This is a small follow up to an article I did last year on the Loch Ness Investigation Bureau. The article mainly focused on those films taken by the Bureau in the 1960s which have now disappeared from view but are known to be in the hands of private individuals. The general tenor of the article was that we know these films are not game changers, but we would still like to see them.
On the back of that, I found an article by David James (co-founder of the LNIB) from the Straits Times dated 9th June 1964 (which you can find here). The one film I would like to see is the filming of an alleged Nessie on land back in June 1963. It seems this film (at least last year) was not found, but David James acknowledges its existence here and gives us a distance to object metric. What is entailed by the word "wallowed" and whether this action is visible in the film is not know.
On the back of that, I found an article by David James (co-founder of the LNIB) from the Straits Times dated 9th June 1964 (which you can find here). The one film I would like to see is the filming of an alleged Nessie on land back in June 1963. It seems this film (at least last year) was not found, but David James acknowledges its existence here and gives us a distance to object metric. What is entailed by the word "wallowed" and whether this action is visible in the film is not know.
Another film which looks of interest was taken on October 19th 1962 and is described here. It was a multiple witness event of a long, dark shape in the water at 200 yards which was accompanied by some extreme jumping fish behaviour. Again, whether this film exists, is recoverable, is digitiseable and can be put online remains to be seen. You would think that at 200 yards, something of interest would register on film.
The rest of the article takes us back to a time of innovative and sometimes wacky experiments. The searchlights on Loch Ness is a good ploy, but it is not clear whether such a tactic could easily record anything on film. I have learnt that what I see with my eyes on the loch, does not always transmit well onto recording equipment.
It is claimed that some "unusual" objects appeared in the spotlight but quickly disappeared. One wonders what animals would be out on the loch surface in darkness? Within a week, the two spotlights became one, as one was cannibalised to keep the other going!
Moving into 1963, the LNIB manned 10 stations over a two week period which produced two films. They also conducted an interesting experiment to test the theory that the noise of the road blasting of the 1930s stirred up the Loch Ness Monster. To that end, five days of "plaster blasting" ensued as the peace of the loch was disturbed. David James would not commit to the conclusion that this contributed to a post-1930s record of more than 40 sightings. (I myself am more inclined to the view that it was the thousands of tons of rock being dumped into the loch that was more likely to stir the creature.)
All in all, an interesting read from a time of high adventure and monster enthusiasm.
I don't have my copy of Victor Perera's book handy but doesn't he describe visiting the LNIB camp right after that beach film was taken? If memory serves a rather excited Dick Raynor was involved in the story. And that's definitely a film I'd like to see.
ReplyDeleteI would have to check. Dick was not there in 1963 and I think Perera's book was published in the 1970s.
DeleteAlways found it strange how these films went missing!!! Does anyone know of anyone who has seen them and if so wat was their opinion ???
ReplyDeleteTo clarify Jake, I believe all LNIB film is in the possession of The Loch Ness Exhibition Center. Adrian Shine being the curator/caretaker of the center would, I take it, have viewed all said films and Dick Raynor would have been privy to them as well. As to why any film in the possession of the center would be missing, I would not venture to guess and would doubt that there is any conspiracy to withhold any game changing evidence. What would be the purpose? A matter of interpretation? Nothing to show, so why release them to the public domain? After all these men are just as dedicated to solving this mystery as anyone else, in spite of their skepticism. Although, I do find it a bit strange and ironic that of all the films, the June 1963 alleged land sighting would go missing! One thought comes to mind, isn't there anyone other than the aforementioned individuals who have seen the film and can come forward to say what they perceive is on it, or have they all died off? I wonder who the cameraman was and if he is still living? Oh well, add that one and the other mentioned in this article to the alleged MacRae film that has gone down the proverbial black hole. This blogs article from last year pretty much sums up the situation.
Deletehttp://lochnessmystery.blogspot.com/2014/09/those-loch-ness-investigation-bureau.html
Ask Adrian Shine or Dick Raynor. If anyone, they would be them.
ReplyDeleteI'm also interested in the term "wallow". In the US it means rolling around in shallow mud or water. To me, this brings to mind of a possible seal or marine mammal.
ReplyDeleteGB...Would a FOIA request be possible as to the film?
ReplyDeleteMy feeling is that the films are being kept from the public due to secret government pressure on the Loch Ness Exhibition Center. There are all kinds of cover ups going on. The truth is out there in the shape of chemtrails, Sasquatch, UFOs, Ghosts, Nessie. But we are not allowed to see it. Shine will have been visited and told not to share the films.
ReplyDeleteNonsense.
DeleteOh my, this is getting creepy and scary. Make sure your tin foil hat is on nice and snug Anonymous!
DeleteTo be clear, next to no one has seen these films. Roy Mackal (who did) labelled them "inconclusive" at best. It's not even a debunking issue as there is nothing tangible to debate.
DeleteMy interest in them is purely historical as part of the history of the Monster lore.
I would much rather get my hands on the G.E.Taylor film, etc.
In response to anonymous FOIA request of film query. I don't think FOIA in Scotland would have any effect on the Loch Ness Center, if that is what his/her intended target would be, as it is not a governmental or institutional entity, it being a private enterprise. Likewise with “private individuals”
ReplyDeleteGB, I have become confused, did the Loch Ness Center ever have possession of the Oct. 1962 and June 1963 films, then perhaps misplaced/lost, or transferred them to other persons unknown (private individuals), or were they never included in the batch of films turned over to Adrian Shine by David James in the first place?
I suspect films which were not game changers would not have been treated as well ...
DeleteOK, I just found my copy of Victor Perera's book. In it he does bump into Dick Raynor in the LNIB camp. It turns out Raynor wasn't talking about the LNIB beach film, he was relating his own sighting of an object in 1960 that was 17 feet long, five feet wide and out of the water on a beach.
ReplyDeleteMichael, are you sure about that? I've never read anything about Dick Raynor having a sighting in 1960, and, if memory serves, 1967 (the year he took his film) was his first year as an LNI volunteer. Dick, if you're reading this, can you clarify?
ReplyDeletePaddy
I can confirm this from my own copy. In fact, Perrera quotes Dick Raynor as opposed to just talking about this sighting.
DeleteI hope I'm correct, but I think Dick Raynor would have been 10 years old in 1960. I wonder if his mum knew he was at Loch Ness playing hooky.
DeleteI obviously can't confirm that what Perera wrote is accurate, but I'm looking at page 16 of his book and he claims Raynor spoke with him about a beach sighting in 1960 and the film he made in 1967. He also discusses an experience in submarine that took place in 1969.
ReplyDeleteCan't have been much or why would he now be so sceptical?
DeleteMy guess is Perera made an error regarding the date. I can't imagine the conversation he quotes extensively in the book being an error. I once asked Raynor about the beach sighting via a FB message. I can't remember if I was asking him about this sighting in Perera's book or the LNIB film. Anyway, Raynor directed me to a video he made from his boat that showed a beach and said it was a popular spot for fishermen. My thought at the time was any object 17 feet long and 5 feet wide would be kind of hard to mistake for a fisherman. A beached rowboat, perhaps.
ReplyDelete