Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]






Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!
Make a forum zoo!

Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
Nessie explained.
Topic Started: Mar 11 2016, 12:39 PM (2,041 Views)
Rudyn
Member Avatar


the dark phoenix
Mar 11 2016, 05:41 PM
Would a Sea lion fit the bill then?
I dont really think since there is no evidence that eared seals ever lived in European waters.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Luizo
Member Avatar
#MOREBADGES

stargatedalek
Mar 11 2016, 05:56 PM
Mrs.Luizo
Mar 11 2016, 03:31 PM
Now that I think I think the Sharks Greenland if possible, live at depths of 2.500 meters, and its food varies but never overlook to the surface I think I better give up
Try 200 meters, not 2500...
http://www.bio.gc.ca/sharks/maritime/somniosusmicrocephalus-en.php
As I said, I think that should the rule as the Greenland shark does not rise to the surface, and the typical image of a snake coming out of water also makes the Greenland shark is not possible Nessie, so 2,500 meters is that he CAN dive to that depth.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

Mrs.Luizo
Mar 11 2016, 06:14 PM
stargatedalek
Mar 11 2016, 05:56 PM
Mrs.Luizo
Mar 11 2016, 03:31 PM
Now that I think I think the Sharks Greenland if possible, live at depths of 2.500 meters, and its food varies but never overlook to the surface I think I better give up
Try 200 meters, not 2500...
http://www.bio.gc.ca/sharks/maritime/somniosusmicrocephalus-en.php
As I said, I think that should the rule as the Greenland shark does not rise to the surface, and the typical image of a snake coming out of water also makes the Greenland shark is not possible Nessie, so 2,500 meters is that he CAN dive to that depth.
I'm sorry but did you even try to read that? There are well documented cases of Greenland sharks occurring not only at the surface but in freshwater, and with frequency. 2500 meters is insane, the deepest Greenland sharks are known from is 730 meters.

And please stop centering everything you post.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Posted Image Flish
Member Avatar


Uhh... Did you read the link Star posted?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ztlabraptor211
Member Avatar


I think its mistaken identity with some species of large eel. An otter makes no sense in my opinion as the loch has been thoroughly searched for decades for any signs of Nessie. While a fish that spends its times underneath the surface might escape detection, I highly doubt a mammal that regularly surfaces for air and has to come into land could escape detection. Besides, no otter got near the size Nessie is reported to be, and a group of otters together could be the only explanation for size. And a group or population of these otters would definately not escape Human sightings.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ztlabraptor211
Member Avatar


Oops I accidentally posted this twice.
Edited by Ztlabraptor211, Mar 11 2016, 06:26 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


BTW what does any of this have to do with extinct animals, I just realized?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ignacio
Member Avatar
Ex Corrupt Staff

Nothing but TDP posted it here.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Nessie, as proven many times, does not exist. Extensive research and even eletromagnetic scans of the lakebed found nothing out of the ordinary, and the photos have time and again proven to be hoaxes.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/photos-of-the-loch-ness-monster-revisited/

a large air breathing animal, be it an otter, a plesiosaur or anything that has to reach to the surface for air would have already been spotted by now, yet people who work everyday on the boats all across the lake's shore hardly spot anything out of the ordinary, and "sightings" have all but decreased ever since the "nessie" craze. Plus the whole surrounding are a isfreaking habitated, there's entire towns full of people on the lake's shore, you really think we wouldn't have spotted said creature by now?

Furthermore, the food pyramid on the loch ness doesn't produce nearly enough energy to sustain large animal such as what nessie is claimed to be, like, its probably the absolute worst place for some humongously large aquatic creature to be stuck on.

And as the last nail in the nessie's coffin, some earlier sightings can be easily explained by another, very real monster of the deep. Y'see, loch ness can't permanently sustain any very large creatures, but it is sometimes accidentaly visited by one of them, a mighty, ancient, primitive beast that can reach over 6 meters in length and weigh over 400 kgs...

Acipenser sturio, the Baltic sea sturgeon.

Posted Image

The Baltic sturgeon is likely europe's largest river fish, being present all around the continent's coasts and breeding seasonally anywhere from greece to northern germany. Though they are not known to breed on any brittish river, these anadromous leviathans are often known to visit the shores of britain, as well as enter on rivers occasionally to find food.

Animals measuring over 4 meters were caught on scottish rivers on occasion, and a very large one was even caught on loch ness itself. The sturgeon's bizarre surfacing behaviour, their elongated and vaguely "serpentine" forms as well as the mighty row of spikes on its back could've easily led to inexperienced onlookers from afar assuming a very large fish is actually a "sea serpent" or a "draconic creature".

Another part of the blame for the nessie craze comes from Celtic folklore itself, as Kelpie/merhorse legends were always part of scotland's legends and lore ever since pictish times.

Furthermore the reason why people keep searching for "hidden animals" and "monsters" in highly explored and highly urbanised areas (as is the case of many "cryptids" such as Bigfoot, Nessie among many others.) will always bug me. Has it ever occured to this people that there are entire regions of rainforest on Africa and south america that no man, not even native tribes ever set a foot? Heck what aboput the goddamned ocean, a place we know less about than the surface of the MOON, and you still want to search for monsters in the midwestern USA and the United Kingdom? Seriously, the way people keep going after things that clearly do not exist, while there's actual hidden things to be found makes me think that you guys only do that because you WANT to believe there is something hidden on your backyard, and while that might make a good story, it doesn't make good science. And yet you might find that reality is actually far more interesting than even the wildest of our imaginations.

Take for example this monkey right here:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150718-rare-photos-of-oddball-monkey

You see these pictures and this video? Those are our only known images of this creature alive, this large, arboreal and absolutely weird species of primate wasn't known to science until 2010, and was only known from a dead specimen until 2015, This is our very first recording of this species on its natural habitat, the inhospitable, mountainous rainforests of Burma.

Want another example?

Mesoplodon traversii, The spade toothed whale, a large, 5 meter long cetacean that we knew from a single jaw for atleast 200 years, we didn't even knew what it looked like until 2012, when a couple of specimens surfaced on the shores of new zealand, and we have YET to see any of them alive...

Y'see people, monsters do exist, you guys are just looking on the wrong places...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
the dark phoenix
Member Avatar
King of wonderlandia

So we're ignoring land based accounts?

I heard there was a african otter larger than the amazon species who ate crocodiles when it wanted to and lived along side giant baboons and Australopithecus. I may be exaggerating Enhydriodon due to fragmentary remains but Otters are known to get stupidly big.

They can also keep their heads up and out of the water for long periods of time, What can a sturgeon do? Two seconds before gravity pulls it under again? A large otter moves up and down so it or more than one of it can produce the characteristic humps, Fish move side to side. There are a few land accounts of these attacking livestock, unless mudskippers are native to the loch, fish don't attack on land. Yes it has the disadvantage of breathing air but otters borrow, there are many lake scans and searches but I don't hear much on shore or land based searches.

Therefore I believe it is a otter. Unless you can show me a wels catfish crawling on land to maul a sheep, I believe it is a form of Semi-aquatic carnivorous mammal.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ztlabraptor211
Member Avatar


There is no chance it's an otter. For something of Nessie proportions, at least four otters would need to exist, meaning there would be several. They simply couldn't survive in the loch without being noticed by humans, especially a breeding population when it comes to the cities along the lochs coast.

Land based accounts could be another animal all together, maybe fully terrestrial creatures with no relation to aquatic sightings.
Edited by Ztlabraptor211, Mar 11 2016, 08:53 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Paleosaurus
Member Avatar


I hate to be a party pooper but the terrestrial sightings have also been debunked time and time again. That TetZoo article Yi Qi posted covers them (or one of his other Nessie articles, don't remember for sure). There's nothing new in Loch Ness and there's no reason other than desperate hope to continue searching. If you want to find a big, enigmatic megafaunal animal you need to look in places we haven't explored. Every inch of Loch Ness is mapped, if there's a big animal hiding there it must also be a ghost because there's just no way we've missed a flesh and blood monster.
Edited by Paleosaurus, Mar 11 2016, 09:03 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
the dark phoenix
Member Avatar
King of wonderlandia

Well are there any recent sightings? Perhaps whatever the hell it is is extinct now.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

the dark phoenix
Mar 11 2016, 08:33 PM
So we're ignoring land based accounts?

I heard there was a african otter larger than the amazon species who ate crocodiles when it wanted to and lived along side giant baboons and Australopithecus. I may be exaggerating Enhydriodon due to fragmentary remains but Otters are known to get stupidly big.

They can also keep their heads up and out of the water for long periods of time, What can a sturgeon do? Two seconds before gravity pulls it under again? A large otter moves up and down so it or more than one of it can produce the characteristic humps, Fish move side to side. There are a few land accounts of these attacking livestock, unless mudskippers are native to the loch, fish don't attack on land. Yes it has the disadvantage of breathing air but otters borrow, there are many lake scans and searches but I don't hear much on shore or land based searches.

Therefore I believe it is a otter. Unless you can show me a wels catfish crawling on land to maul a sheep, I believe it is a form of Semi-aquatic carnivorous mammal.
Guess what, the long neck thing, it's busted. The only credible accounts all describe a serpentine creature that it's simply unrealistic to claim is anything but a fish. Plesiosaurs weren't even capable of holding their necks in the typical "Nessie pose", it would have killed them, and the same is likely true of an otter with the same proportions.

As pointed out those accounts of it coming on land are also hogwash but since you asked:

Hey it's not a sheep but it's a lot more evidence than you've shown.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
the dark phoenix
Member Avatar
King of wonderlandia

Posted Image

Tada! No its not photo shopped, It's real. Not busted.

Not swan-like like inaccurate plesiosaurs but its still holding its neck and head above water.

Otters hold their limbs close to the body, So it could look serpentine. Weasels and otters are known for their long flexible bodies.

Also people explain a creature crawling out of the water with four limbs, grabbing a sheep, and going back to the water. Not a catfish trying to be a Orca copycat.

Also we're talking about sheep in a pasture near the loch, not a small pigeon standing toes deep in the water. Find me a catfish who can invade a fenced area, grab a sheep, and stroll back into the loch.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2