Will lunch be served?
I’d go in a heartbeat. I bet I could coax that thing out.
I’ll name her Nessie and love and hug her forever.
That “disputed” photo displayed in the article has long been known to be a hoax.
ABC News seems to be joining the ranks of crypto-news organizations.
My understanding is that “scientists” think that IF there is/has been a large creature in Loch Ness it’s an invertabrate.
As one comedian pointed out about close encounters - “after 20 years of everyone carrying a camera/video recorder phone 24-7, it seems the aliens have become more and more camera-shy.” The same could be said of Nessie.
That it is captioned ‘undated’ is especially silly. The only doubt about when it was taken is that, because it was a hoax, the photographer might well have been lying when he gave an exact date for when he took it.
Do you mean for the searchers or for the monster?
(Wow, this is my longest gap between posts in a thread ever.)
Yes.
(Shut up, Discourse. “Yes” is a perfectly good answer)
I visited Loch Ness once and took a picture of my son sitting on a rock on the shore.
When we looked at the photo later, in the background, out of focus, there’s a dark shape that looks like an animal with a long neck. It most resembles something like the textbook picture reconstructions of plesiosaurs.
I’m pretty sure it’s just a fallen tree with a branch sticking up, but it looks like the Loch Ness Monster.
Part of the reason people still keep on believing is they want to, but also because of the size of the loch, there’s no practical way to scan all of it, in great detail, all at once; even the rigorous sonar surveys would probably not detect something that was lying flat on the bottom or hiding underneath some submerged overhang.
Not that I think Nessie is real, but the only way it could absolutely be disproven would be Star Trek level scanning devices, or draining the loch completely and searching it while it was empty, which isn’t ever going to happen.
Oooh have you got the photo still? Can you share it here?
Any creature the size of Nessie would leave evidence of its existence. Keep in mind that we can’t be talking about a single creature here, we’ve got to be talking about a population that manages to reproduce every few years. Something that big has to eat a lot of food and it’s going to take a toll on the ecosystem. The same is true of Bigfoot. An ape larger than a man is going to leave all sorts of evidence. Fur, feces, remains, it’s prey, etc., etc.
I read that first line and thought “Plot twist! Mangetout’s son is the Loch Ness monster!” Way to disappoint…
I’ve pixellated his face for privacy. The ‘Nessie’ shape is top left.
NB This photo is hosted in OneDrive - if you have a Microsoft account, you might see a login screen. If you’re worried about that being a security risk (it isn’t), you could open the link in a private browser tab/window and this should go straight to it.
The other thing to mention is that while we were there, we did see the wave phenomenon that is believed to be responsible for some of the ‘serpent’ sightings - it was the persistent wake of a boat, appearing as a series of ‘humps’ that looked like they were travelling across our field of view, long after the boat had passed by.
True. I mean especially in a lake. the body of a large animal would bloat then wash up somewhere.
That’s a yeti swimming.
Top left? Looks more like the Mary Celeste to me.
Another deeply skeptical view that references the impossibility of a self-sustaining yet undetectable population, and the vast amounts of food the Nessies would need but which the lake cannot supply.
I don’t think this is a pure case of it being logically impossible to prove a negative. You can’t prove goblins don’t exist, but you can prove that visible goblins are not in this room right now; the thing is supposedly tangible; the search scope is finite. It could be done.
In the case of Nessie, the large search scope makes it difficult to do in practice, but there’s no logical impossibility as such. Even if you argue that the subject moves away somewhere when it knows people are looking for it, that only widens the search scope to the upper limit of the planet’s surface; still not logically impossible, just hard.
Homo megapodfastidius
So it seems the photo linked captures one of the baby Nessies…