dannycheveaux1
Devoted Cultist
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Messages
- 214
I thought that immediately when the photo was first published- quite why it took anyone in I don't know.the Surgeon’s photo odd, not because of the shape of the object but the scale of the waves on the water. It alway looked to me as being about a foot long.
That Tynemouth video was circulated a while back; it's not new. Funny how any alleged water monster seen in or around the UK is assumed to be Nessie on holiday.
The thing waving about in the water looks to me like either a piece of waste plastic trapped or snagged on something, or possibly a length of broad-leafed seaweed, undulating in response to the movement of the waves.
I've seen congers, morays and freshwater eels close up. When they wriggle, they move! That is why they wriggle. Also, all eels are bottom dwellers and it is not part of their behaviour to break the surface for extended periods.
Unless, of course, it's Nessie practising his "moon walk" moves on the spot.
Analogue Boy: I agree about the apparent scale of the Surgeon's Photo, and the waves. Until I knew it was a hoax done with a model, I always assumed it was a bad picture of a grebe (or similar water fowl) surfacing.
However, the person on the camera does exactly the right thing by zooming out and giving reference points to judge distance and also approximate length of the beast.
As Roland points out he is not a biologist with a PhD. Nor is he a biologist of any sort. At our Nessie at 80 conference he stated he did not accept the 10% energy transfer figure in a food chain. By the time he had written it up on his blog he had disproved this figure! I think his figures on eels are sadly misguided. Also for his argument to work then every individual animal as soon as it entered Loch Ness would have to be eaten. Depending on how you play with the figures he is either a factor of ten or one hundred out. Following his logic that would give beasties of 300kg or 30kg. But his whole argument also rests not only on the fact that Nessies eat everything that enters the Loch but that nothing else eats any animal matter in the loch. Literally every other animal he has mentioned is a meat eater. Not quite the devastating blow to Loch Ness deniers that Roland feels it is.One of the prime arguments against the existence of our 'Nessie' up here, is the absence of a sustainable food source.
Taking neither side of the debate, this is a related article I thought worth highlighting:
http://lochnessmystery.blogspot.com/2012/02/is-there-enough-food-for-nessie_12.html?m=1
As Roland points out he is not a biologist with a PhD. Nor is he a biologist of any sort. At our Nessie at 80 conference he stated he did not accept the 10% energy transfer figure in a food chain. By the time he had written it up on his blog he had disproved this figure! I think his figures on eels are sadly misguided. Also for his argument to work then every individual animal as soon as it entered Loch Ness would have to be eaten. Depending on how you play with the figures he is either a factor of ten or one hundred out. Following his logic that would give beasties of 300kg or 30kg. But his whole argument also rests not only on the fact that Nessies eat everything that enters the Loch but that nothing else eats any animal matter in the loch. Literally every other animal he has mentioned is a meat eater. Not quite the devastating blow to Loch Ness deniers that Roland feels it is.
Consider snakes and crocodiles. They have the capacity to eat nothing for extended periods. Furthermore, we don't even know if the creature exclusively lives in the Loch or merely visits occasionally from deeper saltier waters. While I consider much of the LNM evidence questionable, there is nothing to support the notion that the local ecosystem couldn't support a large carnivore.
An avid viewer of a webcam aimed at Loch Ness says that he has successfully spotted the site's resident 'monster' for the second time in less than a month. Eoin O'Faodhagain of Ireland made news last month when he was one of two people to report seeing Nessie over the span of just five days. In his case, the sighting occurred as he was watching Loch Ness webcam back on February 27th and noticed a dark object briefly emerge from the water. Incredibly, just a few weeks later, O'Faodhagain caught sight of the creature once again.
Good fellow Fortean, how can I convince you that, 'Nessie' is impossible!Nessie spotted again on Webcam...
Good fellow Fortean, how can I convince you that, 'Nessie' is impossible!
What a relief, that is...:ness:Just reporting the news my friend, just reporting the news.
Good fellow Fortean, how can I convince you that, 'Nessie' is impossible!
Terrible quality but it does look pretty windy. I think it is just the wind whipping up spray.Nessie spotted again on Webcam:
https://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/webcam-watcher-spots-nessie-again
Very blurry, but my first thought was the wakes of two boats crossing in opposite directions. Where two waves meet, the peaks and troughs are added. If they cross at an angle, the extra peak appears to move.Terrible quality but it does look pretty windy. I think it is just the wind whipping up spray.
The Ruins Boleskine House, lair of the Great Beast and the Great Beast is up for grabs.
"Fixer-upper. Might need some roof repairs"
It may be in an area where you can build a dwelling only if there is one there already.
It’s a grade B listed building as well so once you’ve bought it there are going to be a mess of regulations about what you can and can’t do.I see. Well, that's me out. I'll leave it up to one of you lot to purchase it, just for the sake of it.
Good fellow Fortean, how can I convince you that, 'Nessie' is impossible!