Back in January, I wrote a piece on the famous close up sighting by John MacLean and how new information concluded he was very unlikely to be fooled by what his critics claim was just an otter. That article is here and I always thought it was a bit ridiculous that an experienced observer such as John would mistake a three foot otter for an animal estimated to be twenty foot long.
So it was no surprise that despite writing that piece that one of the regular naysayers popped up on Facebook a week or so ago claiming ... it was just an otter. Perhaps they believe that repeatedly saying these things make them true. One person replied saying he saw some otters at Loch Ness recently and they are easily recognisable. But since sceptics proclaim there is no Loch Ness Monster, no matter what anyone says, it has to be something else.
So it was by a convenient coincidence that three otters were recently spotted in the River Ness which flows north from the loch. If you go to the Press and Journal link, you can see a video of them cavorting or feeding in the river. The river is about two hundred feet wide at this point which puts these otters about the same distance as the creature seen by John MacLean. A snapshot below shows one of them breaching the water.
The similar distance is where the similarities end as the movement of the otters popping in and out of the water rapidly is nothing like John MacLean's 20 footer. Of course, they were recognised as otters and that is no surprise. They look rather small and that is because they are rather small. Yet somehow if they are transported ten miles down to the loch, they magically become monsters. Watch the video and tell me how these can be re-imagined as twenty foot monsters?
So, sceptics, please stop insulting the intelligence of numerous eyewitnesses with your condescending views about their observational skills. Why don't you just say what you want to say and call some of them liars instead of nonsense about otters, seals or deer? We can concur with you if such observations were made at a mile away or for two seconds or in fog or heavy rain. But then again, no one is going to see an otter at a mile away. Sixty feet? That is a different matter.
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com
Can't wait till someone starts the Giant Otter theory now!
ReplyDeleteWell......Can you say 100% that a Giant otter is NOT in the Loch? :D
DeleteIt could be amongst the 25% unknown DNA from the eDNA testing......
:D
Very curious just what could be among that not verified dna!
DeleteIt's been done, 60 years ago by Maurice Burton who conceded that some sightings could have been put down to an outsized otter of the order of six foot or something.
DeleteOf course, we know about the giant otters in the Amazon, but nothing of this sort has been reported.
Just to remind you Latman that no otter DNA was detected in the experiment. Just like giant eels, one is not sure how giant otter DNA would differ from normal otter DNA.
DeleteI was only kidding about the otters, hence the smiley faces :D
DeleteI think any suggestion of giant otters is preposterous, I mean they would need to be massive and obviously would be seen a lot more!
Yup, even if there were oversize otters, you'd see them on the surface or shore frolicking and surely not mistake them for monsters.
DeleteNot only that, but they would be burrowing in the banks of the loch, and having great fun sliding down the slopes into the water. You'd also see a lot of them, because otters are monogamous.
Delete"Perhaps they believe that repeatedly saying these things make them true."
DeleteWhy not? That seems to be a very common belief in politics.
A giant otter ,the dangerous dobhar-chu maby?
ReplyDeleteSaying there's a giant otter is like saying there's a giant snake/eel/duck/snail....take your pick. The sceptics will never accept an unclassified creature. They have insisted(backed by funding of course)that there's nothing to see and therefore if you say there is you are a liar,a simpleton, blind,stupid or drunk .Isn't it interesting that these high and mighty sceptics only open their beak when there's a TV crew nearby and some media outlet who can keep them in the style to which they've become accustomed. Strange how there's not a word from them when Roland unearths a new incident or catalogues years of sightings by lochside residents such as the Carey's. Nothing to say about the 2006 photo by the American tourists and where their flag bearer tried to insult our intelligence again by declaring it was bird shit !! Try challenging me or calling me a liar and you'll be inside a courtroom before you can say Loch Ness.
ReplyDeleteAny reason the sceptics are hiding the 1960s film of a creature entering or exiting the water on a far away beach?
Could it show something strange?? Heaven forbid.
Whilst I do take and agree with your main point, I have to disagree with the point your making regarding the american sighting. I think it was Mr Feltham who said it was bird droppings on the window, he's hardly a sceptic flag bearer.
DeleteBefore a war breaks out, I'm on your side pal.
Funding from who? I assure you that none of the sceptics I know (Adrian, Dick and Tony) are being overpaid by any stretch of the imagination, lol!!
DeleteYes, I doubt anyone is "funded". Adrian earns a shilling or two curating the exhibition and from lectures and TV appearances. I doubt the rest earn enough to purchase a "I Hate Nessie" T-shirt!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHas anyone else here walked around the location near the clansman until all the angles in the photograph taken by the anonymous Americans line up?
DeleteIts very easy to do, and it will give you the exact spot from which the photo was taken. A holiday cottage up on the hillside, a long way from the road where he said he took the picture. His story about taking the picture through the shut car window in a layby is a necessary lie in case anyone spots that the photo is taken through glass. It was taken throw the holiday cottage window, that is the only place that the picture triangulates correctly to.
I have been in the room and identify the causes of the other pool of light visible in the reflection in the photo.
I also now believe I know who the anonymous American was and why he set out to deceive certain investors.
To date I have heard no other plausible explanation from anyone at all, I'm still waiting for that.
Investigating this photo, and proving it to be a hoax to my own satisfaction does not however make me a sceptic, far from it.
DeleteMy full analysis of the anonymous American photo is here...
Deletehttps://www.nessiehunter.co.uk/recent-possible-sighting/
..."loch, ness."
DeleteThe sceptics continually beat the excuse drum to no surprise. It's arrogance to assume that we know all about everything on this planet. It's increasingly clear that there is a weird energy and history with Ness and other lochs. Some years back i watched an otter in Lake Ontario about 30 meters from shore. Its behavior and relative small size were unmistakeable.
ReplyDeleteHi..back after a bout of covid! I watched otters on the Fort augustus cabin Park bout 3 years ago. They wer in and out of the Loch a few times. I watched them from different angles and distances and no way wud u mistake these creatures for a monster lol...in fact the idea is proper laughable!! Cheers . Roy
ReplyDeleteWelcome back Roy...hope you're ok :-)
DeleteThanks Riitta! Yes I'm better now and looking forward to things opening back up again so I can get back up to loch ness lol I've still got my deposit left on cabin Park since last April.. Cheers
DeleteNice to have you back Roy. Hope it wasn't too bad.
DeleteJesusFan are you not a six day creationist like "john". So why are you not on here peddling the not-extinct-plesiosaur?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.answerbag.com/q_view/48599
That's heresy! JesusFan, you got some splaining to do. LOL
DeleteI know that some do hold to that creature as being nessie, but to me seems more reasonable to hold to creatures shown to be actually there in Loch ness, hence some type of seal or else giant Eel!
DeleteMacLean's sighting was clearly a 20 foot long water vole.
ReplyDeleteFinally, some clarity!
DeleteLol!
DeleteLudicrous.
ReplyDeleteThe comments here summarise one of my bugbears with the sceptics too - the view that eyewitnesses, caught up in the aura of Loch Ness, simply mistake mundane objects and animals as monsters. Many of them have life-long experience around the Loch, and its wildlife, and just wouldn't be so easily fooled.
ReplyDeleteExactly. The arch sceptics are quite silent about that and the many other incidents unearthed by Roland and the inescapable conclusion that there's something strange in the loch. The arch sceptics have, on the other hand,added diddly squat to the search for the truth. They'd rather diss witnesses and evidence. What's their agenda I wonder?
DeleteThose who have been lucky enough to catch a glimpse of Nessie are almost branded as being delusional. I’ve made several comments on Facebook (Aslan Red Beard) about how insulting skeptics can be towards eyewitnesses especially if those eyewitnesses are locals who I’m assuming are well educated and experienced enough to know the difference between natural phenomena, animal behaviour and the unknown. We live in Scotland so it’s easy enough to pick a culprit and easier still to confidently identify. We aren’t spoilt by variety. That’s just my way of thinking and I find local eyewitnesses far more credible than those of tourists.
ReplyDeleteAccording to most skeptics YOU or the locals have encountered Seals. Otters. Deer. Birds. Kayaks. Boats. Waves. Windrows....blah blah blah
Well said.
Delete@Roland, I understand how this example of lazy scepticism can make your blood boil, and I concur.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to see what I consider to be one of the worst examples go pick up your paperback copy of Stuart Campbells monumental hatchet job on this subject, the 1991 revised edition of "The Loch Ness Monster the Evidence", page 28 half way down, "otter like reports".
Read that first sighting report, D Mackenzie of Balnain (which is basically Drumnadrochit), he was up on the hillside ABOVE Abriachan collecting Heather for his roof, this was 1871 or 72, he spotted something kicking up a disturbance at torr point, from up there thats the best part of a mile away.
Campbell calls this an "otter type report",
If you had never visited loch ness and were just reading his cut and paste book then you would in all likelihood accept his greater knowledge and presume that Mackenzie must have mistaken an otter for something massive. Remember this was in the 1870s so there was little expectation, unless you were local to the loch.
You and I both know that it would not be possible to even see the water displacement caused by an otter at Torr point when viewed from such a huge distance.
Otter my arse.
Lazy sceptical reporting of remarkable events to fit his negative narrative.
Thats probably the example of otter bullshit that makes my blood boil the most.
... I once got the opportunity to challenge Campbell on that otter classification, naturally I went off on one a little bit at him about his woeful lack of knowledge of the locations involved, I remember I was pretty angry.
ReplyDeleteI believe he removed that account from later editions.
I remember also questioning him closely as to whether or not he had ever actually visited loch ness, he assured me that he had, I see no evidence of that in his book.
@Steve
DeleteCompletely agree with you here on that one Steve!
I’ve emailed Campbell on several occasions with some light advice and evidence that debunked several pictures and eyewitness reports. Does that make me a skeptic? Absolutely NOT! I’m sure that others will agree that it’s important to remove such debunked pictures/reports from his website because they actually do more harm than good so why does Campbell not share that outlook? Surely he’d pay attention to detail? Why keep these ridiculous reports after they’ve been 'solved'? Every time Campbell adds an account so blindly he’s actually reducing all credibility. I know we can’t educate the millions of individuals who have been to the Loch or planning to visit but I’m hoping that they’ve done their own research on sightings before screaming MONSTER MONSTER!
I’ve never met Campbell personally and I’m sure he’s a decent guy but he really needs to edit and update his website.
It is lazy scepticism, Steve. Part of the problem is they won't say "I can't explain this" and so feel they have to come up with something. Better just to ignore a case rather than look foolish.
DeleteI once spent far too much of my time going through the whole of Stuart Campbells book and cross referencing every one of his eyewitness statements back to their source, he basically just cut and pasted whole chunks of text from older books and added his opinion.
DeleteI think a publisher must have given him copies of all the old books and said come up with a negative conclusion by picking what you want from other peoples research. No need to visit the loch or talk to a living soul... anyway thats my gripe over.
I can believe that, Campbell has written a series of anti-something books.
DeleteCheers Steve. For a moment there I was about to reply through Facebook rather than here after having recently spoken about our camping trips and you swimming in Urquhart Bay.
ReplyDeleteI know that many share my frustrations too when it comes to skeptics, we are all entitled to an opinion but when that skeptical opinion becomes desperate that’s when I shutdown the conversation and move on.
The minimum requirement when investigating this mystery is to retain an open mind.
DeleteNot every reported sighting is Nessie, and not every reported sighting is false.
I was with Gary yesterday, he didn't mention this latest webcam 'sighting'.
DeleteI’m going to assume that’s a step in the right direction haha Like I say, I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting Campbell and it’s never been a personal issue only a frustrating one. I do believe he shares a passion for Loch Ness just like everyone else who is deeply invested! Cheers.
DeleteI’m going to assume that’s a step in the right direction haha Like I say, I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting Campbell and it’s never been a personal issue only a frustrating one. I do believe he shares a passion for Loch Ness just like everyone else who is deeply invested!
DeleteAnd....very well put indeed Steve in regards to keeping an open mind. I just wish that skeptics would take a closer look before they brand it nonsense and if or when it’s growing more difficult to explain certain certain accounts then that’s a positive in my eyes.