Dinosaur sightings

Ive noticed that aswell. It is usually tilted or blurry. Either these people dont know what a camera is or are faking it. Usually deliberatly blurry ones r fake. Some orb photos are just blotches On the camera lens

oops! Double post! Sorry

[Edited on 03-11-2003 by Aztec]

Big fish! You might have something going here, on nagas aztec.

back on the subject of dinosaurs, we know none could possibly be alive. Then these big lizards arent dinosaurs but what?

You say that the top one is too big to be a crocodile, but what are you using for perspective? For all we know that creature could be no bigger than an iguana. The photo is likely blown up, hence the poor quality.

The second one just looks like a cut out job to me. Or possibly There is no wake and there are no ripples around the creature to show that it is moving. The shadow looks good, so probably not a photo shop, unless the person did a good job with that.

I just found in google a link to this ATS site. It looks like a thread on Nagas is already here. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by greenkoolaid
You say that the top one is too big to be a crocodile, but what are you using for perspective? For all we know that creature could be no bigger than an iguana. The photo is likely blown up, hence the poor quality.

The second one just looks like a cut out job to me. Or possibly There is no wake and there are no ripples around the creature to show that it is moving. The shadow looks good, so probably not a photo shop, unless the person did a good job with that.

Look closely, looks like a dead fish...

Nagas...read my Crypto pedia, see if they are there. (if it isnt in part 1, try II)

Originally posted by Seapeople
There is definitely a logical explanation for them both. The problem is that the logical explanation doesnt include dinosaurs.

Exactly !!

I have seen the second photo claimed to be a photograph of a crypto-sauropod said to be surviving in the Congo called mokele mbembe. It has been documented since the 1700's by Europeans, and there have been several PhD expeditions into the area to try and find tangible proof, but it has not been forthcoming to date. It doesnt stop people from looking though. Bear in mind that the habitat the creature is said to exist in is extremely remote, and mostly dense, inpenetrable jungles. I think this has helped the stories of the creature(s) to survive.

I do try and keep an open mind with these things, and I agree that it is very likely there are some large, mind blowing creatures inhabiting the oceans, however I am skeptical of this claim that a self sustaining breeding population of apatosaurus's are surviving even in a remote jungle of Africa.

Given the creatures allegedly large size, the number of people looking for the thing over the years I would expect that there would at least be some forensic evidence gathered by now to sustain those who claim the creature exists. What further dampens credibility in the Congo dinosaurs existence is that there are even more claims of other types of dinosaurs living in the area, called emela ntouka and mbielu mbielu mbielu, a creature said to resemble a dinosaur called Stegosaurus.



If these claims are true then there is a real Jurrasic Park residing in Africa, and not one shred of tangible proof to back it up.

I'm not sure if what I am about to write is true, and I'm hoping someone can help and clear this up for me. But from what I can remember, I have heard that most of the country of Congo had been kept away from the general public, for specific reasons. Much of the jungle being unaltered by the acts of human activity. In my opinion I believe that this would be the perfect location for the existence of prehistoric beings.

Never seen the top one befor, have to look into it. The bottom one is an elephent swiming across a rive/lake. The back part that looks like the body is infact the animals head, the 'neck and head' is the trunk. If you look at it you can see it. Cool pic though.

Originally posted by Monk
To big to be a tail. of a crocodile. Or mayb its just a BIG crocodile....

How can you tell? There's absolutely nothing in the first photo to suggest size or scale.

I think we have established it is not a dinosaur. Tell what Universal?

Originally posted by Monk
I think we have established it is not a dinosaur. Tell what Universal?

Huh? Sorry that makes no sense to me

The first one looks amazing, second a bit vauge, and the third.....I should really stop pulling my pants down in public.
Deep

Originally posted by UniversalFiction

Originally posted by Monk
I think we have established it is not a dinosaur. Tell what Universal?

Huh? Sorry that makes no sense to me

he means. "how can you "tell" what? Universal"

Originally posted by triplesod

he means. "how can you "tell" what? Universal"

Ahh right, sorry - I wasn't bein funny there, I really didn't know what was meant! Cheers.

How can I tell there's nothing in the image to suggest scale or compare size against? Well... I mean... there ain't anything there! The tail could be a foot long, it could be ten feet long, there's nothing to say either way. That's all I meant.

Originally posted by Aztec
I've found one of the photos shown on the documentary about Nagas, but this creature looks like a sea creature to me. www.pantawee.dk...

"A Swedish gentleman who lives upstream from Nongkhai swore that he had seen the spectacle and had put his powerful binoculars on it and observed that it was some kind of wooden structure undulating down the river in an eel-like manner. But then he is prone to a Carlsberg or ten! "

Originally posted by Aztec
I've found one of the photos shown on the documentary about Nagas, but this creature looks like a sea creature to me. www.pantawee.dk...

I'd wager that is a MegaEel..... atleast I think that's the name for them.

EXTREMELY large, sea/ocean dwelling eel that is of a unique species.

And I don't think it would be hard for a huge eel, or "sea serpent" to hide in the briny depths.

Keep in mind the Earth's surface is like 70% water.
And it can be VERY deep.