Tuesday, 18 September 2012

Tim Dinsdale, Nessie and the Paranormal


I mentioned in a post from last year that some Nessie hunters thought there was more to the Loch Ness Monster that natural flesh and blood. Indeed, a supernatural or paranormal explanation was courted by some. Ted Holiday and Tony Shiels were two prominent examples but Tim Dinsdale may have been a believer or at worst sympathetic to the argument.

Did Tim Dinsdale hold to the view that the Loch Ness Monster was an animal that would naturally and eventually takes its place in the appropriate taxonomic order of phylum, genus and species, etc or was there more to the classification of this entity?

There is no outright quote by Tim that he held such a "heretical" view but some think it may be inferred. The first source is the late Jon-Erik Beckjord who died in June 2008. Beckjord believed that many of the cryptozoological creatures such as Bigfoot and Nessie were not mere animals but multi-dimensional ghost-like entities. In that light, he claimed that he was close enough to Dinsdale to know that he did hold similar beliefs (though how close to Beckjord's is another matter). In a book review on amazon.com, he made this comment:

He praised Tim Dinsdale, also deceased, not knowing Tim had told me in person, with a witness, that he was a secret paranormalist and kept it quiet just to save his book sales.

Who this other witness was we shall find out, but this went further with another reference to Beckjord concerning Dinsdale and strange events on Loch Ness (quoted from the article "Is The Loch Ness Monster a Shapeshifter" from the July 2010 issue of Paranormal Underground):

Another Nessie hunter that eventually had to amend his view was a researcher named Tim Dinsdale. ... The event that convinced him there was an undeniable supernatural element attached to the monster transpired one night while he was anchored just off of Boleskine House, where Crowley performed the Abramelin rituals 70 years prior. According to Dinsdale "he endured a series of ghosts, ghoulies and demons crawling into his boat and coming at him. They never harmed him physically, but they finally killed off the plesiosaur idea for him."

Unfortunately, Beckjord's reputation amongst some crypto-researchers was not great due to firstly his obviously fringe views but also his somewhat abrasive nature with other researchers. So it is no surprise that plenty would scoff at these two quotes. Of course, being disdained by others does not mean you are a liar. The identity of the other witness was given by Beckjord himself in his now defunct website www.beckjord.com. However, thanks to the Internet archiving program at archive.org we can access various defunct Nessie websites, including Beckjord's. What he said concerning Dinsdale and the paranormal can be found here during a claimed visit to Tim's house in 1983.

Suffice to say, he claimed Dinsdale did not believe in a normal biological Nessie but hid it since publicly holding such a view could prove to be detrimental to his research and reputation. Beckjord  reiterated the ghostly episode near Foyers mentioned above. However, he names the other witness who was his then girlfriend, Kathy Quint, a hospital assistant administrator.

Now I suspect Ms Quint resided in Seattle at that time but tracking down such a person now is a major task in the given time I have. I presume, if alive, she would be aged around 70 years of age. If anyone can discover a lead to find whether this person can confirm this story, let me know. In the meantime, Beckjord's story remains in the "unproven" category.

But did Tim Dinsdale have anything directly to say on the matter which would give Beckjord's claims some credence? This answer is partly "yes". In the 1982 edition of his "Loch Ness Monster" book, he makes this uninhibited comment while discussing the Shiels photograph:

In the field of the paranormal in recent years science has reluctantly been obliged to admit to the reality of phenomena, which occur, and which are physical in the occurring, and which cannot be explained away in terms of the physics we understand ... It is all very embarrassing, and raises the question ‘what is reality?’.

It goes without saying that if one suspects the Loch Ness Monster of being a paranormal phenomenon then one must first accept the premise that such phenomena in general exist. Tim made a further admission to his credence of such things in his "Operations Newsletter" dated 1976:

"I hope to maintain a good humoured working relationship and contact between the key figures in the Ness and Morar search and research projects - and other fields of exploration, such as the Bigfoot, UFOs and Paranormal Phenomemon each of which deserves a focus of attention."

Furthermore, it is recorded that Tim was a member of The Ghost Club which is the oldest organisation associated with psychical research. He was active in recruiting psychic researcher, Bill Bellars, to its membership:

"Tim was a member of our club, and we met up in Scotland. We became firm friends, and it was he who invited me to join the Ghost Club."

However, perhaps the most thorough article Tim wrote on himself, Loch Ness and the paranormal was published in the late 1970s. Here he revealed something about the strange goings on at Loch Ness for the March 1979 issue of the now defunct Alpha magazine. To begin with, Tim makes a curious statement about a dichotomy of phenomena at Loch Ness:

"Firstly, that the Loch Ness monster, whichever way one chooses to regard it, really is a phenomenon. Everything connected with it - be it measured in terms of mythology and legend, zoological possibility, scientific improbability, or human involvement - is phenomenal."

"Secondly - that beyond the phenomenon, in real terms, there exist the phenomena witnessed by researchers at Loch Ness and Loch Morar, and visitors, and local people, which can be both inexplicable, and "etheric" in lack of substance, but real enough in effect."

Are these two phenomena in any way connected in Dinsdale's eyes? On the one hand, he sounds perfectly "zoological" but on the other hand he refuses to draw a strict line of demarcation between the two:

"The difference between the two is simply the difference between the 'normal' and the 'paranormal'  because if the Loch Ness monster exists, for all its extraordinary features, it is as 'normal' a being as is, for example, the mountain gorilla, which for many years before its official discovery was thought to be an imaginary creature. Paranormal happenings, on the other hand, need to be recognised as such, and classified separately - and they may have nothing to do with the monster."

Note he does not say "they have nothing to do with the monster". Tim then delves further into these paranormal happenings at Loch Ness and his own experiences.

"Over the years I have been careful to collect information on these paranormal happenings, and to record my own experiences which have on occasion been peculiar, and sometimes disturbing. As a serious student of this type of phenomena, both as a member of the College of Psychic Studies and the long-established Ghost Club, and having read widely on the subject, I have become convinced of the need to keep one's feet squarely on the ground - as an engineer should - and thus in recording a few of these happenings, the reader may be assured of a balanced approach to the subject, and a degree of objectivity."

When I read those words, I wondered if Tim had collected enough material for another book on Loch Ness, but one of a more nebulous and other worldly nature? And just what were these events described as "disturbing"? Were we approaching Beckjord territory? Without a full disclosure of information we cannot say for sure.

As stated in the quote, we are given a hint of Dinsdale's further involvement with paranormal matters by his membership of another psychical organisation, the College of Psychical Studies which advertises itself thusly:

"Founded in 1884, the College is a beacon of light and learning for those seeking to explore a consciousness beyond matter."
 
Clearly, Tim Dinsdale was a man who had more than a passing interest in the paranormal. Going back to the article, Tim does record one unusual encounter at Loch Ness around 1975.

"Climbing down the steep hillside west of Urquhart Bay at Loch Ness one night about four years ago, I was making my way back to the small research boat, Water Horse, on which I lived. It was swinging at anchor about 30 yards off-shore. There was just enough light to make out the white of the fibreglass hull. Glancing at the hands of my watch I could see they were both exactly at midnight, giving a 'one hand only' impression, which was odd. 

At that precise moment a strange bluish light seemed to emanate from the ground, about 40 yards ahead of me - for a fraction of a second it lit up the field, and the trees below me at the water's edge. Startled, I halted in my tracks - before continuing down the slope into the eerie gloom, determined not to be put off by ghostly fireworks. A second flash then occurred, from beyond the line of trees, just over the water. There was no one there of course; and when climbing into my inflatable dinghy.

I rowed out quickly to Water Horse and scrambled aboard. I could think of no rational explanation for the lights, which unlike summer lightning were blue in colour. Furthermore, they were immediately local - they did not light up the sky, only the field and trees ahead of me. It was a strange experience, and the coincidence of the watch hands directly in line at midnight, equally so."

Interestingly, this reminded me of another bluish object that was seen falling near Loch Ness a year or so ago (story here). Tim further adds an experience from Loch Morar when he heard a blood curdling scream echo across the loch one night as he sought a safe haven during a storm at 3 o'clock in the morning. He further mentions the dowsing abilities of an unnamed lady in 1970 (whom we can identify as Winifred Cary) who apparently dowsed over a map of Loch Ness to pinpoint two monster locations for them. 

Tim goes onto say that they went out to the locations with sonar equipment and registered anomalous hits within 200 yards of her first location and exactly at the second location.

So what are we to make of this matter? Did Tim Dinsdale come round to a paranormal view of Nessie or did he always keep stories of Loch Ness Monsters and Loch Ness Paranormalities apart in a state of continual tension?

I was once told by a fellow cryptozoologist that Tim Dinsdale's mother was a christian seer and one can presume that some of that supernatural influence must have left an impression on her son. Given all this paranormality in Tim's life, it would indeed seem strange that the Loch Ness Monster was a lone zoological island in a paranormal sea. In fact, based on what I have researched, it would be no surprise to me if it was proven conclusively that he did hold to a paranormal Nessie (whatever that may entail).

What seems certain is that Tim Dinsdale did not shut the door on a paranormal Loch Ness Monster and he had tales to tell of Loch Ness which I suspect are now lying in a box or folder somewhere crying out to be told to the world! Sadly, it is probably safe to assume that if such material does exist, it will go the way of other Loch Ness research and never see the light of day again.

POSTSCRIPT:

Tony Healy, who is a paranormal cryptozoologist, met Tim Dinsdale in 1979 and adds this comment:

"While at Ness in 1979 I asked Tim if he thought there was any possibility that the creatures were, as Ted Holiday suggested, paranormal. He said no, but went on to say that he did believe in some paranormal phenomena. One night while moored near Ft Augustus Abbey he'd heard what sounded like a man being flogged, and was sure it was a psychic experience - and that it may have been the sound of someone being tortured there after the '45 rebellion."





Saturday, 15 September 2012

A Couple of Interesting Nessie Documentaries



An old video from perhaps the late 1990s has been posted on LiveLeaks and I am not sure of its title or provenance but it is an enjoyable watch as old footage from years of reports and searches are shown. The documentary is sceptical and ends with the Sturgeon theory, which I guess is a monster of sorts (a subject worthy of  a future post no doubt).

Look out for Lachlan Stuart being interviewed at about 9m40s into the video (picture above). Quite topical considering the current posts on his photo and personalises the story a bit. You will also find the ubiquitous Alex Campbell, Tim Dinsdale and others featuring to varying degrees.



Another YouTube clip I saw is from a series of videos called "Mysterious Planet" whose 21st episode concentrates on the Loch Ness Monster. Now this clip has interest for me personally as they give time to the "eel head" interpretation of the photo that was first publicised on this blog. Based on that, the editor proposes the Giant Salamander theory which seems to have gained some traction recently (I suspect the editor had read this post I previously publicised).



This is not the first video I have seen that publicises the Hugh Gray eel head, so it is nice to see the word getting out on this important piece of Loch Ness Monster evidence.


Wednesday, 12 September 2012

Loch Ness Monster Artists

The Loch Ness Monster has been drawn, painted and modelled in various ways for decades now. Some are not very serious as I  think of the many humorous postcards and models that have been churned out. However, some people with artistic skills have turned their talents to the Loch Ness story and framed their interpretation over a phenomenon that has had many opinions spoken over it.

One such artist is Bradford Johnson who I have communicated with in recent months. He has a long interest in Nessie and her hunters and has produced a portfolio of related paintings over the years. He is currently working on a gallery entitled "Surveillance And Looking For Signs" which focuses on the monster hunters themselves. One example he sent me is of the (in)famous Nessie hunter, Bernard Wetherell, who was implicated in the Surgeon's Photograph hoax.


The paintings are derived from relevant photographs and Bradford is on the lookout for more hunter photographs. If anyone knows a good source for Wetherell pictures, let me know.

You can view his other Loch Ness Monster portfolios below:








Saturday, 8 September 2012

Nessie on Land: The Harvey-MacDonald Case

In the next instalment of the "Nessie on Land" series, I would like to examine a not so well known story.

In the course of emails between like minded Nessie people, I was reminded of this land sighting from 1934 which, like most such cases today, tends to move beneath the radar of modern Internet surfers. My fellow Nessie enthusiast pointed out that the provenance of the original story was the March 3rd 1934 edition of the Glasgow Herald which by a stroke of luck I was able to access and reproduce for your interest below. It is a fascinating story and all the more since the beast was so near to the witnesses. I am trying to think of a sighting that was so close in proximity to the observers but for now such an answer eludes me.


A further bit of research also produced the following clipping from the Northern Chronicle of the 7th March. The details are largely the same though the distance is given as 20 yards instead of 20 feet. Newspaper reporters are not always the best at transmitting such "minor" details (as I have found in recent reports) and somebody got "feet" confused with "yards" or vice versa but it does add the detail that the sighting occurred about 8pm.




Land sightings are important for two reasons. First, the observer is normally closer to the creature than someone who is obliged to watch the animal far out on the loch surface. Secondly, you see a lot more of Nessie since she is out of the water. This apart from revealing more about morphology and behaviour also decreases the chances that the witnesses have misidentified what they are seeing. In the case of Jean MacDonald and Patricia Harvey, they saw just about everything from twenty feet/yards (albeit it was a full moon evening).

The date of the sighting is most likely Tuesday January the 30th 1934 based on full moon data for that time which is about the stated four weeks prior to the article being submitted to the newspaper. Given that a full moon rises in the east like the sun and is south at about midnight then I would speculate that at about their time in the evening it was south east and so it is likely the creature was between them and the full moon. Given that the trees in the picture (more below) look deciduous they would have been devoid of foliage in January hence allowing a good deal more moonlight to shine on the creature and as the account says at twenty feet "they had no difficulty in recognising that it was something out of the ordinary".

Now seventy eight years since the event, we can employ modern tools such as Google StreetView to find  the locality of the sighting. The newspaper account is quite precise in placing the event near where the Inchnacardoch Burn flows under the A82 (The main Glasgow to Inverness road). This places us about the centre of the circle on the satellite map below. At the bottom of the picture you can see the double entrance of the River Oich and the Caledonian Canal into Loch Ness.



It is also stated as happening less than a mile from Fort Augustus and the pictures below are about 0.7 miles from the town. Using StreetView we can zoom into the very location of this most unusual sighting of the monster (click on images for detailed views). As we try to place ourselves in the shoes of those two frightened girls, it is clear that twenty feet is a good estimate for the distance between them and the creature (you can also fit in 20 yards as the creature moved further away).





As it appeared to them near the river and road intersection, it would have been at its closest and I suggest more of its front was visible. As it made rapid progress, it would have presented a side view to the witnesses and as the beast veered away into the trees, the tail section would have been all they saw. In due time, the monster would have been lost to view in the trees but I suspect our frightened witnesses did not wait until it was out of view as they ran back into town! There is no drawing that accompanies this sighting but based on the description, one can come up with something which I use further below.

Now those who are sceptical about this sighting may zoom in one feature to the exclusion of all others - the white underside of the neck. This would suggest an otter. Such is the opinion of sceptic Steuart Campbell who for some reason thinks the description bears a close resemblance to an otter. Maurice Burton is silent on the case but given his predilection for otter explanations, it would not surprise me if he went along with that. Ronald Binns says nothing but Roy Mackal is curious in that instead of accepting this case as positive evidence, he suggests that the witnesses saw a cow or deer. Why he should have thought that I have no idea but the description again bears no resemblance to either animal - even if it wasn't daylight conditions.

Otters have been linked with the Loch Ness Monster since the Spicer sighting of July 1933. When George Spicer wrote into the Inverness Courier with his account (it was only the second sighting that the Courier had published) the editor preceded it with a local expert's opinion that it was merely an otter with her young. Since then the two animals have been inextricably linked in the monster debate.

Some otters do have a patch of white on their necks and for some this is enough to prematurely close the book on this case. Here is one such picture of an otter sporting a somewhat dirty white patch (original link here).


Here is another of an otter cub - I just happened to like this cute picture (original link here).



I was keen in this situation to find a picture of not just any old otter but one that was found near Loch Ness. Some are too indistinct to see the underside but I found this picture of an otter rescued in Inverness (original link here).



This next one was taken up the road from our sighting in Glenmoriston but it is hard to make out any light coloured underside (original link here). Indeed, getting any kind of photograph of an otter at Loch Ness is a bit of an achievement.



However, the main reason for using the Inverness photograph (apart from seeing a white underside) is the posture of the otter. The witnesses stated that:

"The thickest part of the body appeared to be at the shoulder. The body tapered considerably towards the tail."

This description cannot be applied to an otter - white neck or not. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case in that the thickest part of the body is at the rear and so the body rises markedly towards the tail. The contrast could not be clearer.

In case it may be protested that the posture is different when the otter is running, check the YouTube video below. I see no difference between standing and running, it's a completely different posture to the creature described.






Also, as you can see, an otter when it runs keeps its head down for obvious reasons. When our creature is speeding along, it is evident from the description that the neck was raised. I would also suggest from the account that the creature crossed the burn rather than following its course. Otters tend to follow the presence of water unless forced elsewhere by something like danger.

The other important difference is size. This creature is stated as being up to ten feet long and six feet high. Otters are commonly three to four feet long from nose to tail so we go with three and a half feet for an otter and nine feet for the beast seen by the girls. Height wise, one foot is good for an otter compared to the six feet estimated at Loch Ness. Now one may make a case for size being overestimated (or underestimated) at longer distance, but at twenty feet away, errors of observations are at a minimum (at this point, I have to be fair and point out that Maurice Burton did not discount the possibility that giant outsized otters could live at Loch Ness, other sceptics would point out this is replacing one unknown with another unknown). The two relative sizes of the creatures are shown below. I cut the head-neck short on my reconstructed Nessie since the witnesses did not describe this particular feature.



In that light, I could not allow this case to expire merely on the colour of one part of the creature. But now thanks to a combination of a good description of the location, Google StreetView and my attempts at using image editing software, the two respective outlines of the animals can be superimposed on the location to give a sense of what the girls claimed to see against what an otter would look like.




I think it is clear that it would be a bit of a push to mistake an otter for something ten foot by six, especially since the witnesses had multiple frames of reference, such as the adjacent trees and the burn being crossed. Put yourself in their place, could you mistake such a creature for something smaller? I don't think I would either.

Perhaps it was indeed a large animal such as a deer or cow? Again, put yourself in the place of the witnesses and ask whether an animal familiar to these rural people could be so easily mistaken for this larger creature with a dramatically sloping back at such a short distance. Again, common sense suggests this is not likely.

On another point, apart from being the possibly closest sighting of the beast, this sighting may also hold the "record" for the monster being seen furthest from the loch at 350 metres. There is one other sighting which may beat even that, but at such a long distance, what was the creature doing there?

That is a matter of sheer speculation. At ten feet long, it could qualify as a "juvenile" Nessie and as such would have less bulk to impede it going further inland. Perhaps juveniles are also a bit more inquisitive? Who knows, but it would seem that the burn which emptied into Loch Ness held the creature's attention for some reason.

Whatever the reasons may be for the Loch Ness Monster being found so far from it's lair, two girls wandering back home on an evening stumbled into a surreal situation which would forever be etched in their memories.






Wednesday, 5 September 2012

New Theory on the Hugh Gray Photograph

 Giant Salamander (original link)

First of all, let me welcome a new blog to the Nessie blogosphere. The author is Steven Plambeck and it is called "The Loch Ness Giant Salamander". You can click here to visit the blog.

You may guess from the blog title that Steven is following in a tradition that stretches right back to the birth of the Nessie story in 1933. Before long neck stories began to dominate peoples' thinking, some held to the view that Nessie was some form of outsized amphibian and in particular the salamander. I am a bit partial to a fish-like amphibian or amphibian-like fish theory myself, so we are in agreement to some degree there. An amphibian has its issues just like any other Nessie theory but I am sure it can hold its own in the Nessie pantheon.

However, Steven has had a further look at the Hugh Gray photograph in this respect and is of the mind that there is more than just one creature in view. I'll say no more and you check it out yourself with his latest article.






Monday, 3 September 2012

Charles Paxton and Bob Rickard

Charles Paxton gave an enlightening talk on the statistics of Nessie sightings last month and here are some reviews of it. Eyewitness reports of the Loch Ness Monster are the lifeblood and raw data of the phenomenon and any serious study of them is to be welcomed. I hope Charles will publish his final paper on this ongoing work sometime next year.

On a similar theme, I would give a heads up to anyone near Edinburgh next week on the 11th September as the founder of Fortean Times, Bob Rickard addresses the Edinburgh Fortean Society on that magazine's history and the Charles Fort legacy.

I remember as a teenager before FT went mainstream eagerly awaiting the next issue to drop through the letterbox and immerse myself in the weird world of not just cryptozoology but anything you care to label as beyond the fringe of normal human experience. 

There was also the wacky art of Hunt Emerson and I even played my part as I sent the editorial team any Fortean like newspaper clippings I came across. Further details of the talk can be found here.






Sunday, 2 September 2012

The Culture of Nessie




This post is a place holder for articles which address the cultural aspects of the Loch Ness Monster. This blog of course covers the main theme of Nessie herself and those who pursue her but a modern day mythology has wrapped itself around the creature as society in its various aspects expresses their various conceptions of the Loch Ness Monster.

The old Highlanders mapped their bridled demon onto the mysterious object that ploughed its way thru Loch Ness and modern man is no different in how he processes the beast through various cultural filters of the day. You have the Commercial filter where outlets sell postcards (above), fluffy toys, fridge magnets and badges portraying something ranging from a green monster wearing a tartan bunnet to a more standard looking plesiosaur.



You have the Hollywood filter which either portrays Nessie as a gentle giant appealing to family audiences such as in the 2007 "The Water Horse" film or for the less nervous we have the marauding man eater such as in the 2008 film "Loch Ness Terror". All entertaining stuff but not much to do with that thing looking like an upturned boat slowly gliding to a point of submerging.




That is also reflected in the literary world where films often take their ideas. Steve Alten's "The Loch" leads a genre of book which stays with the mysterious beast you need to avoid at all costs ranging to titles where things are just generally a bit mysterious and edgy.




This is most reflected in the Childrens' filter where we see that the Loch Ness Monster seems to have some magical appeal to kids. There are more books written on Nessie for kids than other audiences and I don't see that trend changing anytime soon. This can range from green Nessies which present the Loch Ness story in a kid-like way to general friendly Nessie stories. By the way, if anyone can guess why Nessie is often presented as a green creature in many cultural references despite being generally described as grey or black, I would be interested in your comment. Clearly, grey/black is not a cheery colour or conducive to entertaining, but why green?




Each of these filters or genres presents the Monster in a different way to its intended audience. But like the Kelpie of old, they may bear little resemblance to the underlying reality. Even the more serious books which concentrate on the evidence and seek to avoid "entertaining" are not immune to cultural influences as more popular theories such as the plesiosaur one infiltrate the handling of the evidence. In the end, culture is the sum of all our preferences and prejudices and the Loch Ness Monster is no more immune to that than any other folklore, be it modern or ancient.

Below are links to the various articles I have written relating to the Culture of Nessie.

Nessie and the Silly Season - link

The Loch Ness Eels (fictional book) - link and link

Loch Ness Monster Exhibitions - link

 Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (film) - link

Loch Ness Monster Pictures - link and link and link and link

Nessie Cartoons - link

Nessie Simulacra - link

The Secret of the Loch (1934 film) - link

Who would own Nessie? - link

Tourism Wars at Loch Ness - link

Loch Ness Artists - link

Some Nessie Tidbits - link

Nessie banknotes - link 

Some Nessie Paintings - link

Asterix, Doctor Who and Nessie - link

Some Pathe Newsreels on Nessie - link

Another Loch Ness Painting - link

Two Books and Two Kelpies - link

Christmas and Nessie - link

World War II and Nessie - link

The Commonwealth Games and Nessie - link

The Loch Ness Monster and the BBC - link

Early Artistic Depictions of Nessie - link

Nessie says No! - link

Nessie, Salmond and Bonfires - link

Nessie Cartoons Through the Years - link

The Nessie Effect - link

Nessie in the Kitchen - link

Most Popular Cryptid? - link

The Soviets on Nessie - link

Nessie: Scotland's National Animal? - link

New Loch Ness Tourism Website - link

Was Nessie invented by a publicist? - link and link

An old tale from Loch Ness - link

Nessie named after the Queen? - link

Nessie on the Internet rise - link

The Year of the Monster (artist) - link

Oor Wullie meets Nessie - link