Lake Monsters and other Weirdness

[Lucas]

i think cats are more comfortable than us. they can even jump several times their own body length up to they die of old age no humans can do that. even the most fit of old men cant, hell even the most fit of young men cant.

here is proof:

COMFY CAT

[Drake]

Evidence is NOT proof as any scientist will tell you

Uh... it's enough proof. I don't think you really understand the scientific evidence behind this, or even what led them to start researching this, and that there really isn't any other explanation.

[Hardwork108]

There's a TON of evidence for dark matter, actually. Just did some research on it for some analysis requirement.

I guess, what there is absolutely no evidence for is the existance GREY matter in this forum....

Except for cetain exeptions, of course.

[Drake]

I suppose there is a necessity to figure out where lore meets the truth. There's always some reality within those old stories.

[SoCo KungFu]

What about Upright walking Hominids such as Sasquatch or Yeti, or even Old Yellow-top?

In the last 11 years, researchers have discovered at least 25 new species of primates. Many of them have been discovered in some relatively small ecological areas - areas bordered or threatened by vast tracts of civilization, such as the Asian subcontinent, especially Borneo.

Many of the recently discovered mammal species probably remained elusive for such a long time not because of their intelligence, but because of their nocturnal behaviour. Scarcity in numbers is often a factor; size also (the biggest weakness of the "old yetiquatch" argument.)

Borneo, while thick with jungle, is also relatively small. There are other, much vaster and remote forests in the world. Many of these forests have native legends of upright walking beasts. The sasquatch stories can be found in pre-columbian native lore; the Yeti story is also old; and yellow-top was known to the natives before the miners in cobalt Ontario described their encounter.

Also, here's a cool link describing the recent discoveries of new species in the USA.

So when it comes to old stories of an upright walking ape... if it took until 2004 to discover the Arunachal Macaque (a relatively large primate found in North-East India, one of the most densely populated areas in the world) then I'm open to the possibility of there being some undiscovered larger primates in some of the more remote regions of the world... say Nepal, B.C or Alaska.

Did you just try to use a mythical bipedal primate to try to prove a mythical aquatic sauropod? (or primitive cetacean or whatever it may be if it existed)

I just gave you a list of common aquatic stressors and why this type of creature (if in the morphology common myth asserts) could not have survived to present day. And that's not even a comprehensive list by any means. I'm just keeping it simple. So tell me, if its just a nocturnal creature, explain why it would be so. If you disagree with my statements explain the evolutionary counterpoint that would allow it to be so. Explain how such a creature could exist to present day in such isolation while all others of its presumed line (I'm assuming cetacean here since reptilian is just too far out there) have all completely adapted to their environment and yet this hasn't. 50 million year is a long time and it has none of the features of an aquatic apex predator. There's a reason why whales look like giant fish (generally speaking).

Its not enough to simply say, oh well its just nocturnal. You have to explain why and how that would be beneficial to survival. I'm not trying to be an ass. I would love for a dinosaur or 50 million year old whale to still be in existence. Stuff like this is why I'm going broke trying to get to Ecuador this summer and spend some time in the forest. But if you are going to say that something exists, you have to explain how it would be so. What niche does it fill? How does it do so? What traits allows it to remain competitive despite everything against it? Why are there so many seemingly contradicting traits present? (dark colors typical of deep water organisms yet its spotted chilling at the surface, remains submerged almost exclusively yet does not appear to have gills and is far too large for skin diffusion (assuming reptilian), lack of streamlining typical of truly aquatic organisms yet seems exclusive to that environment). How does it maintain its required energy inputs given its lack of aquatic adaptations, likely inability to capture significant food sources, and given its size and shape larger energy costs for potential reward. Water is viscous, it causes friction and has inertia. It takes energy to move through it. This type of creature would require more energy if nothing else than simply for its shape/size. How does it survive? I gave reasons why it wouldn't.

And btw Sasquatch is so much cooler than Champ.

[goju]

http://www.psican.org/alpha/index.ph...a-Monster.html

[xclgreen]

This stuff are interesting. I was fascinated and enjoyed reading all the stories and post here. And all I can say is that nothing is impossible in a world with real and fake.

[Dragonzbane76]

"sometimes reality is stranger than fiction"

[Drake]

It wouldn't be the first time they've discovered something they thought to be extinct. I think the problem with sasquatch isn't whether or not it can exist. I think most people are just cynical because of all of the frauds and hoaxes.

[Jimbo]

I used to believe there might be some type of plesiosaur or such in Loch Ness and other lakes, but not so much now. I do believe there's something unusual in many lakes around the world (not only Loch Ness and Lake Champlain). Now, many (most?) times it's probably simple misidentification, like boat wakes, tree stumps, large fish and maybe even giant eels. But the problem with eels is that many descriptions are completely unlike eels. Who says there can't be both in a lake?

I'll toss in something, but it's gonna sound pretty weird:
What if many (but not necessarily all) of these sightings of lake monsters, if they were indeed clear sightings of "dinosaur-like" animals, were of some type of paranormal phenomena, i.e., something that temporarily materialized as a solid thing, then "dematerialized?" Some kind of intelligence that can take whatever form for whatever purpose. And what purpose might that be? Who knows. Maybe to awe or frighten people? Or maybe to have some fun at people's expense? There are variations in legends of the "trickster" all around the world. Not saying I believe OR disbelieve this idea, just throwing it in there. After all, there are more things in heaven and earth...

[JamesC]

I used to believe there might be some type of plesiosaur or such in Loch Ness and other lakes, but not so much now. I do believe there's something unusual in many lakes around the world (not only Loch Ness and Lake Champlain). Now, many (most?) times it's probably simple misidentification, like boat wakes, tree stumps, large fish and maybe even giant eels. But the problem with eels is that many descriptions are completely unlike eels. Who says there can't be both in a lake?

I'll toss in something, but it's gonna sound pretty weird:
What if many (but not necessarily all) of these sightings of lake monsters, if they were indeed clear sightings of "dinosaur-like" animals, were of some type of paranormal phenomena, i.e., something that temporarily materialized as a solid thing, then "dematerialized?" Some kind of intelligence that can take whatever form for whatever purpose. And what purpose might that be? Who knows. Maybe to awe or frighten people? Or maybe to have some fun at people's expense? There are variations in legends of the "trickster" all around the world. Not saying I believe OR disbelieve this idea, just throwing it in there. After all, there are more things in heaven and earth...

Have you seen that show on Animal Planet called River Monsters? If not you should check it out. It's a great show.

I have enough to worry about with all the actual inhabitants of freshwater rivers and lakes. Nevermind what hasn't been proven yet.

[Jimbo]

Yes, I've seen River Monsters. I actually consider it one of the better shows on TV right now...not that I watch many shows anymore. Like I mentioned, many reported accounts of 'lake monsters' could just be large eels or large/unusual fish, such as on River Monsters. But not necessarily always.

I do believe there's more that goes on in the world than has been proven (so far). Despite all the scientific experiments (some well set-up, some half-a$$ed) to disprove the possibility of unknown animals/paranormal phenomena/etc., such things have never really been disproven, either. I just thought I'd put it on the table. It might account for the unusually creepy feelings reported by many who have supposedly seen lake monsters, much creepier than if they'd seen an unusual or extra-large fish, eel, wake, or probably even if it were some type of dinosaur. Plus, some reports fall well outside of the fish, eel, or dinosaur descriptions.