• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Three Scottish Loch Monsters Caught On Video Simultaneously

David Tame

Fresh Blood
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
24
Location
Coventry, UK
Yes, this happened and I not only saw but had a copy of the clear video. But there are frustrating aspects to this tale, though it often comes to my mind. A friend I've known since the 1970s, more of a friend of a friend, whom I'll just call Ed for reasons which'll become apparent had this experience and gave me a copy on DVD. As character reference, may I just say that Ed is very highly intelligent, utterly honest, and used to have the reputation of being something of a genius. (In his teens he built his own REAL rockets which he launched from his parents' garden until officials called round to stop him as they were a "danger to low-flying aircraft".

Two of us went to visit him, which is the last time I did see him, something like fifteen years ago now. The evening was quite late when he casually mentioned this experience, and we pressed him to tell more. Sorry I don't recall all details, after the years. He was hiking solo up a Scottish mountain, and happened across two hiking girls. So when he wanted to go to the loo, he went some way down the far side of the mountain for privacy (don't remember which one), and from this high vantage he was looking down upon a loch (I don't remember which one - but not large). At this point he saw the image of an absolutely typical loch-monster head sticking some way out of the water, and he could see the body since he was high up, looking down into the loch. He did say that he regrets forgetting that he had an excellent top-range camera with him, but if he'd fiddled with that my comment is that he wouldn't have picked up his video camera. So he proceeded to show us the absolutely stunning and unique video he took.

By the time he started filming, the head and neck had unfortunately gone back into the water, but you can see the body shape - I have to say just as you'd imagine a plesiosaur to be, and I'd estimate roughly that the bulk of the body was 9 to 12 yards long. You could see it fairly well since it's taken from a high elevation, looking down at - and therefore into - the water. I can't say for sure that what I saw actually broke surface, but if not it was only inches below the surface, displacing the water and leaving a wake. It moved from the "right" near the end of the loch to very near the near shore, then swerved right at the shore and swam off along the loch away from the camera and to the left, at steady speed. I thought about it, but no way was it a "shoal of fish" but definitely one large moving body - and Ed had seen its head and neck anyway. Well, this is startling enough, but as it swerved from the shore another appeared just like it from the same place, and took just the same course. As that one moved away, a third appeared from the same place and again took the same course.

At a rough guess these three forms, just inches below surface and maybe slightly breaking surface, were 300 yards away or more - hard to tell. The perspective was looking down at them from maybe 25 degrees. But Ed used the video camera magnificently, zooming in frequently, but also cleverly panning out so that you could still see these forms, but both sides of the loch and surrounds, and you got an excellent sense of place, distance, and size from this. Well, I'd never heard of three monsters all seen together in one loch before! (It's possible each had just gone out of sight down the loch when the next appeared.) And Ed, who had this on DVD, made copies for his closer friend and I. I assure you that this video would cause a minor sensation if released. Ed is fully honest and wouldn't fake this. And the film is pretty clear. He almost didn't tell us about it and was in no hurry to.

Now it gets frustrating. Ed and I are both veterans of much reading about Fortean events, primarily UFOs, and the kind of ridicule you get prey to. And he felt it doesn't lead to any advance of knowledge anyway. So he didn't want to release the DVD, nor for us to do so, not to go public. And after a handful of years --- I found I just could not locate my copy!! I've since twice moved so I can't have it by now. All this wish for anonymity is why I'm not giving his surname. I'm not now in touch. We do have a mutual friend, but he feels Ed still wouldn't want to go public with this film. Maybe I'll pursue this again sometime, but tend to think Ed won't have changed his mind. (If he reads this, you can let us know!) So that's it - three obvious 'monsters' in one loch, which loch didn't appear so very large, so as physical creatures I don't see how they'd feed themselves.
 
So that's it - three obvious 'monsters' in one loch, which loch didn't appear so very large, so as physical creatures I don't see how they'd feed themselves.
These are absolutely-crucial cofactors in any cryptozoological hunt: local sustainment ecologies, territorial seperacy/capacities and genepool diversity for mating.

Otherwise we are forced to consider the possibility that (as with so many other reported or envisaged Fortean phenomena) we are not looking at/seeing something that is conventionally physical.

The reports of attempts to recover non-attributable DNA from loch/lake water samples (ie 'proof' of presence by way of inverse elimination) is a fascinatingly-ambitious way to tackle this- perhaps.

And here's another 'perhaps' (of sorts). If we as Forteans might be willing to countenance the existence of ghosts (whatever that may mean): might we ever at least in principle consider the concept of lake/loch monsters somehow being the 'ghosts' of long-dead aquatic dinosaurs?

This is (not quite) sheer wooo/fantastical postulation, but: if there was to be any similarity in concept between homeopathic 'water enrichment' (with inverse dose/effect quotients) and a variation upon the so-called "stone tape" hypothesis of uncertainty....I wonder. Somehow, environments becoming emprinted with distant echoes of their more-savage past scenes...

Note: as ever, I don't say that I believe this to be really what is happening....I am merely wondering aloud, and considering unlikely improbabilities. And in the absence of spoor or carcases, what more than this can we do....especially if we have missing DVDs, and classically-reluctant witnesses
 
...he saw the image of an absolutely typical loch-monster head sticking some way out of the water, and he could see the body since he was high up, looking down into the loch. He did say that he regrets forgetting that he had an excellent top-range camera with him, but if he'd fiddled with that my comment is that he wouldn't have picked up his video camera. So he proceeded to show us the absolutely stunning and unique video he took.

We need to see this video.

l have a close friend who’s an expert in imagery analysis, and who was once employed to examine alleged footage of Nessie for a telly programme. l have no reason to believe that he couldn’t still work his magic on this video.

maximus otter
 
So he didn't want to release the DVD, nor for us to do so, not to go public.
Nice to hear from you and of this account, but 'nullius in verba' for me.

The reports of attempts to recover non-attributable DNA from loch/lake water samples (ie 'proof' of presence by way of inverse elimination) is a fascinatingly-ambitious way to tackle this- perhaps.
Yes, I thought this a worthy idea.
 
Ed states that he saw the head and neck which is great but anecdotal. The only evidence will be the footage which can be then analysed to calculate the size and speed of the objects.

I'm guessing seals until shown the footage.
 
If we as Forteans might be willing to countenance the existence of ghosts (whatever that may mean): might we ever at least in principle consider the concept of lake/loch monsters somehow being the 'ghosts' of long-dead aquatic dinosaurs?

I've long thought that such lake monsters (and quite likely other cryptos) can't be conventionally physical. Now you see them and can take photos - then you can almost dredge the lake and find nothing. But not "ghosts" precisely, huh? Or at least things which do temporarily become somehow physical, such as the clear water-displacement seen in Ed's film.

We need to see this video.

l have a close friend who’s an expert in imagery analysis

It's largely a social thing as I've personally lost touch, and would have to relocate Ed through another friend who's also reluctant. But it's been on my mind a long time. This is the first time I've given an account of this. And obviously Ed could give a much more accurate one. At the time i fully understood his PoV in not going public. I was much more into Forteana then, and knew very well that no matter how good your evidence (such as film), there are always sceptics, usually controversy, and the feeling was, "Well, we know, so why bother with all that?" BTW, since writing my memories last night, although I know I'm recalling with reasonable accuracy, I did remind myself that memory plays tricks over a period of fifteen years. But not that much, I'd add. I haven't forgotten the essentials.

I'm guessing seals until shown the footage.

Yes, of course it's anecdotal as that's all I can offer myself, today. As for seals, lol, I can totally assure you no way. I've more than once been within yards of multiple seals. (1) Seals behave quite differently, as being smaller they alter their movements and move (per size) much more quickly, not "lumberingly". (2) Just as we two friends instantly saw the sheer size of whatever they were on the film, Ed also is a scientific sort of guy and has held down techie-style jobs: he saw instantly that he was viewing something of utterly unnatural proportions. From the film you get a good idea of his vantage point, and seeing the loch-sides, the distances, the rocks and flora, he couldn't mistake the size of what he saw. (3) I'm aware that my account is so far only anecdotal, but these critters were far, far larger than seals. As written, maybe 9 to 12 yards long in body alone: you had a clear view of that even just in the video, since Ed panned out a number of times and you could get the size of everything in good perspective. He did a good, clever job in doing that. These were very large, and I'm glad I wasn't taking a swim in there at the time! Indeed, you'd probably from the video be able to get pretty accurate estimates of size.
 
Last edited:
Just a reminder and a program note ...

The last time someone initiated an interesting thread claiming photographic loch monster evidence without providing the evidence:
... it didn't go all that well.

And the award for Understatement of the Year goes to....

La La Land!
No, wait...
 
You wait years for one loch monster then three come along at once..
 
Boy. I understand scepticism, but I would have thought my account comes across as honest. I even wrote under my own real name, while the rest of you are anon, far as I can see. I dare say I was reading (and writing to) FT earlier than anyone who's posted here so far, since I was getting the small-format mag through the post within about a year of FT's formation (early 1970s and maybe 200 subscribers?), long before it went glossy. I'm not an unknown who popped up from nowhere. Earlier today I tried to find Ed on Facebook - no luck. I'll contact our mutual friend about what he thinks re contacting Ed, but this weekend he's busy in a band.

So while understanding some scepticism as outlined above, it underlines why Ed, and I understood, had the attitude of, "Why bother? Why go through all that and have to justify yourself?" Especially since it'd quite likely hit the mainstream media, or would have done then.

The account is genuine, I wanted to leave a record of it, and I saw the film, which perhaps the other two still have on DVD. But even should it remain anecdotal, I wanted to leave a record of what was seen and filmed by Ed. One starts to see that maybe he did the right thing and avoided the obvious ensuing fuss.
 
Last edited:
So to sum up, I felt the account was particularly worth recounting since to my knowledge there's never been an account of even two Scottish loch monsters together, let alone three. It's also something impossible for me to forget, having seen the excellent video Ed took, which was nothing like the blurry from-distance old Super-8 things we are used to, and it was also far better, even if I don't get hold of it to give here (I did open by saying there were frustrating aspects) than (1) all the photos and films which don't pan in and out to give context, and (2) films taken horizontally from loch water-level. Here, you could see down onto the water.

But it's also interesting about Ed's decision not to go public, at least back then. He was no shrinking violet who'd stumbled across the paranormal and didn't want anyone to know. We'd both been interested in Forteana for about two decades, and had both experienced some things. We'd seen how it goes - especially if the mass media get hold of it. At the time, I'd have liked it to go public, but that was up to him. I honoured that, having my own copy. But no, even back then around the turn of the century, we'd seen how it all goes, that no evidence is ever good enough for hardened sceptics and the mass media. I do understand that going public would have been a circus. You might say that we already "knew what we knew", and Ed felt no need to prove anything to anybody.
 
Boy. I understand scepticism, but I would have thought my account comes across as honest. ...

Just so we're clear ... The grey realm that is paranormal / Fortean studies has to deal with two types of skepticism.

The first is skepticism about a report's content per se. This is normal and to be expected.

The second (sad to say ... ) is skepticism about the report and the reporter. The number of (e.g.) Internet trolls and pranksters continues to rise. Interested parties (here on FTMB and elsewhere) have been burned before by folks seeking to simply jerk our chains.

I'm certainly _not_ accusing you of being one of these. I'm just advising you - and reminding FTMB regulars - that some similarly detailed accounts of extraordinary evidence have turned into dead ends, flamefests, and other types of frustrating wastes of time.

Advising you represents an FYI note validating your expressed concern there could be resistance to accepting the story at face value.

Reminding the other members represents a fair warning against letting this thread devolve like some earlier ones did.

That's it; that's all ... Play on ...
 
So to sum up, I felt the account was particularly worth recounting since to my knowledge there's never been an account of even two Scottish loch monsters together, let alone three. It's also something impossible for me to forget, having seen the excellent video Ed took, which was nothing like the blurry from-distance old Super-8 things we are used to, and it was also far better, even if I don't get hold of it to give here (I did open by saying there were frustrating aspects) than (1) all the photos and films which don't pan in and out to give context, and (2) films taken horizontally from loch water-level. Here, you could see down onto the water.
Echoing (in part) @EnolaGaia, we really would love it if there was a monster in Loch Ness. However, Anecdotal accounts with no supporting empirical evidence, although interesting, I regret have no probative value at all, certainly in terms of what may or may not be there. And despite our hopes, vouchsafed for by our presence and interest, we'll need more than anecdotal evidence to be convinced and notwithstanding that, you can expect to be questioned!
 
we'll need more than anecdotal evidence to be convinced and notwithstanding that, you can expect to be questioned!

Sure, of course. Last night it was spur of the moment to tell the account, which necessarily is anecdotal right now today, and I intended it as anecdotal. But ... I personally would have released the film back whenever it was, and will see what I can do. Personally when evidence like this is very darned convincing (the film) I like to jerk the strings of utter skeptics even though they may call it "wind blowing on the water" or whatever. :crazy: And of course also for the sake of the interested.
 
40261725_1090194097825137_4973902141170122752_n.jpg
 
'I want to believe' is missing.
 
Just to say, I doubt a cold-blooded plesiosaur could survive in the chilly, nay, icy waters of a Scottish loch. Not denying something was captured on the video, but it's highly unlikely they were plesiosaurs (apart from the fact they've been extinct for tens of millions of years).
 
These are absolutely-crucial cofactors in any cryptozoological hunt: local sustainment ecologies, territorial seperacy/capacities and genepool diversity for mating.

Can't they move from the sea up the river to Loch Ness? Yes, I know there are "locks", but the creatures can obviously move on land too.
:ness:
 
Can't they move from the sea up the river to Loch Ness? Yes, I know there are "locks", but the creatures can obviously move on land too.
:ness:
Iirc the river is creatively shallow, something that large would be spotted I'd have thought, mostly by the chaps up to their nicky-nacky-noos Spey-casting.
 
Sure, of course. Last night it was spur of the moment to tell the account, which necessarily is anecdotal right now today, and I intended it as anecdotal. But ... I personally would have released the film back whenever it was, and will see what I can do. Personally when evidence like this is very darned convincing (the film) I like to jerk the strings of utter skeptics even though they may call it "wind blowing on the water" or whatever. :crazy: And of course also for the sake of the interested.

I think you can take it as read that we're all interested, but when 3 large plesiosaur-shaped creatures in a Scottish loch are mentioned, you've got to expect the odd raised eyebrow.

Anyway, welcome aboard - good so far!
 
Just to say, I doubt a cold-blooded plesiosaur could survive in the chilly, nay, icy waters of a Scottish loch. Not denying something was captured on the video, but it's highly unlikely they were plesiosaurs (apart from the fact they've been extinct for tens of millions of years).

Air breathing prehistoric animals that are only spotted occasionally at that.
 
Can't they move from the sea up the river to Loch Ness? Yes, I know there are "locks", but the creatures can obviously move on land too.
The river Ness is very shallow when it goes through Inverness so the monsters may have a little trouble in A) navigating their way upriver and B) not being seen doing so. Here's a photo from an angling website showing a man standing in the middle of the river.

phoca_thumb_l_ness%206.jpg
 
Just to say, I doubt a cold-blooded plesiosaur could survive in the chilly, nay, icy waters of a Scottish loch. Not denying something was captured on the video, but it's highly unlikely they were plesiosaurs (apart from the fact they've been extinct for tens of millions of years).

Pleisosaurs would have been too large to have been effectively cold blooded. Their bulk would have created an internally relatively constant temperature. Plus there is no reason to assume that they were cold blooded anyway. Reptiles are not always cold blooded, and mammals are not always warm blooded, in both instances species are best seen indavidually on a sort of spectrum.

Obbviously the idea of one surviving today is a non-starter though.
 
Can't they move from the sea up the river to Loch Ness? ...

There's nothing to suggest this sighting involves Loch Ness.

The OP doesn't ID the loch, says he cannot recall its name (unlikely if it's THE loch), and he states it wasn't large.
 
Back
Top