It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Loch Ness Pictures

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 10:17 PM
Hey, I've been a long time lurker around this part of the board. Figured I'd share my views and what not on a few subjects, my first one of " Nessie ". I know there are thousands upon thousands of them already but I found a couple of pictures over at Cryptozoology.comwhich caught my eye. The first showing Nessie grey scaled and it seems to be quite a good find. But it could have been better if it wasn't so pixelated but we carn't blame the owner for it. Well, we can. But were not harsh people now are we?

The second image being all grey scaled and what appers to be either darkend or lightend. My guess is darkend, but it shows greater detale of Nessi, for fact that Nessi appears not to have any teeth. Unless those little jagged things near its mouth are, but lets face it. Nessi can be up to 18-80 feet, I don't think it would have tiny teeth as it does there.

And so my final view on the pictures are, good shot. Could have been better if there weren't so pixelated, but again. We carn't blame the owner.

Also, the world would be a greather place if Photoshop was never invented. To think all the pictures ever taken could all be real. Which is also the reason the pictures could be fixed, lets just pray not.

Tech N9ne.

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 10:43 PM
The first picture looks like a blurred photo of the T-Rex from Jurassic Park. Either that or something from 'Walking with Dinosaurs'

[edit on 2-1-2005 by Pisky]

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 10:51 PM
From looking at both pictures for about 5 minutes, it sure does look like the T-Rex, but with just a few minor flaws. Its missing the part from the nose to the eye, like a eye socket. I never really watched Walking with Dinosaurs, so you might be onto something. I'll Google it for some images.

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 10:59 PM

Originally posted by Tech N9ne
From looking at both pictures for about 5 minutes, it sure does look like the T-Rex, but with just a few minor flaws. Its missing the part from the nose to the eye, like a eye socket.

True, but I think a proficient photoshopper would have no problems with that.

And yes, I would love to see Nessie proved - I've been on and near Loch Ness many times just hoping for a glimpse - but with no luck.

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:06 PM
Unfortunately, wish as we may, there isn't anything there. Lovely story though.

[edit on 2/1/2005 by Lady of the Lake]

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:07 PM
Thats why I think the world would have been better if Photoshop was never invented. I mean sure, without with we wouldn't be able to figure out if somethings real or not, but with it it just puts things out of the mind. You think it's real until it's either told it's fake or someone tells you, heart crushing.

And keep on looking man, I haven't been able to make any trips at all for most of my life. Nessie dosn't really intrest me that much, but pictures did get me intreseted in it. Such as the famous flipper one.

But it's always nice to wish isn't it Lady of the Lake?

[edit on 2-1-2005 by Tech N9ne]

posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:18 PM
pisky is right one picture does look liked a blurred dinsour or t-rex

posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 01:30 AM
looks like the head of a sea turtle thats pissed

posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 05:40 AM
That photo could be anything.

As much as i loved nessie when i was a young'un the whole thing's been explained quite convincingly as a mixture of a type of mass hysteria and floating wood. A documentary shown here in the UK did a good job of proposing and supporting this theory and it was enough to turn me from a "might be something out there" to a "there isn't anything out there" person.

Like a lot of these phenomenon, a reasonable quality photo is all we're asking for, but they all seem to be blurred "could be a plesiosaur, could be a coke-can" affairs. Not to mention all the openly admitted frauds over the years.


posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 10:14 PM
I think you are forgeting something here: These photos cant possible have been taken at Loch Ness.

You can see whats supposed to be the bottom of the lake there, but the water at Lock Ness is very cloudy because of peat suspended in the water, sunlight can only penetrate a few meters in there, it doesnt reach the bottom.

Those photos have been taken somewhere else. It could be photoshoped, which I dont think so, because in that case they could have make it look a bit more real. My opinion is that its only dust or a water plant.

posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 10:34 PM
Back a few years ago they dredged per say the loch ness area for nearly month, maybe 2 with sonar bouys, fish finders everything looking for something big to be there...not to mention, like Peronemlin stated, its very dark there, like the deep ocean and the depth is pretty deep there as well.

posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 10:52 PM

Originally posted by firedoc2368
looks like the head of a sea turtle thats pissed

EXACTLY!! if you ask me, that picture looks extremly fake. it looks like above mentioned turtle, or a clump of weeds.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 11:33 AM
there isn't a suitable food supply for nessie, and the necessary breeding population would be at least 10 adults. my guess is nessie is a good tourist attraction, thats about it

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 02:01 PM
I think that the loch has various underwater tunnels leading to the ocean and plesiosaurs come and go as they please. That theroy explains why some searchs have turned up nothing. If anyone has evidence disproving this, please inform me. Victor, could you give us some of the facts that they gave in you the documentary that disproved Nessies existence?

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 02:33 PM
no, please show us the evidence of the underwater tunnels.

please explain the breeding population question.
please explain the food supply question.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 05:57 PM
I remember reading somewhere that scientists placed cameras in strategic places on the bottom of the loch, which were motion activated. When anything got near to it, the flash would go off and the camera took a pic. I think that's how they were supposed to have got the flipper picture and the one that looks like a tree trunk.

new topics

top topics


log in