The Sea Serpent Cryptids Iceberg Explained
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- Welcome everyone to the sea serpent cryptids iceberg explained! Today we'll be discussing various sea serpent cryptids, sightings and more. I hope you enjoy! Also, make sure to like, subscribe and drop a comment on what you thought about the video.
Copyright disclaimer under section 107 of the copyright act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and more. no copyright infringement intended.
My favorite theory about mokele mbembe is that it started as a tale of some people getting killed by something, but then became an exaggeration to wind up European explorers wandering into central Africa, because it was funny
"One Who Eats Rainbows", or something, iirc. The locals lied as a joke claiming it meant, "one who parts rivers"
@@Boco_Corwin "hey, we convinced those guys from Europe that dinosaurs live in the jungle, want to go throw rocks at them while they get lost out there?"
@@al145 You know, ancient legends say giants hide in the woods and throw rocks at foreigners. Prolly should bring the locals more spirits and tobacco.
My favourite one out of all these is Marvin. The photos/ video look very real and I love the idea of a large invertebrate sea serpent hiding in the depths, just seems very plausible.
Yessir, another aquatic cryptid iceberg! 🌊🌊
Always love some cryptid content, glad my fav the mokele m'bembe got mentioned here
Keep up these videos I’ll watch every single one good job dude!!!
I definitely don't think a giant plesiosaur could sustain itself and remain undiscovered after 65 million years, but the amount of various sauropod cryptids is interesting. If they aren't all misidentification, I'm not opposed to the long-necked seal convergent evolution theory.
Keeping the seasonal depression at bay (barely) w vids like this. Thank you good sir much love:)
I’m glad it helps out, stay tuned for more!
i really wish you'd have mentioned the connection between young earth creationists and the mokele mbembe and the fact that it looks like a dinosaur from fantasia and not what we now know dinosaurs to look like. you usually do really well with providing both a believers and a critical viewpoint
This is my first video from you. You have definitely earned my sub!!
Im glad you enjoyed it, welcome to the channel!! Stay tuned for more content!
I love the sea videos! Great job! :)
Loving your channel!! Will you consider doing a Bigfoot/Cannibal Giants vid? 🎉❤
This is awesome for me to listen to all night long
Thanks for the videos! Love the research you put into these, how many of these do you think are whale junk though?
I’m glad you enjoy them! I’m not sure honestly, there’s a plethora of theories of what each one could be
Loved sea serpents as a kid i would watch this video like gospel on repeat back in 2011
Man, I had to go to the public library. Now I feel old 😢
23:03 it's pronounced gloster my friend! Gloucester! Not being an arse about this pal! Just saying mate! Thanks for the great content 👍..love it. Jason in England x 🏴
Yeah so this is just what the fuck I needed right now and I didn’t even know it
I hope you enjoy!
Technically, the longest animal we know of is a species of ribbon worm (at 180'). Its runner-up is a siphonophore (at over 150') discovered in '87. Out of what's still alive I think the Lion's Mane is number three. It really wouldn't shock me if there were smaller undiscovered invertebrates, like our relatively new friend Marvin.
Ogopogo got it's name from a British 1920's song! Hammerson Peter's spoke about this cryptid! Explaining where the monica came from! Even played a short piece of the song "ogopogo" 🎵 tbe loch ness monster is either a huge type of eel, or a huge catfish and maybe even an unknown arthropod but gigantic! Definitely something in those waters! Jason in England x 🏴
Jimmy John’s!
My dream is to hopefully find one of these creatures one day
Some of these pronunciations are wild. I enjoy listening to the content for the mispronunciations but also enjoy the content otherwise. No offense intended. :)
Huh, I haven’t noticed. Might be because it’s not my native language so I realize that words can have multiple different pronounciations.
❤ keep going!
I love how wildly impossible many of the stated sizes are. The Blue Whale is the largest documented animal to EVER exist, it outclasses pre-historic animals in size by a good deal at 90ft long (the largest prehistoric marine animal is a type of icthyosaur estimated around 70ft), and then you have a lot of cryptozoologists claiming there are prehistoric creatures around that are approaching this size, way bigger, or at the very least are almost twice as long as any of their original known relatives. This speaks to one of two truths, either eyewitnesses are lying (very possible) or these people are absolutely horrendous as estimating size (Also very possible)
Well, measuring by length Argentinosaurus is estimated to have been about the same as a blue whale at 30m (with that being at the lower end), but also like... Half the weight, I want to say? Then going solely by living organisms, there's at least four off the top of my head that outclass it in length (Lion's Mane Jellyfish, two separate siphonophores of entirely different families, and the Bootlace Worm). Length isn't really the issue, it's mass that currently gives the Blue Whale the crown for size.
@Recoil1808 First off I said largest not longest, length was only brought up for the prehistoric animals. Going by largest includes length and weight, which excludes the Lion's Mane, the siphonophore also get excluded because of that but also because siphonophore are colonial organisms that act as a larger whole so by technicality can't really be considered one organism but rather a collection of them. And the Argentinosaurus' size is speculation only and therefore is not counted because it's not fully documented, it may very well have bigger or it may be another Dunkel dud that turns out to actually have been half the estimated size.
@@Lockz1111 Okay, but for one I don't know where the "first off" comes from. For two my point stands that the lengths of the sea monsters really wouldn't be impossible in-and-of-itself (implausible yes. ABSOLUTELY implausible. If there was an ocean-going mammal or reptile of those sizes, there's a pretty good chance we'd have known about it due to where the species would most likely frequent, but that's a very different question to impossibility), and for three you specifically measured *by* length in the initial comment (which, in-and-of-itself, is a valid measurement of size in a scientific context. It's not the dominant method for measuring vertebrates, but it still is the dominant method for many invertebrate animals such as worms, arthropods, cnidarians, and siphonophores). I understand if it's a case of not fully enunciating your intended point, but you can't just turn around and say that's not what you said.
Back to the more scientific end of this, siphonophores are so inter-dependent that often times the zooids that comprise them aren't capable of surviving alone (which is usually one of the key distinctions between a colonial organism and a true multicellular organism), and they and similar colonial organisms (not to be confused with bacterial or insect colonies) are already somewhat of a grey area between multicellular organisms and unicellular organisms working together. If you really want an identity crisis, a serious, scientific argument can be made that multicellular organisms like us aren't as unified as we like to think. As for our dino buddy, the estimates I've seen generally put it at about the same length of a Blue Whale. Sure, due to fragmentary remains there's a pretty decent chance that changes (wouldn't be the first time... Or the second, or the third, so on and so forth), but it still well-emphasizes my wider point that length *really* isn't the issue with the reported sea monsters.
@@Cekseiro You are, by and large, arguing a different point then I am making. My initial point is very simple. Largest is by both length and mass, longest is just length, I was pointing out that the largest creature we know of is the Blue Whale (This can easily be shown by just googling "longest animal ever known" and "Largest animal ever known" the answers are different And also just a few seconds of googling will show even if the Argentinosaurus its max estimated weight range is still less than the lowest range for Blue Whales . Also in context it would be sea creatures so again even if Argentinosaurus is as larges as it's estimated to be, it's irrelevant when talking about sea monster sightings and only appears to serve as some random potential "gotcha" moment for you because I did not clarify that when I said "That we know of" meant it only includes concrete classifications. My point then goes on to point out people saying these are "possibly prehistoric" animals when no aquatic prehistoric creature got to the sizes of some of these estimates. My secondary point was that people are bad at estimating sizes, especially in the water, and generally trend to making things larger than they actually were. You come in with "What about a jellyfish" or "What about a colonial organism" neither of which would be mistaken for a marine reptile or prehistoric whale unless the eyewitness was very drunk, or it was very dark.
@@Lockz1111 Okay, I think we've stumbled into a massive misunderstanding in this thread. So as to not be misunderstood, please allow me to clarify a few things (itemized because it's probably a lot easier on the eye than a massive paragraph-post);
1. I was only going by length because it was the criteria set in your own measurements. The original point of my reply was a "yes, and" rather than a counterpoint; I agree with your point, it was an apparently failed attempt to provide additional context rather than an attempt to undermine it.
2. I brought up the Argentinosaurus in the hopes that it would be a good example to help clarify that my point was NOT saying that there were bigger animals than the blue whale, which is also why I emphasized that even with those estimates being close in length it was believed to be significantly smaller by mass. It wasn't a gotcha, and I apologize that it came off as such.
2.5. I'd put betting money that no prehistoric animal we ever discover will dethrone the king. Many have tried, all have failed. Even moreso it's laughable to even consider we'd discover an animal bigger than it alive TODAY, because simply put we'd have already seen signs of its habits in the ecosystem, and I severely doubt any animal big enough to do so would be able to thrive in a location we wouldn't find it. Now there *are* bigger organisms, by literal miles in fact, just not bigger animals.
3. I'm extremely skeptical on the face, additionally, of people who claim this weird obsession that what they saw must be some sort of prehistoric creature. It annoys me to no end the sheer amount of people who claim such-and-such creature is DEFINITELY some plesiosaur that miraculously survived for millions of years without showing literally any sign of it doing so, or to bring it to land for a second to say some other random cryptid is DEFINITELY some still-surviving example of a usually highly-outdated rendition of a dinosaur. I find that in many of these cases, the people the most deadset on it being a prehistoric reptile that survived all this time aren't actually interested in the truth, but tend to have an ulterior motivation for pushing that narrative so hard.
4.Absolutely, people are awful at estimating sizes. Both in general and especially in the water. Just look at how many "erma gerd itz toatally da mega loaden!" videos pop up of whale sharks, basking sharks, and not even especially large great white sharks.
5. My point with bringing the Lion's Mane Jellyfish and Siphonophores up was NOT saying they'd be mistaken for a marine reptile or marine mammal. Again I apologize that it came across as whataboutism, but it (like with the mention of Argentinosaurus) was more about clarification than contrarianism; there's a whole lot of genuinely impressively-large things to have lived, though almost everything close to or over the Blue Whale's length is not just beaten by it in mass, but outright dwarfed.
Hell yeah
14:59 there's no way that's the photo taken right?
No I don't believe it is a real photo! I'm 99.9% sure!!
The McCleary sea serpent was most likely a Mega-Eel.
Wow I never heard of the Gloucester story despite growing up not far from there! (Also it’s pronounced Gloster and Nah-hant - think a Boston accent)
A lot of those serpent sightings in older times where just whale penises.
Its day-duh-luss. Its please-eeyo-sore.
!Day-dah -Lus" proper annunciation . Dagh da lus is toatally wrong Sorry but do research and grt things correct
You pronounced about 1/3 of the names right. Good try