If you saw this at the water surface but couldn't see the parts under the water, would you not think you had seen a giant snake?
And the statement about Plesiosaur heads made at the top is quite true, I remember writing the same thing in the margins of my copy of In The Wake of the sea-Serpents when I first got it back in the 1970s. Best Wishes , Dale D.
Hi Mr. Drinnon! These comparisons are very interesting, although I must say that I highly doubt the plesiosaur theory. But, if you are wiling, I would love for you to try to convince me! I was wondering if you would be willing to do a quick guest post on my blog, regarding what you think is the best evidence for relic plesiosaurs. I would totally understand if you are not currently up for it. But if you are, please email me at coondog1015@aol.com and we can arrange a guest post at my blog. Once again, feel free to decline if you are not up for it. I simply wanted to just explore the possibility. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThere are several postings in the archives of this blog which deal with the topic. I always wonder that soebody can stop in here and not look at the index for what they want anyway. But at a brief summary, here are my main points about a surviving Plesiosaur hypothesis:
ReplyDelete1) Pinnepeds are NOT an adequate substitute. Pinnepeds do not have more than the standard seven mammalian neck vertebrae. In the case of longnecks we have "X-ray" depictions indicating 25 to 30 neck vertebrae, the same number as the trunk
2) in similar vein, Native depictions of Plesiosaur-shaped creatures such as some "Bunyips" specify such features as the bony structure of the flippers, limb girdles andbelly ribs which match Plesiosaurian anatomy, and inteneded to show living or "Recently-dead" subjects
3) more importantly, the majority of "Dragon" representations around the world specify what is usually called the Euryapsid condition of the skull, which marks Plesiosaurs and their relatives. These are not representations of snake heads because snake skulls do not have anything like this construction
4) PostCretaceous Plesiosaur finds ARE known, in particular from the Southeastern part of the United States. We know the type generally, they are related to and constructed something along the lines of Cryptoclidus (as indicated) The fossils are found in connection with early (archaeocete) and more recent (dolphin) cetaceans. We do not currently have a proper genus name nor family name for thse fossils.
5) the objections about a Plesiosaur's neck not being able to bend its neck that way are derived from the more extreme and specialized Elasmosaurs, and the mechanical reasons for why such creatures would not be able to lift their necks up out of the water have more to do with the extreme length of the neck, muscular strength, gravity and the physics of trying to get such a neck out of the water itself more than the flexibilty actually inherat to the neck. In such an instance, applying the same reasoning to other Plesiosaurs is a false analogy.
6) recent finds have proven Plesiosaurs bore live young, could live in fresh water ands tolerate cold temperatures down to freezing. Some of the most recent Plesiosaur Fossils came from Antarctica, and there was already supposed to be iceaps in that area at the time.
7) "Vertical undulation" in no case refers to an animal's back. it is an illusion caused by waves in the wake.
There is more but that covers the basics.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
Okay thanks! I was originally wondering if you would be willing to do a short guest post on my blog about this, or would you rather me summarize the articles that you have posted here and link them back to you?
DeleteI can, but I won't be able to until Wednesday, I'll be out of the house until then.
DeleteThanks so much Mr. Drinnon, you're the best! And okay, no rush at all though. I actually already have someone sending me something for my blog on Wednesday, so you really don't need to rush at all. Take your time and please don't let it get in the way of other things. I was just hoping you could write about what evidence convinces you of relic plesiosaurs (and maybe include some comparisons). Simply expanding on the summary that you replied with above is good! Thanks, and please email me at coondog1015@aol.com for further info about the guest post. Have a nice day.
DeleteThe 2005 "champ footage" is rather un-plesiosaur like because the "flipper" is more like a webbed foot than the known anatomy of plesiosaur flippers (I also doubt that a plesiosaur could position its flipper so close to the head.)
ReplyDeleteI also think that plesiosaur-like bunyips in the legends of the Australian Aboriginies could be based on fossil evidence; it is known that many tales of mythic beasts come from the ancient people's observations of fossils of mesozoic reptiles and ice age mammals. In addition, the supposed Aboriginal art depicting a plesiosaur is very modern ( the artwork is not made on rock) and it also turns out that the story of the artwork's origin is very tied up with young earth creationists who think that a live plesiosaur would destroy evolutionary theory.
ReplyDeleteWell, no, it is notv a "Known fact" it is a mere presumption. And it does NOT account for similar reports of living animals. And I have shown similar Australian Aboriginal rock art including "Plesiosaurs" that are authentically ancient (Also in New Zealand) So once again your arguments are missing the mark and addressing matters other than the ones being herein presented. You are beginning to make a career of going beside the point.
Delete