Cryptozoology forums > Cryptids > Sea and Lake Monsters > view thread

Subject: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 10:53am  An incident was mentioned on Arthur C. Clarke's "Mysterious Universe" that has always interested me, although I've never seen it discussed anywhere else. According to the program in 1942 the body of a long-necked creature with large teeth came ashore at Gourock on the River Clyde in Scotland. The narrator tells us that being wartime the Navy allowed no photographs. The body was eventually cut up and hauled off to the local landfill for disposal under the direction of Mr. Charles Rankin, the "borough surveyor". This landfill is now buried beneath the playing fields of St. Minion's Roman Catholic Primary School. In the interview with Mr. Rankin that follows, he describes the creature as 28 feet long and 5 to 6 feet in width. He says the body was comprised of a long tapering neck, a thicker middle portion, and a long tapering tail. The top and bottom jaws of the animal's head had sharp teeth that were approximately 1" long. As he describes the creature's physical characteristics, he points to a sketch that he presumably made at the time. The drawing is done in pencil on half a piece of yellowed paper and looks like a field sketch. It shows a plesiosaur-like animal with four fins. The end of the tail ends in a sort of squared-off shape that resembles a mace. Mr. Rankin directly addresses the rotting basking shark theory as a candidate for the Gourock creature. He says that there is no way it could have been a rotting basking shark as this creature was completely whole and showed no signs whatsoever of decomposition. Rankin also talks about the contents of the creature's stomach, indicating that some sort of internal examination was performed. He says it contained several pieces of a netted material. About ten years ago, I fired off a letter to everyone in the Gourock phone directory named Rankin. There was no Charles Rankin listed, but there were three other Rankins. I received a response from one with no relation to Charles Rankin. She was interested in the story, however, and was kind enough to place an ad in the Gourock paper soliciting information. We received no responses. Has anyone heard anything more about the Gourock carcass? Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Megaraptor posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 11:04am  I think it was proven to be a basking shark. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: busterggi posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 11:13am  Nope, never proven because the authorities buried the carcass rather than allow any examination. Why? WHo knows. There have been plenty of basking sharks 'pretending' to be sea serpents so it wouldn't have been any big deal. Censorship during the war years was a little bizarre. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 11:18am  Proven by whom and how? That would make Charles Rankin either a liar or a total nutcase and he struck me as being neither. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: AvandisFifth187 posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 11:41am  Why doesn't somebody trie and dig it up? If it was only 1942, then there should still be some bones, right? Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: PhoenixFire posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 6:22pm  Depends, if they know where its buried and if someone would be willing to try anyways if they didn't. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Comrade posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 11:50am  Do basking sharks swim in rivers? Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: BadMulder posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 12:16pm  Heh...good point there, Comrade. So much for the "basking shark" theory... Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Aziraphale posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 1:28pm  Not so fast there. Gourock is on the Firth of Clyde, which is an arm of the sea, at least a mile wide at that point. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: enigma posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 1:51pm  how hard would it be to dig it up? it would be so easy. if i lived nearby i would grab a shovel and start myself. how rediculous is it that for 60 years it has been there and no one's tried top find it Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: levthan posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 3:44pm  makes u wonder...if everyone was so sure it was a shark, why bury it? I mean, (this is just me talking), the only reason I see to hide it if it wasn't really a shark. Mmmmm.... Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Kaze posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 3:47pm  lol, good point. Kinda makes you think of Roswell (0_o), except without all of the publicity. Or maybe I'm just babbling. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: PhoenixFire posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 7:31am  Reminds me more of Area 51, a guy who works there nearly got shot for divulging what happened there. Did you do the animation in your profile? Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: ElmerFudd posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 4:18pm  Cartilage if its a shark......be long gone.... Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Furball posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 5:22pm  that being the case, if they can get the rights to dig and find bones, they can eliminate the shark theory right off the bat. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: EmpireStateBloke posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 5:35pm  You can't dig football pitches up, its the law. -that's soccer for those in the colonies. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Ego posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 6:19pm  This sounds very familiar to me, need to check it out..Dick raynor would possibly know more, if he's about. E Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Thu, Mar 17 2005, 7:20pm  I'd be anxious to hear what others have heard about it. Again, in the interview Mr. Rankin was emphatic that the creature was not a rotting basking shark as it was whole and showed no signs of decomposition. It also interested me that time was apparently taken to open the animal's stomach, which contained pieces of netting. No mention of the reddish plantonic slime that I thought was usually what one would expect to find in a basking shark's tummy. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Dick Raynor posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 8:52am  I'm afraid he doesn't. The Firth of Clyde has produced a few SS reports over the years, and I don't have any useful ideas as to what is behind them beyond the usual suspects. That part of the ocean does have a seasonal population of Basking Sharks - Gavin Maxwell tried killing them for profit (Harpoon at a Venture). It's fine for people to be emphatic (in this case about it not being a Basking Shark) but when people are emphatic at me I listen politely and write "sincerely convinced" in my mental margin. Cheers. Dick. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 11:50am  Rankin seemed to be quite impressed with the 1" long sharp teeth that he saw lining the animal's upper and lower jaws. Does a basking shark, rotting or otherwise, have anything in its mouth that could be confused with teeth? Also, as I mentioned earlier the drawing that he had made of the animal looked to me like something he did on the scene. If you get a chance to look at the program I think you'll see what I mean. It was half a sheet of three-hole-punched paper with notes scribbled on the back. Of course it could have been prepared long after the fact, but it was interesting. I'm just curious as to why I've never seen the event mentioned anywhere else. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 12:22pm  It occurred to me that I asked my question about the teeth incorrectly. If a rotting basking shark is misidentified as a long-necked sea monster, then it's the shark's snout that would be mistaken for a small head at the end of a long neck. Is there anything going on in the snout that could be mistaken for inch long pointed teeth? Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Ego posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 3:14pm  I wouldnt have thought that there was much if your referring to a proper examination by someone who knows something about anatomy. The basking shark mis-id tends to take the form of a slimy decaying lump which can take on basic SS form but wouldnt realy stand up to closer examination, B&W photos of hung carcases - maybe but otherwise maybe this is something very different. E Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Fri, Mar 18 2005, 8:18pm  I'm inclined to agree with you that this is something different, which is why I'm surprised not to have seen the incident mentioned elsewhere. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: YarriWarrior posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 1:54am  I recreated the drawing Mr Rankin produced of the creature that was chopped, burned, and buried at the soccer field at St. Minion's primary school. He seems honest-and clearly stated that the animal was without a mark on it-and had teeth in both jaws-I'm sure he meant upper and lower. It doesn't matter if the animal was cartilaginous or not- there would be no intact remains left to find-perhaps fragmentary at best. Bones break down fast when buried-I have personally found this out when trying to clean skulls by putting them in the earth. I wound up with a pile of goo and mush that stunk to hell on more than one occasion. Way too wet. Anyway-The replica of Mr. Rankin's drawing is very close to his-with the exception of a little artistic licence on the shading. The most interesting thing on it is the club-like tail! I emailed St. Minion about a year and a half ago-but they never replied. I don't think they took me seriously. Here is a important fact about Rankin's find that has been overlooked-It looks exactly like the creature seen on the shore of lake Khaiyr by Russian scientists in 64'! I will post the drawing in the gallery. YarriWarrior Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Nyarlethotep posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 8:56am  Well done! I look forward to seeing it. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Aziraphale posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 10:23am  There is a long report in the book, "Sea Serpents and Lake Monsters of the British Isles", and a summary here by Karl Shuker. Apparently it had no bones except the spinal column, which makes it sound more like a shark than any other credible candidate. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Dick Raynor posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 12:59pm  I find it interesting how different reports have different things in common, and how words can conjure up different images in different people. When I read the opening post in the thread, something along the lines of the McRae / Dallas beast came to mind. Whatever that was. Cheers Dick Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Aziraphale posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 2:02pm  The Dallas sketch is fascinating. It doesn't look like a mammal to me. It looks somehow slimy and repulsive, as lake monsters are often said to be. If I had to classify it I would say it was an amphibian. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: Kaze posted Sat, Mar 19 2005, 5:15pm  Hmmm... It doesn't look like the traditional image of a lake creature to me. Alot of extra skin. I've never heard of, for instance, Nessie or Champ described/drawn like that. Subject: Re: Gourock Carcass From: hroth posted Sun, Mar 20 2005, 11:00am  An amphibian with mammaries and hair? What's the longest-necked amphibian you can think of? And the largest I know of isn't even 6 feet long.

Close Window