Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did 'Nessie' roam Down Under?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU
 
Fox Mulder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 07:22 AM
Original message
Did 'Nessie' roam Down Under?
Evidence of giant marine reptiles swimming around Australia

Wednesday, July 26, 2006; Posted: 1:13 a.m. EDT (05:13 GMT)

SYDNEY, Australia (Reuters) -- Australian scientists have identified two new species of ancient marine reptile, similar to the mythical Loch Ness monster, that swam in an Australian outback sea 115 million years ago.

The reptiles, named Umoonasaurus and Opallionectes, belonged to the Plesiosaurs group which included a "killer whale" type predator of the Jurassic period, palaeontologist Benjamin Kear from the University of Adelaide said on Wednesday.

Kear, whose team studied 30 opalized fossils mainly from around the outback mining town of Coober Pedy in South Australia state, said the long-necked marine reptiles swam in the shallow water of an inland sea that once existed in central Australia.

Freezing polar water covered large parts of Australia 115 million years ago when the island continent was located much closer to Antarctica.

<snip>

More here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. The idea that Nessie is a plesiosaur
is largely based on the very famous (fraudulent) photo depicting an obscured photograph of a toy.
If Nessie exists (and for the record I think there is something weird there) a plesiosaur it is not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fox Mulder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. This picture?
Edited on Wed Jul-26-06 07:38 AM by Fox Mulder


Edit to add from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nessie :

The famed "Surgeon's Photo" (pictured top) was confirmed a hoax, based on the deathbed confessions of Chris Spurling, son-in-law of Marmaduke Wetherell. Spurling claimed the photo, which inspired much popular interest in the monster, was actually a staged photograph of clay attached to a toy submarine. Also notable are the ripples on the photo, which fit the size and circular pattern of small ripples when photographed up close, not large waves. Wetherell, a big game hunter, had been tricked into searching for an imaginary monster around the loch based on evidence which turned out to be the result of children's prank. He was publicly ridiculed in the Daily Mail, the journal which employed him. To get revenge, Marmaduke Wetherell set this hoax up, with the help of Chris Spurling (his son-in-law as mentioned), who was a specialist in sculpture, Ian Marmaduke (his son), who bought the material for the fake Nessie, and Maurice Chambers (an insurance agent), who was to call and ask Robert Wilson (a surgeon) to show the pictures. Well before Spurling's claims, however, others had argued the photo was that of an otter or a diving bird. There are in fact two "Surgeon's Photos," which depict slightly different poses, leading some to argue the photos are evidence against a hoax. However, at the time of this confession his father had already died, and Spurling wanted to disprove the photo. The surgeon who was credited for taking the photo never claimed he hadn't taken it either.

How credible is Wikipedia, though?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. The wiki is right that it is an admitted hoax.
The famous "bump" photos are more convincing to me. And almost nothing is as convincing as the Lake Champlain monster photo...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
3. has anyone told random australian about this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Sorry, I was busy fending off bunyips and drop-bears.
Edited on Thu Jul-27-06 01:14 AM by Random_Australian
What was said?

:)

Interesting fossils, though.

Of course, Bazzaland was never frozen. Does it say that it was frozen in the Bible? No. So there, all your evidence is rubbish and creationism wins again!

:) (j/k)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC