Comments on: Never Stop Asking Nessie Questions

By: bccryptid

bccryptid — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 18:33:19 +0000

I agree, but my main peeve with the LNM is the constant reference to it whenver the media or even books discuss the plesiosaur. I was reading an old Discover magazine (where one would expect a higher level of professionalism) and the article referred to a plesiosaur fossil find on Vancouver island as a ‘Loch Ness Monster-like animal’ (!!!).

This reference has apparently entered into our collective senses as a proper way to explain the morphology of this type of marine reptile to the masses.

By: Tabitca

Tabitca — Sat, 13 Jan 2007 14:22:10 +0000

I have looked at weather records for the Loch Ness area going back to 1833, one of the first recorded sightings of Nessie (There may be have been others but it is the first properly documented I could find) up to 2006, and discovered that whenever there is a particularly bad winter there are more sightings in the spring and summer months. May be significant, I don’t know. I just wish I had more time to pursue it. One day I may have

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:55:05 +0000

It is interesting to think about feeding habits of the alleged creature, but I think first it would be helpful to try to ascertain a little more information about just what excactly it is if it indeed exists. It is not even known if it is a mammal or a reptile, a fish, or what. In my opinion, a little more basic info, like what type of animal it is and even whether it is nocturnal or diurnal in neccesary before starting to try and delve into its feeding patterns.

By: alanborky

alanborky — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:06:45 +0000

Loren, I see you’re using the surgeon’s photo atop this piece.

To me it still looks most like a silhouette of some bloke’s arm and hand, but one thing I’m certain of, is it is NOT an image of a toy submarine modified with plastic modelling material - that story was most certainly a hoax.

As a kid I was in to making such modified contraptions myself, and the few I actually managed to make that could actually balance themselves in the water without sinking would immediately topple over the moment the water was even slightly disturbed.

By: shovethenos

shovethenos — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:22:27 +0000

Lorenzo Rossi-

“No evidence” is somewhat of an exaggeration. There’s the videotape footage that was submitted to the CFZ, for instance.

There’s something there. Whether it’s a seal or something else remains to be seen.

By: sluggo

sluggo — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:53:49 +0000

I guess I believe because I want to. I really have nothing much else to go on. The rest of the world is getting to be a violent, troubled place. Wondering about things like this reminds me of being a child and wanting to go to Africa to see everything from King Kong to giant snakes.

Happy new year and peace.

By: daledrinnon

daledrinnon — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 12:26:59 +0000

“Single piece of evidence” depends on your viewpoint and upon your definition. To my mind, there is much good evidence, including predation marks upon salmon, and not even touching on purported physical remains.

An unknown large fish if found in Loch Ness is still a cryptid. AND the Loch Ness Monster need not be even a permanent resident. Monster sightings are made while the creatures are going into and out of the River Ness while it is in flood.

By: Lorenzo Rossi

Lorenzo Rossi — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 10:43:21 +0000

Personally I think that the only sensible things about “loch ness monster” are in the website of Richard Raynor.

After 40 years of search there is not a single piece of evidence about a strange animal in Loch Ness.