How are Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster different from alien abduction stories and Elvis sightings? They’re similar in nature, but there’s just enough likelihood and potentially credible evidence for Bigfoot and Nessie to take them to a different level, one where reasonable people might believe that they’re imaginary, but can’t completely dismiss the possibility that they aren’t.
Mokele-mbembe may be on a third level, one where it’s not only possible but even somewhat likely that it exists.
It’s stuff like this that keeps people like me fascinated by science. Just when we think that we as a race know pretty much everything, something comes along to rock our worldview and show us just how wrong we are.
I think I know where it’s hiding! Probably the same place you can find it is where it lost its vowel….
This reminds me of when scientists found a giant fish they thought was extinct in the depths of the ocean, one they thought had evolved into other creatures…. I won’t belabor the point. 😉
The coelacanth, I remember it. If you’re implying that this offers some sort of evidence against evolution, then you obviously don’t understand the theory: they thought it was extinct because it had only been seen in fossil form. If there’s no evolutionary pressure to change, and plenty of pressure to retain its current form, it could stay the same until the Sun expires. There are several other species that haven’t seemed to change much in millions of years either, from what limited evidence we have; the crocodile is one example.