No, it was nothing we hadn't worked out. But the opinion of a qualified zoologist and prominent cryptozoologist is worth mentioning on a thread specifically created to discuss this particular photograph.
I would put money on it being seals. But, I know in Loch Ness there's Ferox trout. Piscivorous brown trout that can get rather large, the current UK rod caught record is something like 31lbs. Though 2 jumping like that close together I would find odd anyway
To get back on track: given that the photographer claims not to have seen the image until he saw the photo...I really don't think that there is any reason to take this seriously.
Nessie is just one of those old toys - along with `Love` - that I've had to put back into the cupboard over the years. I love that area, and the whole romantic ethos which surrounds it, and the characters who've gone in search of Nessie and the books they've written. But...the photgraphic evidence in particular is rather wanting. There's not a single image from the pantheon that is not either: a proven hoax, proba bly a misidentified mundane object or just so ambiguous as to be of no real value as testimony.
It is true that there are a few multiple witness close-up sightings dating from the 60's and 70's that are quite suggestive and harder to dismiss - but such events have declined sharply in recent times. I'm tempted to concur with the veteran Robetr Rhines who contends that the creature has died.
And since there's not a soul with any biological acumen who supports the pleisosuar hypotheisis left, then extinct critter may have been something like - at best- a very large species of eel.
Another possibility is that it is a ghost (whatever `ghosts` are). The whole phenomenon does have a feel of a classic localised `haunting` about it. I believe that even Tim Dinsdale was giving some time to this line of enquiry in his later years. But...it's not what we wanted, is it?
Zeke you seem to be spot right. On the other hand a few credibile witnesses have reported a critter big enough to menace a man. St Patrick for one witness with high qualifications.
Though I realize the photo was retouched; the original flipper photo, while noy as clear as the retouched version, does show an animals flipper of considerable size. Nessie may drive us nuts to the end of time; but you've gotta admit those fleeting photos do give us considerable fodder for discussion. Whatever great beastie is.
Well GNC a group tried a submarine. They were the ones who got the famous "flipper" shot. They cut short their time at the loche because the amount of peat in the water obscured most views. What ever had that flipper crossed within feet of the camera or they would never had gotten that much. May have to drain the bloody loch to see what mysteries it holds.
Peat does not preclude fish. We know there are fish in the Loch and probably eels, and who knows what else. But the peat is a serious threat to photography and other visuals. Besides If you could prove Nessie doesn"t exist; what the heck could be talk about? Sasquatch? Fairies? Golly Gee Whiz we gotta have some mystery to explore.:glee:
"[Nessie] ‚ is not a biological full time zoological animal but rather that it is a paranormal/supernatural/ wormhole-traversing being that will never be caught nor killed. And we have a film that shows it coming from a space-time wormhole, and going later back into it’ “