Originally posted by the Bear:
well, a basking shark looks like this:

and this:

and a quick google search with "basking shark carcass" gives this site =>
www.angelfire.com/ mi/dinosaurs/zuiyomaru.htmlsince angelfire does not allow hotlinking of pics, i have to use another pic.. this one:
[img]http://www.mysteriousworld.com/Content/Images/Journal/2002/Spring/SeaSerpents/ZuiyoMaruPlesiosaur.jpgp/img]
the "plesiosaur" carcass was actually conclusively tested to be a basking shark... the mouth of the shark decomposes away rather quickly and leaves the top part.. sort of like the plesiosaur neck...
besides, a basking shark is HUGE! it grows up to about 10 metres long.. so it's easy to mistake a decomposed carcass for a plesiosaur

convinced?

I found a real good site.........it disagrees with what u claim
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/38/38_1/Cryptid.htmSummary of New Reasons Against a Basking Shark Identification
1. Unanimous eyewitness testimony for a pair of upper fins and against a dorsal fin.
2. Matching pictorial confirmation for the pair of upper fins.
3. Archaeological and cryptozoological support for these upper fins
4. Pictorial confirmation for nares at front of skull, matching eyewitness testimony.
5. Only 1/7 the radiation in the horny fibers that sharks possess suggesting fewer crosslinks.
6. Cryptid’s trunk is longer than any known large fish species.
A Sauropterygia identification thus remains viable. Finding this cryptid again, whether alive or as a fossil specimen, would confirm or deny that possibility. At present, it is possible that the cryptid may be unknown from the fossil record, in part because the measurements do not match any known fossil, and in part because of the variant shape of the flippers, corroborated by the matching appearance on the Egyptian seal. The Sauropterygia are usually believed by to have become extinct at the close of the supposed Cretaceous geological era, 63 million years ago. Kuban (1997–199

criticized creation scientists for suggesting the cryptid may have been a marine reptile. It now appears he was wrong, and that the creation scientists are vindicated.
Perhaps a marine biologist and/or paleobiologist could investigate the function of the upper fins. Based on their placement, it is possible that the upper fins helped stabilize the creature during propulsion by its flippers. Indeed, the right side upper fin was still articulated at a right angle to the body when the creature was found, which would have been a proper position to accomplish such stabilization for the creature (Obata and Tomoda, 1978, p. 46) [see Figures 2 and 3].
Two decades after the discovery, the Zuiyo Maru creature still fascinates researchers. Perhaps continued study will reveal further information about this cryptid. If any of the horny fibers remain, a DNA profile would be of considerable value. Considering all the available evidence, it seems that pursuing identification of the creature as a marine tetrapod is the wisest course.