Loch Ness Monster debunks evolution

[Inan3]

Loch Ness was thoroughly investigated using sonar a few years ago (I'm sure I could find a link if anyone wants a source) and found nothing.

Perhaps you should read the link below where a reporter from hearaldscotland admittedly said she spoke with a "Nessie EXPERT" and she relates:

"Of course, the Scottish tourist industry might well reap a dividend from the craziness of the American education system. Nessie expert Tony Drummond, who leads tours as part of Cruise Loch Ness, has a few words of advice to the US schools in question: come to the loch and try to find the monster.

"They need to come and investigate the loch for themselves," says the 47-year-old. "We've got some hi-tech equipment. They could come out on the boat and do a whole chunk of the loch.

"We do get regular sonar contacts which are pretty much unexplainable. More research has to be done, but it's not way along the realms of possibility."

What are the sonar contacts which are "pretty much UNEXPLAINABLE?" And why IF as you said that "Loch Ness was THOROUGHLY investigated using sonar a few years ago" is this Nessie EXPERT saying that more research has to be done. Just because he doesn't think it will be Nessie is irrelevant. What is relevant is that they STILL (this article was written just the other day) are finding UNEXPLAINABLE sonar contacts. That means in case you don't know that they don't KNOW what it is down there. So NO ONE has proven that Nessie is not real or does not exist.

So perhaps you could step back a little from making a judgement of "absolute disgrace" upon this little school in LA and the ACE curriculm which hasn't really said that Nessie has been proven to be real but only states in their textbook that this is what people were speculating and believing. On top of that if you will admit that all the hype and malicious attack that has been surging around the web is coming from your side of the argument and it really holds no basis of anything, then perhaps you would be honest and admit that it is THAT type of behavior which is truly absolutely disgraceful.


How American fundamentalist schools are using Nessie to disprove evolution | Herald Scotland

 

[freezerman2000]

The Celocanth(sp?) was supposed to be extinct before some fishermen got one in their nets..did that discovery do anything to evolution? Not one bit.

 

[Illuminaughty]

The existence of unexplained sonar hits doesn't imply that a plesiosaur is present. Unexplained = unexplained not "it must be a plesiosaur". Talk about jumping to conclusions.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Celocanth(sp?) was supposed to be extinct before some fishermen got one in their nets..did that discovery do anything to evolution? Not one bit.

Made evolution invoke the No True Scotsman Principle, in my opinion.

From Wikipedia:

More closely related to tetrapods than even the ray-finned fish, coelacanths were considered the "missing link" between the fish and the tetrapods until the first Latimeria specimen was found off the east coast of South Africa, off the Chalumna River (now Tyolomnqa) in 1938.

I wasn't aware we have missing links swimming around today.

Or has "missing link" quietly been dropped from the Coelcanth's description?

 

[Inan3]

You really don't need to prove it doesn't exist. What can be demonstrated, however, is that Loch Ness is far too small to support a life form as large as Nessie is supposed to be. There simply wouldn't be enough fish in a body of water that small to sustain it, and there are too many living fish there to hint that anything is eating them all. Not to mention, a creature that large in a body of water that small would be incredibly easy to find.

It's also been proven that the original photos that started it all were a hoax. The story started in 1933. There was no evidence -- just word of mouth. Even the photos that would be presetned as evidence were later admitted by the photographers to be hoaxes. The Surgeon's photograph would even go on to be recreated in 1999 to illustrate how easy it is to create such a hoax. The "monster" you see in that famous photo is only about 19 inches long and made of plastic wood.

I'm sorry Delphiki, although YOUR story sounds so credible, (they all do) even this story of the hoax is suspect never coming out until after the man was dead who supposedly confessed to making the fake Loch Ness. So no one really knows and as I said, nothing has been proven.

 

[Inan3]

Deleted

 

[Delphiki]

Attention, user known as good_brother....












NESSIE DON'T REAL.

 

[Redac]

That's awesome.

Ask a Encyclopedia Brittainica publisher which is the best encyclopedia.
Ask a Cubs fan which team is the best.
Ask a Hoover vacuum salesperson which vacuum cleaner everyone should own.



How would you react to me saying the Bible is accurate and true and used 2nd Timothy 3:16 as proof? By the way, 2nd Timothy 3:16 states, "All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness."

Since I just proved the Bible is all breathed out by God and is useful for teaching, then it would be good to have it taught in the classroom. What would you say to that? I bet you wouldn't accept it as true.


In Christ, GB

Is there a Cubs fan alive that would claim that their team is the best?

 

[USincognito]

Wow. You quoted wiki. I think you should know that I never put much stock in anything Wiki has to say especially when it deals with anything of the Christian nature. Often those articles are so far slanted that they run parallel with the horizon.

Slanted towards facts and reality I suppose. And if one cannot actually address the content, "it's biased!" is a convenient way to not overtly display that fact (though all of us who know better know it's because you simply cannot address the content).

You were even provided a link to the cited source. Was this some wild-eyed militant new-atheist?

Nah, it was a hagiorapher who lived shortly after St. Columba.
Adomnán - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[USincognito]

That's awesome.

Ask a Encyclopedia Brittainica publisher which is the best encyclopedia.
Ask a Cubs fan which team is the best.
Ask a Hoover vacuum salesperson which vacuum cleaner everyone should own.

Actually Wikipedia is quite aware of the foibles associated with open source editing. They even have a page that links many of the lamest edit wars in the sites history.
Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Some of these are hilarious.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm sorry Delphiki, although YOUR story sounds so credible, (they all do) even this story of the hoax is suspect never coming out until after the man was dead who supposedly confessed to making the fake Loch Ness. So no one really knows and as I said, nothing has been proven.

A breeding group of plesiosaurs in a lake would be as hard to find as a breeding group of 50 foot crocodiles. IOW, they would be very easy to find. They are air breathing reptiles and lay eggs on land (like sea turtles or crocodiles). Sorry, but Nessie is a myth.

 

[Delphiki]

I'm sorry Delphiki, although YOUR story sounds so credible, (they all do) even this story of the hoax is suspect never coming out until after the man was dead who supposedly confessed to making the fake Loch Ness. So no one really knows and as I said, nothing has been proven.

So, am I to understand that you're of the mindset to believe everything you're told, no matter how incredible, until proven otherwise?

 

[selfinflikted]

Oh, I'm so glad you got it fixed. It must have been so awful for you to read the truth!! And I looked up "pink" to see why some of you have such and aversion to pink. I found pink to represent good things and positive things and that it is just an all round pretty NICE color, golly gee!! So I'm assuming that some of you are just NOT nice people so that is why you don't like pink. Oh my!! Now isn't this a a peachy explanation? See the link below to learn about pink maybe it might cheer some of you up and wouldn't THAT make the world a better place? You might even change your mind and like pink just like me.


The Color Pink

I have no problem with pink. But pink on a gray background is hard on the eyes. Seriously.

 

[Split Rock]

I have no problem with pink. But pink on a gray background is hard on the eyes. Seriously.

Oh my yes! She has been told this over and over again, but insists on entrenching in response. Typical for a creationist, I suppose.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh my yes! She has been told this over and over again, but insists on entrenching in response. Typical for a creationist, I suppose.

Just highlight the text with your mouse and read it.

Typical for an evolutionist, I suppose.

And an evolutionist that's a scientist to boot!?

Whoo, boy! There's a match "made in Heaven"!

Fedex - even for MBA graduates - YouTube

 

[NailsII]

Perhaps you should read the link below where a reporter from hearaldscotland admittedly said she spoke with a "Nessie EXPERT" and she relates:

"Of course, the Scottish tourist industry might well reap a dividend from the craziness of the American education system. Nessie expert Tony Drummond, who leads tours as part of Cruise Loch Ness, has a few words of advice to the US schools in question: come to the loch and try to find the monster.

"They need to come and investigate the loch for themselves," says the 47-year-old. "We've got some hi-tech equipment. They could come out on the boat and do a whole chunk of the loch.

"We do get regular sonar contacts which are pretty much unexplainable. More research has to be done, but it's not way along the realms of possibility."

First step Inan, investigate the source.
Does this man have a vested interest in Nessie?
Of course he does, his livelyhood depends upon it.
Because of this, I will take a sketptical stance on anything he claims without hard evidence.

What are the sonar contacts which are "pretty much UNEXPLAINABLE?"

unexplainable does not mean plesiosaur.

And why IF as you said that "Loch Ness was THOROUGHLY investigated using sonar a few years ago" is this Nessie EXPERT saying that more research has to be done.

Because more research means more press coverage, which means more tourists which presumably justifies his job.
If the sonar really is unexplainable then no amount of research will ever uncover the truth, right?

Just because he doesn't think it will be Nessie is irrelevant. What is relevant is that they STILL (this article was written just the other day) are finding UNEXPLAINABLE sonar contacts.

See above.

That means in case you don't know that they don't KNOW what it is down there. So NO ONE has proven that Nessie is not real or does not exist.

It is much easier to prove that Nessie does exist than he/she doesn't.
The fact that there is no proof, other than questionable photos, 'unexplainable' sonar readings and inconsistant eye-witness reports, for an animal that in all likelyhood breaths air and would have to be part of a breeding population is pretty poor really.

So the obvious conclusion is that Nessie's existance is highly unlikely.
Until evidence emerges that contradicts my stance, I will remain an agnostic a-Nessyist.

So perhaps you could step back a little from making a judgement of "absolute disgrace" upon this little school in LA and the ACE curriculm which hasn't really said that Nessie has been proven to be real but only states in their textbook that this is what people were speculating and believing

So how does gave any bearing on evolution, as the article implies?
That is the disgrace, teaching that evolution is not based on fact.

On top of that if you will admit that all the hype and malicious attack that has been surging around the web is coming from your side of the argument and it really holds no basis of anything, then perhaps you would be honest and admit that it is THAT type of behavior which is truly absolutely disgraceful.

i am not aware of any hype or malicious attacks.
If there are any, then yes I would suppose that they are disgraceful.
But to teach a scientific theory as nonsense based on what is little more than a myth really is a disgrace.
How would normal people react if a school started teaching astrology as fact, and stating that the constelations disprove astronomy?

 

[Split Rock]

Just highlight the text with your mouse and read it.

Typical for an evolutionist, I suppose.

And an evolutionist that's a scientist to boot!?

Whoo, boy! There's a match "made in Heaven"!

Whatever are you going off about?

 

[CabVet]

Whatever are you going off about?

It seems to me that he took the creationist entrenchment response as an insult, and then entrenched.

 

[Split Rock]

It seems to me that he took the creationist entrenchment response as an insult, and then entrenched.

LOL

 

[Inan3]

So, am I to understand that you're of the mindset to believe everything you're told, no matter how incredible, until proven otherwise?

No, that is definitely not the case but you know, Delphiki, it doesn't matter what I say here or what you say for that matter, we see things differently and no matter how either side tries to explain their stance, the other side is does not see it that way. We understand or see what we want to. I'm not going to argue with you or anyone else here. There is no fruit in that.