|
|
|
|
Title: New Zealand Plesiosaur.Japanese discovery.1977.Follow the LINKS of experts.Two inedit PDF Files.
Added: Apr 23, 2011
Author: zoilo72
Duration: 3:47
Description:
PDF.Plesiosaur Theory.The latest report.http://www.mediafire.com/?384eelq1yxd7aoePDF.Basking Shark Theory.http://www.mediafire.com/?sjjhyfmqyfqk6vcLinks.http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/plesios.htmlhttp://www.newanimal.org/plesiosaurs.htmhttp://paleo.cc/paluxy/plesios.htmhttp://www.answersingenesis.org/images/BaskingFig2.jpghttp://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/47c7322b175d.jpghttp://www.discoverynews.us/DISCOVERY%20MUSEUM/CreaturesFromTheDeep/CreaturesIMAGES/Creature-From-The-Deep.pnghttp://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/CMI_shark_grigg.htmhttp://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/zuiyomaru.htmlhttp://creation.com/letting-rotting-sharks-liehttp://www.mbowden.surf3.net/plsfin13.htmA FINAL THOUGHTWe would raise one aspect that appears to have escaped all previous writers on this subject. Recently dead fish or mammals often float and during that time they may be scavenged. All reported sightings of the decaying carcasses of basking sharks are on beaches and have obviously been floating on the surface and been washed there by the waves.The carcass, however, was found 30 miles off the coast of New Zealand opposite Christchurch and was trawled off the bottom at a depth of 900ft [10]. It also had no signs of having been scavenged. Had it been a basking shark whose remains had decomposed, it should have been much more decayed than that of the carcass that was recovered. We have yet another difference between this carcass and those of the many basking sharks that have been found.No doubt this will again be "explained away" by proposing that the carcass might have eventually risen to the surface at a later stage, but then why have not more of these carcasses with large flippers been found. I suggest that it is its density that takes such mammalian creatures quickly to the bottom and therefore far less likely to be discovered.Sightings of plesiosaur-like creatures are more frequent than most people realise. There have been several reports of such creatures being sighted off the coasts of New Zealand and Australia, and one article [3] gives the Australian aboriginal drawing of a monster with a long neck and large flippers very similar in proportions to those of a plesiosaur. http://www.gennet.org/facts/nessie.htmlAFTER HAVING READ THE ARTICLES,I AM TOTALLY SURE THAT NOT EVEN THE BEST EXPERTS ON MARINE BIOLOGY CAN CERTAINLY CONFIRM THAT THIS IS A BASKING SHARK.Interesting link.http://itinerantlurker.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/plesiosaur-in-the-pacific-basking-shark/M u s i c .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HavVfiDfUwhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmadUj5hPuA
Related Videos:
Videos related to 'New Zealand Plesiosaur.Japanese discovery.1977.Follow the LINKS of experts.Two inedit PDF Files.'
Channel: Tech
Tags: plesiosaur new zealand basking shark cryptozoology monster loch ness
plesiosaur new zealand basking shark cryptozoology monster loch ness
Youtube Comments: 1012
khamjaninja Says:
May 27, 2012 - Okay, Sharks ar ofe Chrondrichthyes - cartilaginous fish. Whether or not the cartilaginous skeleton can be considered "bone", regardless, the decayed remains of a basking shark have an obvious skeletal structure, so that doesn't eliminate it as the Zuiyo-maru carcass on that basis alone.And Chrondichthyes is still classified as fish - the swim bladder is not universal among all fish. Other cartilaginous fish (rays, skates, chimaeras) and lobe-finned fish don't have one, either.
allen19711 Says:
May 27, 2012 - i can believe `that...very good.
Miyuke1234 Says:
May 27, 2012 - :O Now I'm afraid to swim in the sea..
FkNiGhThAwK Says:
May 27, 2012 - It's a ''WHALE SHARK'' fools!!!!!
RandProductions45 Says:
May 27, 2012 - Fuck you
goatmeat42 Says:
May 28, 2012 - This is a baskin or mega mouth shark.Look it up !
Yoshioriginal Says:
May 28, 2012 - I wonder how long it took you to look all of that up..anyway they USED to be considered fish. NOW they are not. Just like birds are birds sharks are sharks. End of story. Besides 99% of the ocean is unexplored so how do you know for sure that it wasn't an acient creature? Look at frogs and crocodiles. They survived so why couldn't the plesiosaur? Basking sharks are usually too deep underwater for a fisherman to hook one. Even when you look at the body it looks too skinny to be a basking shark.
khamjaninja Says:
May 28, 2012 - I did have to look up the spelling of Chrondrichyes :D. Not an expert, though - I thought cartilage skeletons were still considered bone.Though I doubt your point that sharks aren't seen as fish. No zoologist has ever made that assertion.And while the deep ocean is unexplored, plesiosaurs were shallow water reptiles who breathed air - meaning they regularly came up for oxygen, like whales. Such a large creature so close to land should already be known to science.
seanB345 Says:
May 29, 2012 - so wait is it logical to you to tell yourself that based upon what you see its not a basking shark and that basking sharks are usually to deep for a fisherman to hook one there for it MUST be a relic Dinosaur that survived a mass extinction millions of years ago....
sweetbilly Says:
May 29, 2012 - I respectfully disagree that it's a basking shark, but you are entitled to your opinion. Seeing as how one has never been properly Identified after being found before being left to rot on some beach somewhere it can never be proven whether it's a Plesiosaur or not.
sweetbilly Says:
May 29, 2012 - However, amuse me for a moment, I would like to ask a completely different question that I think speaks volumes: If no one has ever seen a Plesiosaur , and no dinosaur was discovered before the early 1800's, how do cultures not even familiar with each other existence, say the Japanese and Native Americans manage to draw a creature they've never seen hundreds even thousands of years ago physiologically correct???
sweetbilly Says:
May 29, 2012 - Bingo! Give that man a cigar!!
sweetbilly Says:
May 29, 2012 - You're also missing the obvious give away in this picture, this shark has bones with ligaments and a bony backbone ...sharks are ALL cartilage.
bamb0t Says:
May 29, 2012 - big fish decomposition jurk... stupidity doesn't have limits on this planet hhhhhhhhhhhhh
zoilo72 Says:
May 29, 2012 - Yes,many have been identified as basking sharks.The fact is that in 1977 little was known about basking sharks,that´s why the first conference said whale (pilot,maybe).Look fo basking shark carcass on google and you will find cases.But the mystery is one,we don´t have the final remains of a basking shark,even a picture,because every time one appears dead or rotten ´someone´takes it away.It happens all over the world.The same happens to weired sea creatures.
steava Says:
May 29, 2012 - no voting? fu!
andres rojas Says:
May 29, 2012 - eso no es un plesiosaurus...xD
Nystagmus2011 Says:
May 29, 2012 - looks more like a rotten shark...
somewhatsam Says:
May 29, 2012 - its real just really dead and filled with air so it floats most likely the stomach cavity
minecraft19wins Says:
May 29, 2012 - but basking sharks live up north and in the antlantic
saxocopter Says:
May 29, 2012 - No, they're actually found worldwide in temperate waters. In the Northern Pacific they occur in the North from Japan east to Mexico, and in the South Pacific they range from the Australia east to New Zealand. So they DO occur in the waters where this carcass was found. My money's on it being a basking shark carcass.
minecraft19wins Says:
May 29, 2012 - in that case i agree with you
lllxjayzxlll Says:
May 29, 2012 - its always the japenese that find the crazy shit!!!
luis heel Says:
May 27, 2012 - boah is das ne muschi