Thursday, May 31, 2007

They Done Gone and Spotted Nessie... Again

I grew up reading about this stuff.

One night, back when we had a "deck," my father showed me the newspaper, on the front of which was a picture of "allegedly," Nessie.

"Nessie" is the nickname for the Loch Ness Monster and reports about a monster in the lake have been recorded for over 400 years. In fact, the first recorded sighting of the Loch Ness monster comes from a Saint who was said to have driven the creature away from two swimmers who were in a race across the loch. Of course, no one knows how much of these things are legend and how much aren't.

But my position on the matter is that, if stories persist, and photographic evidence backs it up, it's a no-brainer.

As the story goes, the Monster attacked one of the racers and the Saint then damned the beast to never eat flesh, or living people, or something to that effect. I don't figure Nessie ever did.

As recently as a year or a few ago, a "new" creature's bones were found: it had the head of a horse and the body of an eel. Photographs of such a beast have existed for over 100 years and eyewitness accounts of such a thing come from as far back as 400+ years ago. This is not the first time this "creature" has been reported or recorded - this "thing" has been photographed!

Of course, reports conflict: one eyewitness report - and a highly-regarded one, by most accounts - holds that Nessie crossed the road before her car. This report is one of those that led a confirmed Loch Ness expert to conclude that Nessie is a Pleisiosaur, a dinosaur supposed to be extinct for millions of years.

A Coelocanth was caught in 1938; the Coelocanth was thought to be extinct for millions of years before it turned up on the end of a fisherman's rod. Several have been caught since then.

So what do I think?

I think you have an actual pool out of time. Not like some dimensional time-warp or anything, but an actual, ancient loch: a lake that bears all sorts of creatures either previously unknown or
uncatalogued. I think Loch Ness has its own ecology we are not aware of, and one which others refuse to acknowledge.

I'm ashamed of the other people in my world. The "Big Guns" who pummeled Loch Ness in the 1960sare trying to protect a lake creature which is endangered - to the extreme - but is utterly worthless.

This is why I always go on about the absurdity of keeping the rest of us in the dark about new findings regarding cryptozoology. I understand it, on the one hand, but I'm completely against it for one, specific reason:

If the people who don't want us to know about it are so damned concerned with these animals, then they've already secured those shores. They're just looking to profit from it now. They just want some reimbursement for their work and effort.

And I agree with that, too.

No comments:

Post a Comment