Lake Monsters and Sea Serpents

So what exactly would we consider a lake/river monster? To me, that shit is a legitimate river monster. A freakishly large and imposing fish that if it really wanted to, could eat a small child.

Maybe not the traditional folklore/ rarely sighted sense, but still.

That's the type of shit they caught on the show River Monsters, and I agree that it does count as a river monster. It's an amazing animal. As much fun as it would be to have dinosaurs lurking around in lakes or jungles, I just don't think they exist. There are very few large creatures that haven't changed in 66 million years.
 
Everyone has opinions and that’s fine. It’s the personal attacks that ruin a thread for me.
On topic, while I do want to believe in large, undiscovered animals, the lack of corpses is a pretty good argument against them. Although I do know that bodies break down extremely fast in nature. Much faster than you would expect.
I'm sure the smithsonian does a good job of taking away pesky things like burial remains as well ;)

My best bet is that Fukushima is going to produce some Godzilla(s) in the future that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
We are always finding “new” shit on this planet.

Things either unknown or thought long lost exctinct animals.

The thing about nessy and champ etc is that they are all along the same lateral lines, so the best theory is these giant sea creatures come inland every so often to bread or have young.

It’s thought that there are underground trenches leading out into the ocean of LOCH ness.
 
It's always interesting how they refuse to point out where they get that 95% figure. It's a load of shit. When they say that they only mean via topographical imaging, not that we haven't been in the waters to see what's down there. We have been all over the oceans across the globe fishing, diving, and exploring.

"Yet for all of our reliance on the ocean, 95 percent of this realm remains unexplored, unseen by human eyes."

Read the link next time. This is according to your own overlords. You know, those people you talked about having a "fucking education".

The entire point of him bringing up the sleeper shark was that it was claimed to be a specimen from the Marina Trench that was larger than thought to be possible. It's not. It's just a regular sleeper shark.

I'm sorry you don't understand the context of that image, dummy.


Just to show how fucking silly this idea of these giant undiscovered creatures hiding in the oceans from us. When was the last time we discovered something we had no idea about in the oceans that was on the scale you're talking about? If you go look at the animal discoveries now, it's almost always small relatives of known species found isolated, and not anything radically different from what we know exists. The idea that megalodon are hiding in the Marina Trench is as idiotic as the idea that Bigfoot is in the woods.

No, he didn't claim it was from the trench. He specifically states otherwise. Pay attention. And it's an irregular sleeper shark, because it puts to shame the verified max for that species.

52hz whale was never located, never discovered.
 
Last edited:
I agree. It's very unlikely that anything that large could be hiding without being found. Similarly to my example of sturgeon vs. lake monsters, the concept of the Sasquatch makes sense if you don't imagine it to be a new creature. I mean, where would you possibly find large, hairy, animals that can walk upright, and live in the woods? Wait, we already have that. Bears can do exactly that.



As a bit of a downer, however:
That bear was killed during a hunt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedals_(bear)


Any account where prints are present, upright bears are easily discounted.
 
"Yet for all of our reliance on the ocean, 95 percent of this realm remains unexplored, unseen by human eyes."

Read the link next time. This is according to your own overlords. You know, those people you talked about having a "fucking education".

These people also don't have a peer reviewed study for that ridiculous claim. If you think science means blindly believing whatever bullshit someone says without going your own due diligence, then that explains why you say stupid shit.

No, he didn't claim it was from the trench. He specifically states otherwise. Pay attention. And it's an irregular sleeper shark, because it puts to shame the verified max for that species.

Holy fuck retard. The claim that this sleeper shark is a "record size" comes from the fabrication that it was taken in the Marina Trench and the cage length was 10' long. That entire fucking story is not true, because the cage wasn't that size and it wasn't taken in the trench. It was taken in a bay with a common sized sleeper shark.

Talk about paying attention, you have no fucking idea what you're even trying to defend.
 
neon-2_2.jpg

Guppies exposed to radiation
 
These people also don't have a peer reviewed study for that ridiculous claim. If you think science means blindly believing whatever bullshit someone says without going your own due diligence, then that explains why you say stupid shit.

The experts over at the NOAA say stupid shit, according to @jgarner. Got it. Lol.

Holy fuck retard. The claim that this sleeper shark is a "record size" comes from the fabrication that it was taken in the Marina Trench and the cage length was 10' long. That entire fucking story is not true, because the cage wasn't that size and it wasn't taken in the trench. It was taken in a bay with a common sized sleeper shark.

Talk about paying attention, you have no fucking idea what you're even trying to defend.

No, it doesn't. The estimation of 23ft comes from Eugenie Clark, a scientist. The largest verified size is 14ft.
 
With 90% of the planet with a smart phone (at least in Scotland and Canada), there should be credible videos daily of creatures in these lakes. The fact that there aren't and so many are sketchy, does not bode well.

When I was little, I always hoped the Loch Ness monster existed and there were Bigfoots. Then, I grew up and realized they don't exist. ;)

Not everyone has their phone out ready to film it. Not really the best idea too when out on the lake.

Search youtube for "phones found in the river". I didn't think that many were being dropped into the water.

Sometimes you only get a narrow window of opportunity. They're not always at the surface or near the shore ready to get their picture taken. There's only a handful of sightings each year so I don't know where you're getting this daily idea from.

Some of the ones I posted aren't sketchy at all.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. Flat out deniers were to be expected.
 
Last edited:
This thread has taken a disappointing turn :/

tbh, this happens every time with threads like this... the hard core skeptics come in here and say, "GOD HOW CAN YOU GUYS BELIEVE THIS STUPID SHIT!!!???" and then they hijack the threads.
 
The issue with Bigfoot and sea serpents is the lack of dead ones found. Everything dies. Videos are always blurry or of something else. Over the course of history, there should be at least one good one that isn’t faked. Never is. I have no doubt the deep sea has secrets, but not lakes and lochs. It all things we know about, just maybe bigger.

I have posted a few crystal clear videos.
 
The experts over at the NOAA say stupid shit, according to @jgarner. Got it. Lol.



No, it doesn't. The estimation of 23ft comes from Eugenie Clark, a scientist. The largest verified size is 14ft.
lol I love this guy @jgarner

In every thread not only is this guy the *expert* on whatever subject matter it is, but he also *knows* who the other *true* or *accepted* experts are in the scientific community regarding those matters as well. Nothing is true until he says it is. Must have a masters degree in everything but a Ph.D in nothing.

Ol'jgarner did you sleep in holiday inn all you're life?
 
The experts over at the NOAA say stupid shit, according to @jgarner. Got it. Lol.

Why don't you find the peer reviewed study they used to draw that conclusion and post it?

No, it doesn't. The estimation of 23ft comes from Eugenie Clark, a scientist. The largest verified size is 14ft.

The estimation came from incorrect assumptions, as I just said you dammed retard.


You're one of the dumbest motherfuckers I've met on this board, and that's quite an accomplishment.
 
lol I love this guy @jgarner

In every thread not only is this guy the *expert* on whatever subject matter it is, but he also *knows* who the other *true* or *accepted* experts are in the scientific community regarding those matters as well. Nothing is true until he says it is. Must have a masters degree in everything but a Ph.D in nothing.

Ol'jgarner did you sleep in holiday inn all you're life?

That's because I don't open my mouth until I know what I'm talking about. When I'm not educated enough to speak with confidence that I'm right, I don't open my suck.

Unlike you, I don't like sounding like a retard. When I don't know, I don't post or I freely admit that I just don't know.

And let's not forget that you believe in ancient aliens and shit McRetard
 
Everyone has opinions and that’s fine. It’s the personal attacks that ruin a thread for me.
On topic, while I do want to believe in large, undiscovered animals, the lack of corpses is a pretty good argument against them. Although I do know that bodies break down extremely fast in nature. Much faster than you would expect.

Even the bones of whales are completely eaten and it's not like every creature that has ever lived left behind fossils for us to find.

Also divers aren't scouring the lake bed all the time.
 
Everyone has opinions and that’s fine. It’s the personal attacks that ruin a thread for me.
On topic, while I do want to believe in large, undiscovered animals, the lack of corpses is a pretty good argument against them. Although I do know that bodies break down extremely fast in nature. Much faster than you would expect.
This is a reason that giant squids were known to exist. Corpses would get caught in nets or found on beaches. That and the beaks were found in sperm whales. So there was evidence of them. Now how big they could get was a different story.
 
Why don't you find the peer reviewed study they used to draw that conclusion and post it?



The estimation came from incorrect assumptions, as I just said you dammed retard.


You're one of the dumbest motherfuckers I've met on this board, and that's quite an accomplishment.

My source > you.

Me > you.

giphy.gif


Deal with it.
 
My source > you.

Me > you.

giphy.gif


Deal with it.

So you have no study to back up that ridiculous claim up and instead you're going to post stupid memes and scream, "I don't hear you" while holding your fingers in your ears?

Gotcha. You're not pathetic at all kiddo. Real winner you are.

Are those sunglasses to hide the tears?
 
So you have no study to bank that ridiculous claim up and you're going to instead post stupid memes and scream, "I don't hear you" while holding your fingers in your ears?

Gotcha. You're not pathetic at all kiddo.

Lol take it up with the NOAA. Perhaps write them a letter explaining how you know better than them, while not being an expert in anything related.

And on that note, son.

 
The issue with Bigfoot and sea serpents is the lack of dead ones found. Everything dies. Videos are always blurry or of something else. Over the course of history, there should be at least one good one that isn’t faked. Never is. I have no doubt the deep sea has secrets, but not lakes and lochs. It all things we know about, just maybe bigger.

this

So what exactly would we consider a lake/river monster? To me, that shit is a legitimate river monster. A freakishly large and imposing fish that if it really wanted to, could eat a small child.

Maybe not the traditional folklore/ rarely sighted sense, but still.

That's the thing, split the cryptozoology bs/legends from simply animals that are far bigger than theyr normal size

I ever found the latter far more interessing, as they're actual real life "monsters" as you say... something that actually exist over touristic legends and bad photoshops

Example watch this page, it compares average weight of various species next to the biggest ever recorded:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_organisms

So you can see in nature happen we get animals that reach twice the size of what is considered theyr usual maximum size

Pretty cool, can't imagine what's like see an over 12 tons elephant (a giant shot in the 70s) walking around, when a an animal that look like this
Africa's%20largest%20-%20African%20elephant.jpg

main-qimg-77bbf3287782562525307122d578e4e3-c


is probably "just" 5 to 6 tons, imagine a 12+ one lol


So when we speak of "sea monsters" instead chase legends and photoshops, i imagine how cool must be see in real life the very largest specimen of actual existing animals like

image.jpg
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,816
Messages
55,309,573
Members
174,732
Latest member
herrsackbauer
Back
Top