# Loch Ness Monster Of England, 'Bownessie,' Allegedly Photographed In Lake Windermere



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

*Loch Ness Monster Of England, 'Bownessie,' Allegedly Photographed In Lake Windermere (VIDEO) *


----------



## Salazare Slytherin (Oct 21, 2009)

I dont know I am not sure I beleive but some of the pics are convincing.
I suppose it is reasonible to assume that reptiles (dinosaurs could survive) like the crocodiles and komodo dragons for e.g.


----------



## Ophexis (Feb 19, 2010)

I am a skeptic.


----------



## herper147 (Feb 7, 2009)

why is it that all the people that capture this stuff have crappy cameras that blur the image 

this is why im agaisnt this sort of stuff 
but you nver know i guess


----------



## blood and guts (May 30, 2007)

herper147 said:


> why is it that all the people that capture this stuff have crappy cameras that blur the image
> 
> this is why im agaisnt this sort of stuff
> but you nver know i guess


Yep always a grainy or blurred picture when its some thing weird or wonderful! that in its welf says fake!

Yes theres more out there to find but this and many other cases simply can not be beleaved. Reminds me of the croc story that turned out to be a tree..


----------



## Salazare Slytherin (Oct 21, 2009)

blood and guts said:


> Yep always a grainy or blurred picture when its some thing weird or wonderful! that in its welf says fake!
> 
> Yes theres more out there to find but this and many other cases simply can not be beleaved. Reminds me of the *croc story that turned out to be a tree*..


:lol2: yeah I remember that one too eeee god.


----------



## SilverSteno (Feb 12, 2006)

Looks like the hungry caterpillar has supersized!


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

Whats up with the tool in the red robe... LOL


----------



## roddy mac (Dec 10, 2009)

Gregg M said:


> Whats up with the tool in the red robe... LOL


 
thats santa he'll not be seen till 25th dec :whistling2:

:lol2::lol2::lol2:


----------



## timc20xe (Feb 11, 2011)

herper147 said:


> why is it that all the people that capture this stuff have crappy cameras that blur the image
> 
> this is why im agaisnt this sort of stuff
> but you nver know i guess


 

how many people carry round a realy good camera with them all the time just because they might see a monster ? none , the pictures are just about always taken by phone because thats what everybody has with them , i dont think its some kind of monster atall , its most likley a tree or sumit

atb tim


----------



## mdtv (Sep 4, 2009)

i know alot of people seem to complain that most these type of photos are grainy and blurred but to be honest most of them will be taken on a phone camera from a distance 

have you ever zoomed in on something distant with a phone? horrible horrible quality 

and its really unlikely that someone would decide to take out their high quality camera and zoomlens on the off chance their gonna see a monster 

basically dont be so quick to say no if a photo is proven geniune and untampered with then there ya go musta been something there what it was who knows haha


----------



## Ophexis (Feb 19, 2010)

You know the most famous photograph of the Loch Ness Monster (The Surgeon's Photograph) was proven to be a hoax, right? :whistling2:


----------



## mdtv (Sep 4, 2009)

and that shows all cryptological findings are fakes?

dont be stupid 

did you know the oakapii was once a mythical creature that people only had grainy photos of as was the silverback gorilla

until finally one day the found one properly its only a matter a time before some more bigger unknown animals are found and large lakes n seas are good places to look


----------



## Ophexis (Feb 19, 2010)

Ha, that's funny, you think I don't know this. I've looked into cryptozoology, thank you.

There has been absolutely no conclusive evidence that this creature exists. It may have done at some point, but that would take much more research, bar draining the loch... but there's no way that the animal is still alive - if of course it even existed.

Conclusive proof, then maybe I'll come back into the realm of cautious optimism. But since there is currently none, I remain a skeptic. In some ways I hope I'm wrong but I am a firm believer in science and evidence - not pseudoscience and alleged sightings.


----------

