Some questions about... paranormal experiences... and stuff.

[Muay]

Well, if you want to change the subject from Nessie to Champ, feel free, but don't pretend an answer to one is the answer to the other. Besides, there are plenty of other potential explanations. For Nessie, they include seiches or rotting pinewood, noting that sightings in the lochs occur only in the lakes with pine trees. As far as I can tell, the same trees grow along Lake Champlain, and the same seiches occur there. Still, I think the best quote is that by the sightings, Champ is a "chameleonesque creature that is black, gray, brown, moss green, reddish bronze or other color, and is between 10 and 187 feet long, with multiple humps or coils as well as horns or a mane or glowing eyes or 'jaws like an alligator'—or none of those features." If I had time...but I don't, so I'll just leave it at that for now.

Well Nessie and Champ are practically the same thing, description wise at least.I don't really get why so many people can't find the idea of a prehistoric creature living in lakes and oceans, other prehistoric creatures have been found living today, just take a look at this. I find the idea of every sighting being a log or branch of a tree, more far fetched than it actually being an unknown creature.

[Gulcasa]

I dunno which side I'm on, here. I only ever think of ghosts, aliens, whatever after I've seen something about them on TV or read a topic like this, and it's only after I'm reminded of them that I start thinking I hear something in the other room, or see something that can't be explained.

So, either it's just my brain seeing what I'm expecting to see after reading about something specific, or ghosts and aliens like showing up only when I've freaked myself out like douchebags.

[Evans]

this. I find the idea of every sighting being a log or branch of a tree, more far fetched than it actually being an unknown creature.

Right, so we have found a few creatures thought extinct. Does that prove there are gigantic ones still around? Nope. Does the fact a lot of people see a lot of dead wood mean there are good chances that, one day, someone might actually see something else? Sure, but not necessarily a prehistoric creature. I can look at birds all day long, but does it mean I'll be seeing pterodactyls around? Not likely, even though some people claim they have seen some.

I dunno which side I'm on, here. I only ever think of ghosts, aliens, whatever after I've seen something about them on TV or read a topic like this, and it's only after I'm reminded of them that I start thinking I hear something in the other room, or see something that can't be explained.

So, either it's just my brain seeing what I'm expecting to see after reading about something specific, or ghosts and aliens like showing up only when I've freaked myself out like douchebags.

Mmm... Latter seems more likely, go with that.

[Mistral]

Well Nessie and Champ are practically the same thing, description wise at least.I don't really get why so many people can't find the idea of a prehistoric creature living in lakes and oceans, other prehistoric creatures have been found living today, just take a look at this. I find the idea of every sighting being a log or branch of a tree, more far fetched than it actually being an unknown creature.

Probably because all that has been seen in all this time is vague, unsubstantiated sightings and blurry, "retouched" photographs lacking crucial identifying signs (such as ability to discern scale). In centuries of time, in a semi-closed system like a lake or loch, one would expect a body to have drifted ashore, a random fisherman to have made a catch (Coelacanth, for instance?), or the systematic searches done by scientific experts to have come up with something. I will not say that it is impossible that a plesiosaur-like population is hiding in Loch Ness (it can't be a plesiosaur because the photos show it with its head out of the water - anatomy of the plesiosaur prevents this), but given lack of conclusive evidence, I will not say it is the only reasonable outcome.

[Dr Mario]

Well Nessie and Champ are practically the same thing, description wise at least.I don't really get why so many people can't find the idea of a prehistoric creature living in lakes and oceans, other prehistoric creatures have been found living today, just take a look at this. I find the idea of every sighting being a log or branch of a tree, more far fetched than it actually being an unknown creature.

Lets compare that particular creature to what most people consider to be a description of Nessie (as a side note people, don't bring up the Coelacanth in discussions like this. The modern species belongs to a different family than most of the prehistoric ones, including the Coelacanthus species, which is what most people are familiar with):

The shark isn't even two metres long, generally lives between 100m and a kilometre below the surface of an entire ocean, and looks pretty damn similar to some larger species of saltwater eel. It also doesn't have many people intentionally looking for it.

Nessie is freaking long, lives in a lake that's at most 230m deep (not to mention very thin and shallow in places) and doesn't really resemble any other freshwater creature native to that area. Lots of people would love to find it.

It shouldn't come as any surprise then that finding a frilled shark is a minor event of note. The (endangered) species has an entire ocean to hide in, most of it below trawling depth. Nessie on the other hand has so few places to hide that it's hard to justify how no-one has gathered any solid evidence.

[Evans]

Lets compare that particular creature to what most people consider to be a description of Nessie (as a side note people, don't bring up the Coelacanth in discussions like this. The modern species belongs to a different family than most of the prehistoric ones, including the Coelacanthus species, which is what most people are familiar with):

The shark isn't even two metres long, generally lives between 100m and a kilometre below the surface of an entire ocean, and looks pretty damn similar to some larger species of saltwater eel. It also doesn't have many people intentionally looking for it.

Nessie is freaking long, lives in a lake that's at most 230m deep (not to mention very thin and shallow in places) and doesn't really resemble any other freshwater creature native to that area. Lots of people would love to find it.

It shouldn't come as any surprise then that finding a frilled shark is a minor event of note. The (endangered) species has an entire ocean to hide in, most of it below trawling depth. Nessie on the other hand has so few places to hide that it's hard to justify how no-one has gathered any solid evidence.

You're so simple-minded.

It's quite clear Nessie and the others have invented a cloaking device. :eyeball:

Gawd!