Loch Ness Silliness.

[bindeweede]

In short, the story of the Loch Ness monster is completely impossible scientifically, and has been debunked by nearly every line of evidence available. Its only support comes from vague “eyewitness reports,” which are the worst possible evidence in a scientific investigation, since human eyes and brains are easily fooled. Plesiosaurs were fascinating creatures. It would be terrifying if they still roamed the earth, but despite Loch Ness legends, they are truly extinct.

This struck me as well-written and well-researched. But not so good for Loch Ness tourism.

http://www.skeptic.com/insight/loch-nes ... more-29289

[Darklord]

The Loch Ness Monster is a great mystery, and captures the imagination of many people. Mainly because they want it to be true. And of course as mentioned, it's great for tourism. But looking at it logically, as far as I'm aware dinosaurs were cold blooded and needed warmth in which to survive, (and of course Earth was much warmer during their reign) either warm water or warm sunshine that they could bask in.
That being the case, it throws into doubt any claims that there could be a dinosaur surviving in Scotland. Which is mainly cold and wet. If there was an Amazon monster? Then that would be a more logical claim.

Before someone mentions that the warmth from the amazon gulf stream warms Scotland. I'm aware of that, but it warms the west coast whereas Loch Ness connects to the sea on the East coast where the water temperature is much cooler.

Sorry Nessie