We may have to move Loch Ness to this forum

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the discovery of a fossilized vertebrae in Loch Ness, purportedly belonging to a plesiosaur, and its implications for the legend of the Loch Ness Monster (Nessie). Participants explore the historical context of Loch Ness, the validity of the fossil claim, and the broader cultural significance of lake monsters.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants mention a fossilized vertebrae found in Loch Ness, suggesting it could belong to a plesiosaur, but express caution about the legitimacy of the claim.
  • Others argue that plesiosaurs could not have accessed Loch Ness, raising questions about the fossil's origin.
  • One participant states that Loch Ness did not exist 150 million years ago, implying that the fossil predates the lake itself.
  • A participant references a historical sighting of a creature in Loch Ness, attributing it to a sturgeon rather than a prehistoric reptile.
  • Another participant notes an interesting pattern in lake monster claims, suggesting a correlation with deep, landlocked lakes at around 45 degrees latitude.
  • There is a mention of the belief that Chinese dragons may have originated from dinosaur bones, linking cultural myths to paleontological findings.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of the fossil find and its implications for the Loch Ness Monster legend. There is no consensus on the validity of the claims or the historical context of Loch Ness.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the lack of clarity regarding the geological history of Loch Ness and the conditions under which plesiosaurs could have existed. The discussion remains speculative, with various assumptions and interpretations presented.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,252
Reaction score
2,664
Since this appears to be legit I am posting here. I am not making claims, but this looks serious. The source appears to be respectible. My apologies in advance if this is bogus.

"Meanwhile, on the shores of Loch Ness in the Scottish Highlands, retired scrap dealer Gerald McSorley, who recently had a hip replaced, stumbled and fell into the water -- where his hand felt a strange object. When he brought it to a museum in Edinburgh to have it examined by experts, they told him it was the 150 million-year-old fossilized vertebrae of what was likely a plesiosaur."


http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=D6312F80-8167-421C-A206-9C3C7F6CD03A
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Biology news on Phys.org
The Washington Times and UPI are playing this down.

STIRLING, Scotland, July 17 (UPI) -- The fossilized remains of a long-necked sea reptile that lived 150 million years ago have been found in Loch Ness -- giving rise to yet another Nessie tale.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20030717-050058-4193r.htm

I thought that a key argument against a "Nessie" is that plesiosaurs could not have gotten into the Loch. Perhaps this is not a plesiosaur's remains?
 
Last edited:
I guess that proves that 150 Myears ago Nessie was there. Maybe Loch Ness was part of a sea back then...
 
i think you will find that loch ness didnt exist 150my ago so even though the fossil was found there it predates loch ness
sorry to spoil your fun
 
http://www.scottishgeology.com/timeline/Jurassic.html
this website shows a map of scotland in the jurassic period
i hope you find it as interesting as i do
http://dinosaurs.jurassicisland.ch/news.eng.shtml
this article from the mesozic press gives a good overview about the find
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by wolram
i think you will find that loch ness didnt exist 150my ago so even though the fossil was found there it predates loch ness
sorry to spoil your fun

Really I would be as surprised as anyone if they found a Nessie. This is one claim that I have written off to sturgeon. There was a sighting about 20 years ago that involved about 5 or 6 six people. One woman had a gun and shot at it...or course... and the next day a sturgeon with a bullet wound was found along the shore.

Also, upon reflection, the argument that I was thinking of was that plesiosaurs could have once existed here but that they never could have survived the last ice age. I was thinking that finding one here was significant. Sorry, probably nothing it seems.

Thanks Wolram for the links.
 
The one point that keeps my interest is that apparently all claims of lake monsters reference deep land locked lakes at about 45 degrees latitude. If this is accurate then it is rather interesting. Perhaps this speak to the formation of deep lakes somehow?
 
It's beleived that

the Chinese beleif in Dragons originated from the Dinosaur bones so abundant in some regions of China.
 

Similar threads

Is a Newly Discovered Fossilized Plesiosaur the Legendary Loch Ness Monster?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K