It is time for another audio interview with yours truly. I was invited for a chat by Corbin Maxey recently, who is an animal expert and biologist who will normally be found talking about animals that have been recognised by science.
Since he had already done a podcast on the Bigfoot, it was time for the Loch Ness Monster and that was where I came in. We had a good conversation and some questions old and new were discussed and answered. Whether you agree with the answers is another thing.
The link to the podcast can be found here,
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com
Always love to hear one of your interviews Roland. I agree with you that one could hedge their bets in the existence of the LNM solely on probability based on eyewitnesses of something unusual. As to your own personal beliefs as to what a Nessie could be, I'll go along with the exotic fish-like theory, but a long neck seal? OK, that fits better than an eel or any other theory thus proposed. Anyway good show!
ReplyDeleteLong neck seal was favorite of Peter Costello also!
DeleteThe long necked seal theory would largely be an itinerant theory to account for the low frequency of reports. Unless one could argue for a pinniped which spends a lot of time avoiding the surface ...
DeleteRoland, well-done as always - and thanks as always!
DeleteSteve Bastasch
Thanks, Steve.
DeleteReally interesting interview Mr Watson. I do have a burning follow up question for ya: Are you back home with us in Bonnie Scotland, or still in England? ;-)
ReplyDeleteCame back from England in 1997. :)
DeleteExcellent, good to hear.. :)
DeleteYou've mentioned the "exotic fish" before in passing. Can you explain that a bit more?
ReplyDeleteGiant eel?
DeleteYes Roland, please do explain. You're on the hot seat now. LOL How do you explain the long neck sightings with small head? You've also suggested in the past that the head-neck could be a proboscis. Exotic indeed if it should somehow turn out to be some type of fish species! The "eelists" will suggest that it is an eel, there's your fish. But I would counter that eels don't have necks, just a continuous body.
ReplyDeleteJust now listened to the pod cast very informative!
DeleteYes, the long necked seal is the closest to known species fit approach, the exotic fish is more identikit and makes no claims for what species/family/etc it lies in - it is an off the chart creature and therefore more speculative. The neck in this case is no neck at all and the head is no head either. It is a boneless, muscular appendage. The creature also has hybrid flipper/limbs to allow movement on land and it has primitive air breathing like the lungfish. As I said, a speculative mosaic creature which is led by the accounts rather than find a known species and make the minimal modifications.
DeleteThanks for the clarification. The idea of a LN seal and its itinerant nature makes sense. It seems like it would have been easier to go with a giant salamander rather than strange fish, but I now understand your reasoning behind cobbling it together and hope to see a sketch sometime.
DeleteOK, I get you, I really didn't think you meant a fish fish. Just a hypothetical conglomeration of parts thrown together based on reported characteristics. Truly a monster out of some sci-fi movie then. Your speculation of the head-neck is a bit of a problem, if you are to believe witnesses who distinctly describe an animals head, but we'll leave it at that.
DeleteMan, I hope in time it doesn't turn out to be as mundane as some freakish big long neck seal species. Otherwise all this fascination with a mysterious "Monster" will have been for naught!
DeletePeter Costello is hoping that Nessie is shown to be just that though!
Delete"Your speculation of the head-neck is a bit of a problem, if you are to believe witnesses who distinctly describe an animals head . . ."
DeleteJohn, the same problem exists with the giant salamander's tail being seen as a head/neck (Plambeck), so while some aspects of the theory sound reasonable, there are still problems with it that hold it down.
The problem is no theory explains every feature of a sighting (and that includes sceptical theories). It is assumed this is due to eyewitnesses not recalling details properly (even it was a real monster) or those who misidentify normal objects.
DeleteYeah, and some eyewitnesses don't even describe or recall noticing eyes, but that does not negate the veracity of seeing something animate and unusual. So yes, it's a pesky problem
DeleteFrom all of this, I'd be most likely to believe what was seen by the fisherman some years back (forgot his name) whose story you recounted again recently, someone with credibility, who had a good long gander at the creature just offshore, described it precisely, and drew a sketch. Sticking with one very good sighting at least keeps one from going crazy continually bouncing competing theories off the walls.
DeleteIt is the fakes and misidentifications that obscure the real monster.
DeleteThere is the long-nosed chimaera that has a long neck-like snout, so something like that where it is a movable sensor giving a neck and head appearance...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/nl-garry-goodyear-weird-fish-1.5695082
Sorry Orick, but I don't think that qualifies as a neck! More like a beak, or a snout. Another problem with the "Fish Theory" is the land sightings. No pun intended, but Nessie would be like a fish out of water! Nevermind, pun intended.
DeleteCould be Eel or Amphibian due to that!
DeleteRoland, great to hear you on the podcast. As always you bring a level headed-ness to mystery at Loch Ness. So appreciate this blog and your work.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
DeleteFascinating discussion, (and the audio quality was excellent). Glad you brought up the recent crescent-shaped sonar contact: it points towards the exotic fish hypothesis.
ReplyDeleteIs there actually such a thing as a long necked seal that everyone keeps going on about?
ReplyDeleteThere was that infamous sighting of one centuries ago!
DeleteMoi Riitta, here's a short article which sums up well the speculations about long-necked seals:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328502-300-lost-treasures-the-loch-ness-monster-that-got-away/
That seems to be the only purported physical evidence for a long necked seal.
DeleteAny type of seal is an air breather so would be seen regulary.A long necked seal is 100% a no no for the loch ness monster.
ReplyDeleteThat is why it would have to be classed as itinerant.
DeleteNot if it has evolved/adapted with breathing on top!
DeleteAlso would cover being seen on land!
DeleteActually though would fit, as we have to accept that whatever Nessie is would probably have to be same as all those other lake Monsters being reported!
DeleteIf nessie is travelling back and too then it really could be anything.Im quite sure it would be seen more often if it was an air breather and travelling up and down over the years.
ReplyDeleteThink RT Gould saw seal as a possibly Nessie, as have several others, especially as a long necked version!
DeleteUnless we're discussing misidentification, nothing that is an air breather can be accepted. Obviously it's a free country and we can all batter in with the speculation, but there are a fair few theories that are easily dismissed with analysis of the available evidence. An air breather would have been identified within a couple of days back in the '30s.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent, apparently seals entering the loch are not that easy to spot.
DeleteApparently? Says who?
DeleteThat would mean has to be either eel or some type of Amphibian!
DeleteDick Raynor once mentioned that according to surveys, on average it was expected one seal would enter the Loch every couple years. Some would get shot by locals, but they were generally hard to spot unless you were right down by the water. Those surveys were taken decades ago; I don't know what newer ones show.
DeleteDidn't he think Nessie was a large seal that wandered into the Loch at times?
DeleteI recall Roy Mackal stating somewhere that Nessie breathed through some sort of appendages... bilateral tubes more or less... on top of its head. He claimed he's witnessed such a head just below the surface. All by way towards explaining why an air breather might rarely be seen.
DeleteAnyone corroborate Mackals take on this? Dead certain I haven't imagine it, lol.
Jon
Hi Jon. I'm also aware of such accounts. this might just be anecdotal, but I recall reading somewhere of some fishermen out on a dark night when they heard splashing and a commotion nearby accompanied by some loud huffing and puffing. Some witnesses have also described appendages or "horns" on top of the head. Greta Finlay described two tubes with a blob at the end. Whether these are breathing tubes is all speculation.
DeleteIf you believe the Jonathon Bright photo is a depiction of the creature, that would be an example of horns/tubes/etc.
DeleteSo would be like the holes that whales blow their air in and out of?
DeleteHi John. Ah yes, Greta Finlay's sighting! The fishermen story would be something amazing and scary to have happened. That's kind of the whole fascination with fishing, as well as with lake/sea monsters... at least at the individual level. Its the mystery of 'what could be lying below the surface'. Be it hooking onto an old tire or some monstrosity lurking about, lol.
DeleteSomewhere on some loch ness show or segment on some 'unexplained/mystery' type show is where he must've said this. Idea came to me to look up Mackal on IMDB which lists shows he's been on. Maybe I'll try to find sometime.
I'm vaguely also recalling that he said it was about the size and shape of a basketball just below surface...
All the best
Jon
Yup Ron. That photo is controversial in and of itself with many interpretations depending on who you ask. Some see a head, some a neck, some a hump and all with some suggestion of a frill. it is definitely a strange one.
DeleteSpeaking of Roy Mackal, here he is on To Tell the Truth, 1967. Any Nessie aficionado will recognize him from the start. Starts at the 8 min. mark.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVjessviHQI
Ooh, thanks John...believe Dinsdale was on our Brit version of the same show.
ReplyDelete