What Do You Predict They Found?

[james bond]

I was interested in this story as it has to do with the legend of Nessie, or the Loch Ness monster. According to Scottish folklore, the monster is a large freshwater creature that inhabits the Loch Ness in the Scottish Highlands. It was sighted first around 1933. The eyewitnesses say it is large in size with a long neck and one or more humps protruding from the water. Obviously, the creationists would love to find Nessie as possible a plesiosaur (dinosaur) living to this day because it causes problems for secular scientists who say that dinosaurs were all killed by a large asteroid and other catastrophes while creationists say it was a global flood. A plesiosaur could have survived a flood.

Here is the general story from yesterday -- Loch Ness Monster 'might' be real, according to new scientific study

What bothers me is finding out through other sources that the scientist leading the exploration wanted money from tv producers to film a documentary of his team's findings. Thus, they have not released what they found in July and won't until September. What bothered me even more was this scientist doesn't believe in the monster. He should still have taken the position of trying to find it since people are most interested to see if there is a monster, and second if it is a plesiosaur. I can see why the tv producers turned him down. Also, I found Answers in Genesis say that there are no DNA of a plesiosaur. If true, then there is no way the researchers could find a plesiosaur from the DNA evidence.

What do you think? Evolutionists should be able to use what they know and predict what they found. They're always bragging about how evolutionary data predicts what species they hope to find, and these guys definitely sound like evolutionists, i.e. biased researchers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they do not have the knowledge and technology to find evidence. I don't think they'll present a fair conclusion for what they found using their evidence.

 

[MarathonMike]

Nessie and Big Foot exist in the minds of those who want them to be real. After all this time, a carcass or skeleton of either would have been found.

 

[TNHarley]

A dinosaur left over from tens of millions of years ago resurfaces in the 1930s
Lol ok

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Cecil died years ago. Beany too.

 

[Dekster]

Who knows. The dodo bird may not be extinct now based on a trail cam in central america and they are finding all sorts of weird new stuff in the antarctic

 

[idb]

You're wrong.
Scientists would love to discover a plesiosaur living in Loch Ness.

 

[Wuwei]

It was sighted first around 1933.

That would make it as old as Ruth Ginsberg. 86 years old. Today's reptiles are small but don't live nearly as long as mammals. It might be hard to predict the age of a huge reptile.

.

 

[JGalt]

Cecil died years ago. Beany too.

You beat me to to it.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

It was sighted first around 1933.

That would make it as old as Ruth Ginsberg. 86 years old. Today's reptiles are small but don't live nearly as long as mammals. It might be hard to predict the age of a huge reptile.

.

Uhm, a Turtle can live up to 200 years old.

 

[Wuwei]

Uhm, a Turtle can live up to 200 years old.

You might be thinking of a tortoise. That is an exception. It's hard to see how a huge beast can live to the same age.

.

 

[MarathonMike]

Cecil died years ago. Beany too.

That was a great show!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Cecil died years ago. Beany too.

That was a great show!

As a kid I never missed it. Einstein was a fan too.

 

[abu afak]

It was sighted first around 1933.

That would make it as old as Ruth Ginsberg. 86 years old. Today's reptiles are small but don't live nearly as long as mammals. It might be hard to predict the age of a huge reptile.

.

Uhm, a Turtle can live up to 200 years old.

And Greenland Sharks twice that age.

Greenland shark - Wikipedia

Longevity
The Greenland shark has the longest known lifespan of all vertebrate species.[23] One Greenland shark was tagged off the coast of Greenland in 1936 and recaptured in 1952. Its measurements suggest that Greenland sharks grow at a rate of 0.5–1 cm (0.2–0.4 in) per year.[24]
In 2016, a study based on 28 specimens that ranged from 81 to 502 cm (2.7–16.5 ft) in length determined by radiocarbon dating of crystals within the lens of their eyes, that the oldest of the animals that they sampled, which also was the largest, had lived for 392 ± 120 years and was consequently born between 1504 and 1744.[25] The authors further concluded that the species reaches sexual maturity at about 150 years of age.[23][26][27]....​

``

 

[Marion Morrison]

It was sanitized before the FBI raid.

 

[james bond]

Nessie and Big Foot exist in the minds of those who want them to be real. After all this time, a carcass or skeleton of either would have been found.

That doesn't answer my question. Is it too tough for you?

 

[james bond]

You're wrong.
Scientists would love to discover a plesiosaur living in Loch Ness.

They're using DNA samplings, but there are no DNA of a plesiosaur according to AIG. So how could they find it? I hope these guys address that if the DNA is not in their database. They should say what's in their database and how comprehensive it is.

 

[HenryBHough]

My prediction:

Nessie will be found to be a sentient being. Though not an American citizen that has been of no concern for than a decade, she is a shoo-in for The Democrat presidential nomination for 2020.

Why?

1. Correct gender - if the name Nessie means what it sounds like. Caution, though, we've had birth-boys named "Sue" who may or may not have had gender-bender surgery.

2. Definitely non-white.

3. Most definitely a minority.

4. And most important....able to evade investigators for a century or more.

Incidentally, photos suggest she/he/it is better looking than any presently recognized Democrat presidential wannabe.

 

[james bond]

Here's what the leader of the research team said. So what do you think they found?

"The prof - an expert in genomics, ecology, population, conservation and evolutionary biology - now says the results were 'surprising'.

He says they tested the data against most of the main theories about the Loch Ness monster.

Prof. Gemmell says while the full details will be released at a later stage one of the theories 'might' be correct.

Two main theories about the monster are it is a long-necked plesiosaur that somehow survived the period when dinosaurs became extinct, or it is a sturgeon or giant catfish.

Prof Gemmell said he hoped to announce the full findings of the study in Scotland next month - but would not confirm which hypothesis might be right.

He said: "Is there anything deeply mysterious? Hmm. It depends what you believe. Is there anything startling? There are a few things that are a bit surprising."

Some explanations of the Loch Ness monster is that its a piece of large tree or wood or an elephant. The circus was in town when people said they saw it. The photo posted by the article is famous, but has been shown to be a fake.

 

[HenryBHough]

Ah the suspense!

Remember how you got screwed into watching the opening of Al Capone's vault?

 

[james bond]

Uhm, a Turtle can live up to 200 years old.

You might be thinking of a tortoise. That is an exception. It's hard to see how a huge beast can live to the same age.

.

A tuatara can live to 100 years. If it was an eel, it's probably dead.

The monster could be a Zeuglodon or Basilosauraus, a type of whale.