Tooth of Loch Ness Monster found
-
Ivestigator Confirms Discovery of Loch Ness Tooth
Investigator Bill McDonald confirms that Loch Ness Tooth photos and video footage taken by two American college students are undoctored.
(PRWEB) April 28, 2005 -- After a thorough examination of photos and video footage taken by two American college students claiming they recovered the tooth of an immense creature lodged in the ribcage of a half eaten deer carcass found on Loch Ness, (http://www.LochNessTooth.com) forensics expert and Nessie investigator Bill McDonald has concluded that the film is undoctored. If the tooth is real, that confirms his own findings as to what the creature is.
"The discovery of the deer remains comes as no surprise to me," he said. "When I traveled to Loch Ness last December, I discovered a slide trail (tracks) that were entirely consistent with my theories on the identity of the monster. The bite pattern on the deer carcass reflects that of a particular species documented in both fresh and salt water systems around the globe.
"The discovery of the shed relic (tooth) however is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and it is extremely important that we recover it as quickly as possible as the DNA would prove my theory. We could be on the cusp of a great discovery and the fact that local authorities in the Scottish Highlands are refusing to cooperate with this investigation is reprehensible," he added.
According to accounts from the two students and the Scottish local who took them on a boat tour, the tooth, along with a video tape and two rolls of film were confiscated by a water bailiff shortly after the students pried the tooth loose from the half eaten deer carcass. Because of a contractual agreement with author Steve Alten, who included his hypothesis in a book (“The Loch)” on the subject, McDonald could not elaborate on the monster's identity until after July 15th.
However he did want to comment on recent speculation that the tooth could simply be the broken tip of an antler. "I can categorically eliminate the notion that the purported tooth is a Cervid/Capreoline deer antler or any animal's claw," he said. "It is neither a young spike nor a bony deciduous antler and in no way resembles the texture of broken, cast, or otherwise shed antler tissue. I've hunted deer with my father throughout my childhood. I know them well. While I can’t verify anything until I examine the tooth, I can say with assurance that we are not looking at a claw or antler.”
McDonald and the two students have offered a $5,000 reward for any information leading to the recover of the tooth. -
Fascinating. I have always wondered about the Loch Ness Monster you know ? But if it really has teeth like that...Then I guess it can stay out of my way.
-
IMHO, looks kinda fake. Can give the url for the above report?
-
notice that the tooth does not have roots?
and teeth with barbs don't really work well.. -
since younf facinated wth such things
They say the monster is a dinosaur survivor called plesiosaur -
Got a url link to the above report?
-
its a claw from a giant 1m snowcrab that landed in Scotland after being sucked it by the great hurricane that hit Kyushu in 1280.
Get it here
www.pathmicro.med.jp/kyushu.=lame&retard.theory/crab -
c'mon... tech-savvy one like you should know where it is, you're just makin' fun right?
looks very very dodgy to me considering it's www.lochnesstooth.comOriginally posted by ditzy:Got a url link to the above report? -
It irks me to read interesting articles that come with no valid source or referencing.
-
Urm...there has always been speculation that that it is a leftover dinosaur... Something which I believe when I was younger...since it looks like it apparently has a long neck and tail from the various "photographs". But come to think of it...Do dinosaurs live that long ??? Won't they drop dead and died ? Or is this an isolated longevity dinosaur ?Originally posted by Harris_JeyaRaj:since younf facinated wth such things
They say the monster is a dinosaur survivor called plesiosaur -
No, I don't know, really. I don't scour the net for articles like these.
-
If it's not a tooth belonging to Nessie, I'd say its her claw!
-
This is one of many plesiosaur fossils that I think look similar to the object found. In other images the fossilized tooth looks straighter and in some thicker, so it is hard to say really.
I really wish I could find one of a zeuglodon tooth.
At first viewing I would have absolutely said that this was a horn or antler, the main thing causing me to doubt now is the "Investigation" of Bill Mcdonald.
He is supposed to be an expert in forensics and on Nessie, he says that it is definately NOT an antler, or claw. That the bite marks are consistent with the type of animal he believes Nessie to be.
He would have given himself a lot more credibility if he had of named that animal, but I guess that is one of the main selling points of the upcoming book.
He certainly has a lot to gain from this and I can see the college guys doing it just to be funny. -
so... nessie's a crab with a long neck...
where's ultraman when you need him?Originally posted by Harris_JeyaRaj:If it's not a tooth belonging to Nessie, I'd say its her claw! -
That thing...struck me as some part of a squid...cant imagine why though...
-
check up on the history of the loch ness lake. It was cut off from the sea during the dinaosuar period trapping the monsters which are the plsesiosaurs, a type of aqauatic reptile which roamed the seas millions of years ago.....Originally posted by Ferret:Urm...there has always been speculation that that it is a leftover dinosaur... Something which I believe when I was younger...since it looks like it apparently has a long neck and tail from the various "photographs". But come to think of it...Do dinosaurs live that long ??? Won't they drop dead and died ? Or is this an isolated longevity dinosaur ? -
He suffocated in spaceOriginally posted by the Bear:so... nessie's a crab with a long neck...
where's ultraman when you need him? -
Precisely. Millions of years unchanged in form ? Hard to believe.Originally posted by Harris_JeyaRaj:check up on the history of the loch ness lake. It was cut off from the sea during the dinaosuar period trapping the monsters which are the plsesiosaurs, a type of aqauatic reptile which roamed the seas millions of years ago..... -
Perhaps its a claw belonging to a giant squid around 18-20m long. Giant squids do exist. They have been washed up regularly on New Zealand's shorelines. A live squid has never been found, only dead bodies.
-
the loch ness lake has enough fish to feed a family of large creatures like plesiosaursOriginally posted by Ferret:Precisely. Millions of years unchanged in form ? Hard to believe. -
well, we have a million year-old thing swimming around in Loch Ness...
now.. if we can figure out what the secret of its immortality is, we'll be rich and shortly after, it'll be the end of the worldOriginally posted by Ferret:Precisely. Millions of years unchanged in form ? Hard to believe. -
Not only in Loch ness there are other sightings of same kind of creatures in Lake Champ and other lakes....
-
The Loch Ness plesiosaur
A series of plesiosaur vertebrae have been found on the shore of Loch Ness. This hss been hailed by some monster hunters as 'proof' of the existence of a living plesiosaur in the Loch.
So what do we know about this find?
Firstly, although it has been confirmed as plesiosaurian by staff of the National Museums of Scotland (NMS), it contributes nothing to the debate over the existence of a monster in Loch Ness. The bones are millions of years old, and Loch Ness is (in geological terms at least) very recent - only 12,000 years old or so, being a glacially excavated trough.
Secondly, it didn't originate in the loch. As the NMS staff, and also Matt Dale of 'Mr Wood's Fossils' in Edinburgh, spotted, its general appearance, and the presence of holes made by burrowing sponges, show that it has spent some time in the sea, probably as a beach pebble on a coastal outcrop such as the Jurassic of the Moray Firth coast, or somewhere further afield. Yet Loch Ness is fresh water.
I have not had the chance to examine the specimen myself, and have to rely on the photographs published in the popular press (all of which show the specimen upside-down, by the way). It is an articulated series of what look like dorsal or very worn cervical vertebrae. The zygapophyses seem rather low and flat, and the rims of the articular faces rather rounded. The specimen is heavily water-worn, and a lot of surface detail appears to have been lost.
If there is any mystery about the specimen, it is how it ended up in Loch Ness. Natural transport as a glacial erratic is unlikely given the distribution of the nearest Jurassic strata, say the NMS staff, who have been diplomatically noncommittal about how it got there.
A deliberate hoax has been suggested by several people in the media. There is indeed a long history of hoaxes associated with the Loch Ness 'monster' phenomenon, and some perpetrator may well have been willing to waste money possibly to no effect. Finds of plesiosaur bones are not very common, and it would need someone who knew something about vertebrate palaeontology to recognise them as such at the first finding and, after the specimen was put in Loch Ness, to take the risk that nobody would find it. There is no suggestion at all that Mr McSorley was knowingly involved in any such deception. Indeed, the newspaper reports quote him as cleaning off 'about an inch of green algae' which suggests that it had been lying in the water of the loch for some time. It was, moreover, sheer luck that Mr McSorley happened to find it when a Dutch tourist, who knew his fossils, was standing by. It would be possible to buy such fossils - I'd guess a specimen of this kind could sell for a couple of hundred pounds. This would make it a rather expensive, and very shallow, deception.
However, a credible alternative is that the fossil was used as a demo piece for tour groups to show what real plesiosaur bones look like, and was left behind by accident one day. This has actually happened before, in the case of a plesiosaurian limb bone in the 1980s.
It will be interesting to watch the story develop. -
Hey...that sounds familiar ! i was just discussing giant squids with a friend a few days ago ! Same sentences ! Are you psychic ?Originally posted by alexkusu:Perhaps its a claw belonging to a giant squid around 18-20m long. Giant squids do exist. They have been washed up regularly on New Zealand's shorelines. A live squid has never been found, only dead bodies.