Nessie Is Not A Plesiosaur: The Biology Of The Loch Ness Monster

This video was basically adapted from a book called "The Loch" by Steve Alten. You can find more information and links in the description. I read the book years ago and loved it, so check it out!

The original descriptions of Nessies, all the way back to 565 A.D., were of a sea serpent, or a Wyrm, not a Plesiosaur, so describing it, specifically, as a kind of large eel makes quite a bit more sense. In fact, here are some things that I've found that suggest an even earlier time period-
"The earliest written record of the Loch Ness Monster, also known as "Nessie", is from 565 AD when St. Columba is said to have driven a beast back into the water of the river that flows into Loch Ness. Between the 1500s and 1800s, there were 21 recorded sightings of the creature by local people. Some of the earliest evidence of the Loch Ness Monster may be carvings made by ancient inhabitants of the Scottish Highlands around 1,500 years ago."

"However, the Picts weren’t the first people to live around Loch Ness, and if the dinosaur-like creature is as old as has been claimed, earlier inhabitants may have spotted the beast. In the last 10 years, another prehistoric cemetery in Drumnadrochit on the northern shore of Loch Ness has been excavated. Several discoveries on the site, including a beaker pot found in a small stone-lined grave (known as a cist) in late 2017, dated the cemetery to the Bronze Age, about 1,000 years before the Picts were around. But the site was also occupied for a brief stint in the Neolithic period around 3,600-3,500 BC."

Mirrored: 'Nessie is Not a Plesiosaur | The Biology of the Loch Ness Monster', Thought Potato, July 21, 2024 .
https://inv.tux.pizza/watch?v=AHW3QteAkkI

-----------
Posted for educative purposes under THE FAIR USE NOTICE: These Videos may contain copyrighted (© )
material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode​
"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use." Disclaimer: 17 Notwithstanding the Provisions of Sections 17 U.S.C. @ 106 and 17 U.S.C. @ 106A, the Fair Use of a Copyrighted work for Educational purpose