Friday, 19 August 2011

WHAT IS THE LOCH NESS MONSTER?

This is a place holder post for the series of blogs entitled "What is The Loch Ness Monster?" which are listed below with appropriate links to discussion. This post will appear on the right hand side of the blog and I aim to add to it as time goes on until, well until I run out of ideas!

Peruse the various ideas and see which one makes sense to you!

Nessie the Plesiosaur - link

Nessie the Misidentified Log - link and link

Nessie the Paranormal Entity - link

Nessie the Giant Eel - link and link

Nessie the Long Necked Seal - link

Nessie the Elk - link and link

Nessie the Viking Boat - link

Nessie the Extraterrestrial - link

Nessie the Non-existent Monster (The Skeptic View) - link

Nessie and that long neck - link

Nessie the long necked turtle - link

Nessie and tales of mulitple creatures - link

Ted Holiday's Little Monster - link



24 comments:

  1. What about the whole Giant Sturgeon idea? I remember seeing a picture of a gargantuan sturgeon that the caption said had been caught in a tributary of Loch Ness. Have you seen this one? Anyway, they can grow up to 6 feet, over 200 pounds, and the females can live 150 years! I believe there is something BIG in the Loch, but I don't discount the possibility that it could just be some oversized "normal" animal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is nothing wrong with the sturgeon theory as far as it goes. It is a kind of semi-skeptical theory which does acknowledge that people are seeing a large animal in the loch but does not go off to exotic explanations.

    It's main drawback is it does not explain land sightings and though it make a reasonable stab at explaining long necks the sturgeon snout could not perform the bending that witnesses report of the long head-neck configuration.

    But it deserves a blog entry in its own right.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is a plesiosaur.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it is defenetly not another animal.it is real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
  4. The good old plesiosaur theory. I held to this one as a kid. The question really is what would a plesiosaur now look like since the Cretaceous Period? We may not even recognise it!

    ReplyDelete
  5. You know already thru earlier e-mails that I favor a giant eel, Roland. It's time someone baited this creature with salmon oil or other olfactory attractants. No need to hook it, although I think that is possible. Eels are EASY to catch; has anyone tried? Regards to all.

    richard

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dude nessie is a plesiosaur not a dumb eel

      Delete
  6. Trying to hook Nessie goes back a long way. The LNIB I think tried just about everything, but I don't know if they tried deep, deep line fishing. Something new and more rigorous and above all patient would be needed.

    From the Inverness Courier of 30/05/33:

    An attempt to catch the monster was made at Foyers. A sealed barrel to which was attached 60 yards of strong wire with strong hooks baited with dogfish & skate was put out on the loch. The attempt was unsuccessful ...

    ReplyDelete
  7. nessie is defenetly real.i believe that she is real and not a myth or a legend.i always wonder how big she is.my friends at school say that she is about half the size of our cafetieria.

    ReplyDelete
  8. does anybody think they could be seen in america???reply me with your answer!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure, you have Ogopogo in Lake Okanagan, Champ in Lake Champlain, Chessie in Chesapeake Bay and Manipogo in Lake Manitoba.

      Check it out:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_lake_monsters

      Delete
  9. I would suggest that Nessie is a sum of many parts, hence the fact the legend has existed so long. The plesiosaur theory seems ludicrous, I would certainly lean more towards eel and sturgeon. If people believe there is a sturgeon in Loch Ness they will see one, but it's not possible. I've been to the loch and seen people excitedly shouting "monster!" when there has been a shadow or a splash, and that in turn keeps the legend alive but I think talk of a paranormal creature or living dinosaur is damaging.

    ReplyDelete
  10. See here:

    The Loch Ness monster seen on land

    Very interesting land reports.

    http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/10/02/loch-ness-monster-on-land/

    We may not be dealing with a semi-aquatic creature, or perhaps even a full land creature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I've read Darren's article and Fordyce is a future article here. I would disagree that the Spicers saw a heat distorted otter (or deer for that matter).

      Delete
  11. Have you described on your site somewhere Neil Clark’s elephant theory of nessie?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, but I think you've given me another article title!

      Delete
  12. I just found out that the elephant theory of neil clark is not new, this news article talks about the theory by two other scientists over 30 years ago!

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1454&dat=19790806&id=r8csAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OhMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3728,1381070

    ReplyDelete
  13. Also a rare clipping in a Glasgow newspaper from 1934 concludes that nessie is a dolphin!

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19340426&id=v8pAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tqUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5715,4000064

    ReplyDelete
  14. maybe nessie IS a dolphin or maybe a undiscovered type of elephant

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmm, an aquatic pachyderm? Just like mermaids are being talked about as aquatic apes?

      Delete
  15. After thinking a great deal about this, the closest creature I can come up with is something along the lines of caecilian amphibians.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqh5rM7cI2I

    What do you think this is? Great blog bye the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good one, isn't it? So the sceptics move from "Too blobby to be conclusive" to "Too good to be true". But first you need to eliminate known animals from the equation ....

      This footage shows the problems with producing "convincing" footage. A panoply of explanations such as a frogman on a submersible towing a hump will be touted.

      And, yes, that is plausible, but is it probable? The advent of CGI, animatronics is now the last refuge of the sceptic.

      Delete