09-30-2021, 05:08 AM
(09-27-2021, 05:39 PM)gordi Wrote:[quote pid='71856' dateline='1632760741'](09-25-2021, 06:16 PM)Nomnomine Wrote: I'm pretty sure the photographer himself admitted the Nessie photo was a modified toy submarine. Not to say we know f all about what's really under the waters. Either way, this photo doesn't say much to me. Then again, I was afraid to snorkel in the Caribbean just in case there was a Kraken. ... ... ... Ok maybe I'm crazy, but the original photo was a hoax.
Sorry, I missed this post earlier!
The earliest reported sighting of a creature in Loch Ness actually dates from 565AD!!
from An article in The Scotsman Website :
Quote:The earliest recorded sighting of the aquatic monster was on 22 August 565 AD when it was written that a type of sea creature had attempted to gulp down a local farmer, before being banished back into the water by St Columba - the man responsible for introducing Christianity to Scotland.
En route to meet with a Pictish king, Columba was passing Loch Ness at the time of the attack. He is said to raised his hand, summoning the power of the Almighty and commanding the monster “go back with all speed”...
The "famous" surgeon photo IS indeed a hoax, along with many others, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Nessie doesn't exist!
The legend of the creature goes way way back to a time, many hundreds of years before cameras ever existed!
G
I'll be the first to say the unknown underwater exists. Hell man, I was afraid to snorkel in the Caribbean in case of the kraken, lol. Bull sharks make their way into rivers. If I ever get rich, I pledge to purge the oceans. Kidding, but we really should explore the oceans more. Mars be damned, what's in the Pacific? :P
[/quote]