I've been interested in this subject all my adult life. I think there's a family of large unknown creatures in Loch Ness. Too many people have seen something for all the sightings to be otters, logs, schools of fish. Some have been priests, lawyers and academics from all over the world. Why would they lie? Many sightings actually go unreported as professional people fear riidicule.

 

22 miles long and a mile wide at it's widest point, Loch Ness is a dark foreboding huge body of water. It's almost pitch black just a foot down due to the peat deposits in the water. It never freezes. whereas all the rest of the Scottish lochs do.

 

Some experts say that there aren't enough fish to support even a small family of large animals. However there's estimated to be a million+ eels of varying sizes in there and millions of salmon migrate through the loch every year.

 

CLUE: BuzzJack has a fair share of Scottish members. One of them really likes an act that are releasing a 'Greatest Hits' album very shortly...

Edited April 19, 201411 yr by Rooney

There is no Loch Ness Monster. It was a hoax that got out of hand.

There is no Loch Ness Monster. It was a hoax that got out of hand.

 

Can you please expand on that. How do you explain all the sightings then? What about the sonar hit fom 2009, a large object which was too deep to be a shoal of fish?

 

Sir Peter Scott, the world-renowned naturalist, died believing there were plesiosaurs in the Loch. They were cold-blooded though so would need warmer water to survive and Loch Ness is too cold for them. Recent possible explanations have been giant salamanders or turtles. A giant eel seems out of the question too as eels can't raise their heads out of the water.

Edited September 23, 201212 yr by Common Sense

I thought I'd done a poll but it hasn't appeared for some reason.

Why do I get the horrible feeling that charsui is Common Sense?

Why do I get the horrible feeling that charsui is Common Sense?

 

 

He/she is not me. :rolleyes: Admin can check the IP Addresses if they like. I've been interested in Loch Ness for many years and would like to spend a year there in a caravan, with basic amenities, on the Loch side, looking for Nessie.

Edited September 23, 201212 yr by Common Sense

He/she is not me. :rolleyes: Admin can check the IP Addresses if they like. I've been interested in Loch Ness for many years and would like to spend a year there in a caravan, with basic amenities, on the Loch side, looking for Nessie.

Already did. Sadly not.

 

Sigh.

They say you could fit every single human being alive in the world today, standing in Loch Ness, albeit standing on each others' shoulders. Wow, shows how big it is though.

They say you could fit every single human being alive in the world today, standing in Loch Ness, albeit standing on each others' shoulders. Wow, shows how big it is though.

 

I love the idea of living in a caravan by the loch, just looking for the monster. Sounds really cosy. You should do it.

 

There is obviously something untoward in that loch.

I love the idea of living in a caravan by the loch, just looking for the monster. Sounds really cosy. You should do it.

 

I've decided. I'm definitely going to one year. Maybe a few months, Spring/Summer. A local place hires caravans for just that purpose, Nessie hunting!! Live on cold canned foods would be fine for a while. One guy, forget his name, has lived on the loch-side for 20 odd years! :o

Can you please expand on that. How do you explain all the sightings then? What about the sonar hit fom 2009, a large object which was too deep to be a shoal of fish?

 

Sir Peter Scott, the world-renowned naturalist, died believing there were plesiosaurs in the Loch. They were cold-blooded though so would need warmer water to survive and Loch Ness is too cold for them. Recent possible explanations have been giant salamanders or turtles. A giant eel seems out of the question too as eels can't raise their heads out of the water.

 

Sir Peter Scott died in 1989. In 1994, it was announced that the original Loch Ness Monster sightings were a hoax. This article might shed some light on it.

Yes, yes there is.

 

There is also a giant dinosaur roaming the streets of Tokyo and a giant marshmallow man wedged between 2 buildings in downtown Manhattan.

Sir Peter Scott died in 1989. In 1994, it was announced that the original Loch Ness Monster sightings were a hoax. This article might shed some light on it.

 

 

But that link says

 

Before Dr. Vagina's famous photo, the Loch Ness Monster had been limited to a few legends and scattered local sightings

 

Read more: 5 Myths That People Don't Realize Are Admitted Hoaxes | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article/157_5-myths.../#ixzz27Jy1u6dE

 

So there were sightings before the admitted hoax.

Can you please expand on that. How do you explain all the sightings then? What about the sonar hit fom 2009, a large object which was too deep to be a shoal of fish?

 

Sir Peter Scott, the world-renowned naturalist, died believing there were plesiosaurs in the Loch. They were cold-blooded though so would need warmer water to survive and Loch Ness is too cold for them. Recent possible explanations have been giant salamanders or turtles. A giant eel seems out of the question too as eels can't raise their heads out of the water.

And the world renowned hisstorian Hugh Trevor Roper declared the Hitler Diaries to be authentic. They were, of course, a hoax. I'm sure many of the people who claim to have seen the Loch Ness monster are totally sincere in their belief. I just happen to think they are mistaken. If there really was something there I think there would be some irrefutable evidence by now. There isn't any such evidence.

And the world renowned hisstorian Hugh Trevor Roper declared the Hitler Diaries to be authentic. They were, of course, a hoax. I'm sure many of the people who claim to have seen the Loch Ness monster are totally sincere in their belief. I just happen to think they are mistaken. If there really was something there I think there would be some irrefutable evidence by now. There isn't any such evidence.

 

 

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

ooh ooh, is this the new Hillsborough thread?? :cheer:

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Who said it was? I just find it hard to believe that there is no firm evidence to support the existence of some sort of creature if such a creature exists. If somebody produces firm evidence then I reserve the right to change my mind.

Yes, yes there is.

 

There is also a giant dinosaur roaming the streets of Tokyo and a giant marshmallow man wedged between 2 buildings in downtown Manhattan.

 

ooh ooh, is the new Hillsborough thread?? :cheer:

 

:D

 

Already did. Sadly not.

 

Sigh.

 

You do realise that Common Sense could be posting from two IP addresses? :o

Edited September 23, 201212 yr by Griff

Who said it was? I just find it hard to believe that there is no firm evidence to support the existence of some sort of creature if such a creature exists. If somebody produces firm evidence then I reserve the right to change my mind.

 

Aren't multiple corroborating witnesses evidence?

Aren't multiple corroborating witnesses evidence?

Not with sporadic witness accounts as apposed to multiple reliable witnesses actually seeing something at the same time.

 

I am with Suedehead on this, until there is some real provable evidence I don't believe there is a monster in the loch. However, I can see why some would believe it.