It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

So I went to see Nessie...

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoSuchAgency
Yeah the size of the loch was amazingly big, really not the way you'd expect it to be. It really makes the chance that there's a monster in there a lot bigger.


Not just wide, also extremely deep. I think an accurate(ish) idea is looking at the surrounding mountains, the depth is supposidly as deep as they are high.

Perhaps it is fiction, but I think afew boats have been in with sonar technology, they supposidly saw a large object moving beneath the boat- But it had been claimed it could be anything from shoals of fish to rubbish, such as drift wood or something similar.




posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   
What you are saying about the boats with sonar is true... They tracked a large animate object for a period of time, before losing track of it... I have all this info at home, and since I am in college at the moment, I can't write about it accurately enough!!! But when I get my hands on the information I will post it all (well maybe not all of it as there is quite a large amount of info to go through) but I will skim through it and post all the interesting important stuff (though I find that it is all interesting!!!)



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheB1ueSoldier

Originally posted by NoSuchAgency
There was something else that I noticed at Loch Ness, there we no fishermen, I don't know if I have missed them, or if there's a fishing restriction in that area, or if the weather was too bad too fish... I just don't know, I hope someone can tell me.



The reason why there are barely any fish in the water, is because Loch Ness is very brackish. Too brackish for most fish that would usually live in that kind of lake. This is considered one of the nails in Nessie's coffin, because there aren't enough fish to support a few dozen prehistoric pleisiosaurs of that size.

Nice thread by the way.
That's one of the key nails. There are of course additional problems that quite a sizeable breeding colony would need to exist, no account of dead creatures washed up/in situ exists, and indeed no definitive proof at all.

Futher it can't be a Plesiosaurs (or other prehistoric survivor) for the simple fact that loch ness was frozen solid during the last Ice age.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 08:43 AM
link   


That's one of the key nails. There are of course additional problems that quite a sizeable breeding colony would need to exist, no account of dead creatures washed up/in situ exists, and indeed no definitive proof at all.


Ok, I'm back again, and I have some questions about what you said...

First, How sure are you that Dead Dinosaurs will float to the shore-level? Won't they sink? I know that Whales and stuff also wash up. But Dinosaurs are different beings.
Maybe this is a very stupid question, but still it looks strange to me that a thing so big would float back to surface.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Dinosaurs weren't fundamentally different. In order to maintain a prescence in a lake like that, a sizeable breeding colony would need to exist. There wouldn't be one nessie, there would be many. To me the idea that no trace has been found of anything so far is pretty damning. Even if they weren't washed up, traces either in situ, or indicative thereof, would be found in the innumerable surveys carried out on the lake so far.

Nothing conclusive, or even remotely convincing has been found so far. Plenty of hearsay and second hand tales, bit nothing solid or tangiable. I think if there was something in Loch Ness by now we'd have some solid evidence (ambiguous sonar hits, and disputed photographs don't count). The fact we don't speaks volumes.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by City_sea]



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   
You have captured something strange.
Look in the first hoaxed pic. Neer the end of the wake, there is an underwater entity there. It is white, so that leaves Nessie out of the picture, but it is just under the water!!!



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Yes I can see it in the photo!!!

Its odd and I really want to know what you guys think it is....

I'm not so sure what I think that it is!!!

Hmmm.....

Tis fairly strange....

It could just be a trick of the light or something...

Maybe something else altogether?!!?!?!?!?!



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   
It's a wave. It's the right colour, and right place.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 03:43 PM
link   
funny, I haven't even seen that myself, but I have to go with city sea. It looks like a wave.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 04:00 AM
link   
I can see two waves in the picture!!!

But then in between them is a flat white "thing"... I wouldn't even know what to call it.....

It looks like there is something under the water all together!!!

I don't know....

I wish that I was there when the picture was taken!!!



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 09:13 AM
link   
hahaha... yeah me too, oh wait, I was there :p

Must say it wouldn't have got you any further, cause I didn't see anything spectacular out there, and I can assure you that I had my eyes on the water the enitre time



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I would feckin HOPE that your eyes were on the water the WHOLE time!!!!

I'd have to find ya and kill ya otherwise....

This is LOCH NESS we're talkin about here!!!



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by City_sea
Dinosaurs weren't fundamentally different. In order to maintain a prescence in a lake like that, a sizeable breeding colony would need to exist. There wouldn't be one nessie, there would be many. To me the idea that no trace has been found of anything so far is pretty damning. Even if they weren't washed up, traces either in situ, or indicative thereof, would be found in the innumerable surveys carried out on the lake so far.

Nothing conclusive, or even remotely convincing has been found so far. Plenty of hearsay and second hand tales, bit nothing solid or tangiable. I think if there was something in Loch Ness by now we'd have some solid evidence (ambiguous sonar hits, and disputed photographs don't count). The fact we don't speaks volumes.


Doesn't Lochness eventually connect out to the sea though? If it does, then the possiblities are endless. They could breed out in the sea. Maybe they migrate to Lochness once a year. Who knows?



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
The way that I see it, and I think that i've sed it before.... is that it has to be an unknown species... Cos its not just in Scotland... There are sitings in other parts of the world too!!!!! Let me just mention Ogopogo and Champ!!!



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   


Doesn't Lochness eventually connect out to the sea though? If it does, then the possiblities are endless. They could breed out in the sea. Maybe they migrate to Lochness once a year. Who knows?


That could be a possibility, although I do have some doubts about that, what i'm about to tell you is something that few people have mentioned, but if you are at Loch Ness, there's a small part of the loch that is quite small, at least that what I saw, maybe i'm wrong and it is just a little side river or something, but the way I saw it the loch 'shrinks' to a small size im about the middle of the river, so that would mean that the complete begin part of the river( so not the side that ends in the open sea) would not be accesible to nessie, leaving a big part of the nessie encounters into nothing but a hoax...



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by City_sea
Dinosaurs weren't fundamentally different. In order to maintain a prescence in a lake like that, a sizeable breeding colony would need to exist. There wouldn't be one nessie, there would be many. To me the idea that no trace has been found of anything so far is pretty damning. Even if they weren't washed up, traces either in situ, or indicative thereof, would be found in the innumerable surveys carried out on the lake so far.

Nothing conclusive, or even remotely convincing has been found so far. Plenty of hearsay and second hand tales, bit nothing solid or tangiable. I think if there was something in Loch Ness by now we'd have some solid evidence (ambiguous sonar hits, and disputed photographs don't count). The fact we don't speaks volumes.


Doesn't Lochness eventually connect out to the sea though? If it does, then the possiblities are endless. They could breed out in the sea. Maybe they migrate to Lochness once a year. Who knows?
Nope. It's a freshwater loch, and I'm pretty sure it's not connected to the sea.



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orla
The way that I see it, and I think that i've sed it before.... is that it has to be an unknown species... Cos its not just in Scotland... There are sitings in other parts of the world too!!!!! Let me just mention Ogopogo and Champ!!!
The simple fact there are a number of unconnected sightings does not mean that it is a new unknown species that thus far has evaded attention. There are plenty of instances (prior to the new age of more accessable global travel) of many cultures having similar legends and beliefs. Besides, many of these lake monsters appear to be quite different from eachother which would sort of preclude them being the same species.

But again, I feel the biggest nail is that there is not a shred of solid evidence. Even in the cases of Yetios and Squatsaches (sp) evidence is fairly abundant, but not even a single convincing photo has been found of nessie or any other lake monster.



posted on Oct, 8 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Well, I once read that its almost harder to prove that Nessie does NOT exist that it is to prove that she DOES!!!



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   
I think so too, But only if you say that nessie could swim anywhere in thw world and not only in a loch in scotland....

Otherwise it won't be so hard to prove...



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs

Doesn't Lochness eventually connect out to the sea though? If it does, then the possiblities are endless. They could breed out in the sea. Maybe they migrate to Lochness once a year. Who knows?


Loch Ness drains into the North Sea via the River Ness - which flows through the centre of the city of Inverness. It also connects to the Atlantic via the Caledonian Canal. It would be extremely difficult for a large creature to enter the loch from either direction without being seen - unless it were to swim up the River Ness when in spate, at night.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join