Karas:
Wrong. The theory about the Loch Ness Monster being a ghost was referenced by me in a previous post. However, if you go back and read it, you'll see the info came from author Jim Marrs, writing about the opinions of the US Government's remote-viewers who came up with the ghost theory. I commented on Marrs' words, whio was commenting on what the remote-viewers said, which is very different to specifically me having "explained Nessie away as the ghost of a plesisaur," as you worded it.
Yep, there's all sorts of reasons why Nessie (or Nessies) may not exist. As I note in this article above, "no poll can accurately offer a definitive explanation for anything." Which is true. And that there are so many theories for the "creature" is indicative of one thing: a lack of any evidence at all provokes a wealth of theories.
It's the same with all lake monsters - absolutely no hard evidence, but a lot of theorizing. I don't know how we could ever say that Champ and Nessie are related. After al, it would require evidence (a body, DNA etc) to comapre the two. But I'm pretty confident that won't happen.






I thought that a few weeks ago you explained Nessie away as the ghost of a plesisaur.
I'm afraid that I am in the camp of people who think Nessie is a hoax and a string of misidentifications by people with big imaginations. Scotland is too well settled an area with populations going back several thousand years for there to be so large an animal living there and there hasn't been conclusive proof of it's existence. If there really were Nessies in the loch, somebody would have caught one or found a dead one hundreds of years ago.
But if they did exist, would they be related to Champ from Lake Champlain or other lake monsters from around the world?