Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Why doesn't someone just use sonar or heat-sensing technology to see the "monsters" in Loch Ness and Chamlain?

Question by Victoria: Why doesn't someone just use sonar or heat-sensing technology to see the "monsters" in Loch Ness and Chamlain?
Honestly! I was just watching a show about Champ, the supposed monster in Lake Chamlaine, and about Nessie (in Loch Ness in Scotland) and I was wondering how there's any speculation at all on this topic! Are there any records of scientists using sonar or heat-sensing technology to prove that these monsters do or do not exsist? I mean, wouldn't that be LOGICAL?

Add your own answer in the comments!


  1. It is a tourist gimmick. As long as the possibility exists that there is a monster tourists will come. The area does not want it proved that there is no monster.

  2. It's been tried.Proving these creatures do not exist.Still the legend goes on.

  3. It would destroy the myth and hurt tourism or the "monster" might come up and bite them.

  4. I watched a show, not too long ago, that showed scientists using sonar in Loch Ness. The problem is that the Loch is so big that it would be impossible to have sonar covering the entire volume of the big lake at the same time.

    I'm not sure about the heat-sensing equipment, but it would seem like a good idea to me.

  5. I've heard that the lake is too murky, but not knowing anything about sonar, I wouldn't think that would matter. You'd think with all of the technology out there, that they'd be able to find the thing.

    Maybe not knowing suits the lake's surrounding cities just fine as it must bring in lots of extra cash from tourism.

    Actually, if there was truly a monster there in the first place, it's gotta be dead by now, yeah?

  6. I think they've tried this, and it didn't work too well. These lakes are surprisingly deep and wide, and really really murky. It's like trying to find a snake in a field of grass - it takes a long time to go over every single inch of territory, and the creature can slip around behind, or lay so still you wouldn't even see it if you stepped right over it.

    Besides, "monster" isn't really a fair term, it implies something dangerous and horrible - no one has ever been hurt by these creatures, if they do exist. I think the chase is more fun than the capture, the imagining is more fun than the knowing, but that's just me.

  7. Think 15 foot fresh water moray eel. It is possible, several salt water species have converted to freshwater. It's called evolution. The salmon have evolved enough to begin and end their lives in Fresh water while growing large in salt water. Aren't salmon in some of the lochs? perhaps some Moray eels followed Salmon into the Loch Ness some time in the far past.

  8. Oddly enough, I was watching an X-Files episode about a supposed Loch Ness-type creature and also wondered why the townsfolk didn't bother to link up a net with multiple boats and see if they could snare the creature they never saw but believe existed in the lake.
    Surely if someone is passionate enough about something, they will think of every rational means of trying to prove their belief?

    People are always conerned about the cost of research like that, but given that they can pay $ 30 million in a time span of 20 years alone, and give up without finding something, would it be logical to outfit a full research team no matter the cost to find out once and for all if there is any truth to the stories? It could save billions of dollars for the government years in advance.

  9. whiskeygirljen75July 4, 2012 at 2:41 PM

    My family owns land on the Vermont side of Lake Champlain and we have been going there for years. Tourists always asking where the best spot on the lake is to look for Champ. Whether or not this technology would actually prove existence is beyond me.However, i can say that even if proven non-existant, people will continue to believe its in there. Same for UFO'S.

  10. Too deep and wide for sonar and if these creatures exist they would probably be amphibians...cold blooded, so heat seeking instruments would not work either
    Just remember you can prove something exists but you can't prove it doesn't.

  11. Don't completly dismiss something "unknown" because viable proof has not been found yet. One day you will be eating those same words just as hundreds before you have done. There have been hundreds of animals that we deemed "fake" or mythical because of the lack of actual proof, and for years cryptozoologists took a serious beating for their continuious hunt for the hidden or the unknown animals of this world.

    The Coelacanth, a "living fossil" — a representative of an order of fish believed to have been extinct for 65 million years — was identified from a specimen found in a fishing net in 1938 off the coast of South Africa.

    1976 discovery of the previously unknown megamouth shark, discovered off Oahu, Hawaii, when it became entangled in a ship's demonstrates the resistance of science to identify new large species of marine animals without a corpse.Sightings of Megamouths now number approximately one a year. Before the discovery, one could argue this consistent sighting record was also present, but that the sightings were ignored or discredited as of some other animal

    Also cited is the 2003 discovery of the remains of Homo floresiensis, a descendent of Homo erectus which took the anthropological community completely by surprise. Legends of a strikingly similar creature, called Ebu Gogo by the local people of Flores, persisted until as late as the nineteenth century, but it took until 2003 before the possible fossil remains of this species were found. In addition, human folklore is full of references to small forest people, called dwarves, elves, fairies, gnomes, leprechauns, or

    Cryptozoology supporters have noted that many unfamiliar animals, when first reported, were considered hoaxes, delusions, or misidentifications. The platypus, giant squid, mountain gorilla, grizzly-polar bear hybrid, and Komodo dragon are a few such creatures. Supporters claim that unyielding skepticism may in fact inhibit discovery of unknown animals, and skeptics claim that skepticism prevents an unwarranted potential epidemic of misidentified animal sightings being successfully attributed to cryptids.

    The emblem of the now-defunct International Society of Cryptozoology is the okapi, a forest-dwelling relative of the giraffe that was unknown to Western scientists prior to 1901

    I could go on and on about how easy it is to dismiss something you cannot see with your eyes or hold in your hand, but history has proven that even the largest of creatures can remain hidden for hundreds of years without ever finding a corpse or a live species.

  12. czechoslovakian67July 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM

    loch ness is one of the deepest "lochs" in europe, and there are a lot of things they could mistake for the monster

    plus, it would hurt tourism

  13. logical if the lakes/locks were smooth. lock ness has many underwater cavers and trenches, some of which are un charted.and thoguht to run all the way tot eh sea via subterrainian caverns.