Supposing that I was a cop, I would probably investigate a UFO claim whether or not I thought a UFO landing was likely. Whether or not an alien spaceship IS involved, someone's freaked out, and maybe they did experience something, though not necessarily aliens.

However, suppose I worked in child services and a man brought his daughter in and claimed she had been assaulted by demons. I would request an investigation of the household to make sure that no abuse was going on.

I say this with all due respect....that's pretty fucked up man. The only thing I remember from my childhood of any fear at night was after watching a werewolf in London (I think I was like 7 or 8 tops) and going to bed, my dog was sleeping underneath my bed and he would lick his lips all night so that freaked me out (kept on thinking I have nothing of silver that I can kill it with I am fucked), but it was only for 2 nights after that eh, never bothered me again. But yeah that's messed up.

That reminds me of a experience I had. When I was a xtian, I read the conversion story of some woman who was supposedly the head of satansim and married to satan. It had some scary stuff in for me at the time,demons and werewolves and stuff.(It was called non-fiction) So later that night I'm asleep when my cat starts nudging my face for some reason. I woke up freaking out,thinking  a demon was attacking me. I started wrestling wih this 'demon' only to find I was almost strangling my cat.

Actually, they got me to explain it to them.

My elementary school had done a presentation on the dangers of meeting strnagers. The most prominent image of what a stranger was a silhouette of a man in a long coat and fedora. Whenever a slide showing what not to let a stranger talk you into doing came up, the stranger's were colored red.

Ah, the things our imaginations will make into monsters.

I've yet to see extremely compelling evidence for much of the field's claims. Note the extreme disparity between the evidence on the site you've linked to and the claim they make. Finding echolocation signals under the water is not the same thing as finding a brand new animal species, or one that's thought to be extinct. A simple application of Occam's Razor immediately removes virtually any reason to believe that a rogue Beluga whale was making the noise (an odd resident for the lake to have, yes - but certainly nothing to offer vindication to those who claim to have seen a dinosaur or sea serpent).

I apologize; I made a typing error. I meant to say,  'A simple application of Occam's Razor immediately removes virtually any reason to not believe that a rogue Beluga whale was making the noise (an odd resident for the lake to have, yes - but certainly nothing to offer vindication to those who claim to have seen a dinosaur or sea serpent).'

As for 'who said anything about a sea serpent or dinosaur' - I think the answer is obvious enough. Most sightnings of Champ (or the Ogopogo, or Nessie) are instances of people claiming to have seen something spectacular (like a plesiosaur or sea serpent). If it weren't the case, 'Champ' would hardly draw all the attention he does.

Yes, cryptozoologist may have a more reasonable stance here. But that does not excuse the advocation / popularization of the mythical perspective simply to keep the public eye attentive.

Now, I did not realize that about echolocation. However, as the article states, "This inland sea was inhabited by many of the animals that inhabit the North Atlantic today, including mollusks, sea urchins, squid, herring, cod, salmon, seals, and belugas. In 1849, while constructing a railroad, workmen uncovered the bones of a beluga whale  in a swampy area in Charlotte, Vermont. The fossil beluga is housed in the Perkins Museum at the University of Vermont. By about 10,000 years ago, the Champlain Valley had risen above sea level. The Valley’s waters drained northward into the St. Lawrence River. This  river flows north of Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes. Over 20 fossils of ancient beluga whales have been found around Lake Champlain This fact is interesting because of what we found in the lake...echolocation, even though there are no beluga present now."

So, what is Occam's Razor going to find more likely? That some small population of Beluga whales are still in the lake, or that some brand new species of sea creature (or a previously-thought-to-be-extinct one) is?

Actually, I think a more fair comparison would be me saying that hearing voices in the bathroom, when nobody I know of is supposed to be in the house, is proof that my house is haunted.

The cryptozoologists here do not stake a reasonable claim based on the evidence:

"This creature is unique, possible severely endangered, and needs to be studied scientifically."

It would much more logical, based on findings and historical precedent, to present the echolocation signals as evidence that Beluga whales are still in the lake. In my opinion, such a statement wasn't sensational enough for the researchers - so they went with the 'unique creature' explanation.

Almost without question, the simplest answer the Good Razor will find is that a population of Belugas are still in the lake.

I have no evidence to believe in the physical descriptions given by some individuals of "champ" in that this creature has a reptilian appearance or anything of the sort.  All we have are vague pictures and personal testimony on that end.  Completely worthless to me.  I refute that information for lack of any real evidence.  This, however, is not the information that makes me unable to refute that something odd is in Lake Champlain.

"This inland sea was".  You DO realize that Lake Champlain is NOT an inland sea today right?  You do understand that the "bones" uncovered were 'fossils'...fossils are not recent remains of creatures, they are the remains of creatures where minerals have replaced the original material of their bodies.  The "inland sea" you quote is from a prehistoric "past" of Lake Champlain's history that hasn't existed for thousands or even millions of years.

[Sarcasm] Yes.  A portion of the Beluga whale, cut off from it's kin in Lake Champlain, have undergone absolutely no evolution for thousands of years and all that the scientists will find in the lake are plain ol', everyday, run-of-the-mill, saltwater existing Beluga whales.  A saltwater creature currently thriving in a freshwater environment.  However they are the exact same species even though the two different populations have not interbred with each other for hundreds of generations.

I can't think of why a single biologist or scientist would even care to read about such an insignificant discovery.  [/sarcasm]

You seem to think that a population of "beluga whales" living independently in an inland freshwater lake is rather...normal or something.  "Beluga" is a name of a species of whale.  But to call this critter a "beluga" is to call you a "neanderthal" as much as we can suspect on the relation based on their location, age of separation, etc. 

Is Champ related to Beluga whales?  I completely agree it most likely has to be.  Is Champ a Beluga whale?  Beluga whales live in the ocean and haven't existed in the Lake Champlain area for thousands of years.  This was back when the area that Lake Champlain exists in was part of an inland saltwater sea.  Plus there is no natural way that Beluga whales can reach Lake Champlain currently.

And that's fair enough.

The article states 10,000 years. I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

I also read 'bones', the first term the article used - and missed that they apparently changed their mind and decided that 'fossils' were the more appropriate term. My mistake.

I also gave you the benefit of the doubt when you stated that 'no known freshwater animal is known to use echolocation', and I suppose I shouldn't have:

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Inia_geoffrensis.html

...and, apparently, the North American bottlenose has also been known to make freshwater bodies a habitat:

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Tursiops_truncatus.html

...Then why all the assertion and suggestion from the Cryptozoologist field that 'Champ' is a plesiosaur? Certainly that (the new species of Beluga) would be an exciting scientific discovery - but not an exciting public discovery, which is - in my opinion - why such an air of mystique is constantly stirred about the 'lake monsters' of the world. When Champ goes from being a mythical dinosaur to a family of exotic Belugas, I think there would be little interest remaining in finding them.

It's also a stretch to argue that an incredible evolutionary leap would've been made after a mere 10,000 years or so. Not insignificant, but I very much doubt particularly exciting. It's ever more of a stretch to say that the population is 'thriving'. If that were the case, one would presume that there would be more sightings.

EDITED TWICE: Once for formatting, once to make a statement clear. The added words are in bold.

I'm envious.

It doesn't matter how many times I have that nightmare - it always scares the living shit out of me.

Good find and good call.  Also I believe there is a critically endangered river dolphin in Vietnam as well now that I think about it.  However, it is pretty easy to see how a species of dolphin entered into the Amazonian River.  This is not the same case with an inbound land-locked lake.

This is not my argument and has nothing to do with what I've been talking about.  Echolocation, freshwater inland lake with no natural way for the creature to get there unlike an amazonian dolphin, is my argument.  However, I have never heard of a professional cryptozoologist mention plesiosaur in regards to Champ.  A lot of people report "lake monsters" as looking more like giant snakes than a plesiosaur.  Don't get hung up on that image and apply it to every odd reporting of a lake monster.

You seem to have heard one description and then say that everyone reports the same description.  Stereotyping has a bad connotation to it for a reason.  Don't stereotype.

During an actively transitional time a species can change quite a bit in 10,000 years.  Recent evidence suggests that not only are humans undergoing an extremely rapid rate of evolutionary change but that our brains have increased in size by 10% in the last 8,000 years.

Evolutionary change rapidly speeds up when your environment changes or you have to adapt to a new food source or some type of competition with another species.  If this lake got cut off from the ocean and trapped saltwater animals within it, that is the perfect criteria that would cause a rapid evolutionary change.

Whether the differences between this lake whale and it's ocean cousins is widely exotically different physically or not what will most definetly be the case is that there will have to have quite a difference in feeding habits, social structure, etc., etc.

And think on this.  North America will have the only "lake whales" on the entire planet.  That's a pretty exciting prospect.

"All I have to say here is that after going and reading up on sleep paralysis,that sucks man.It is interesting though this likely accounts for theists seeing "demons."Glad you aren't deluded though."

This kind of thing accounts for more than demons.  It is also the basis for alien abduction stories.  I is good that you are not deluded.

...What, then, are the connotations of this phrase? Yes, they qualified earlier that they want to dispell notions of a 'monster' or anything supernatural - yet they also clearly lead the reader away from any notion that they out looking for whales, and avoid terms like 'animal', 'mammal' or 'whale' when referring to Champ - instead opting for a more suggestive term like 'creature'.

The 'study' is far more for the sake of theatrics than it is for science.

Nope. I hadn't bothered.

And, would you look at that - it turns out I should've.

Now, to be fair, my original argument was clearly in opposition to lake monster myths and 'sightings', rather than genuine scientific research done by credible organizations.

But, yeah. That was fairly biased of me. And more than a little foolish.

<-- Looks very stupid right at the moment.

I apologize.