, 2002 Share Posted September 30, 2002 Well I was gonna share my six-pack with you, but not n-------blub blub blub. *drowns* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.