• 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

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).

Of course. I've never believed these things are conventionally physical creatures left over from millions of years ago. Doesn't make sense. The lack of a food source is often cited, and I cited it too in my OP, that I didn't see how three 'things' the size of what I saw could exist in what seemed to be not a large loch. BTW though you couldn't see the end of the loch I got the impression it was small enough to have no sea connection, so I think that puts paid to the "seals" idea (?) along with the great difference in size. So Nessie and other lake sightings have that double-strangeness aspect in that they are not conventionally biological but can be there, and then not there. That's a mind-bender for average people, but Forteans get used to such possibilities. :) P.S. I couldn't see them in the film to say they were precisely like plesiosaurs BTW, but size, seeming shape, and Ed seeing the head gave that impression. Being in the water, I could not for example see fins.
 
Anyway, welcome aboard - good so far!

Thanks. I was on-board since the early or mid-1970s, a year or so into FT's existence. After decades of Ufology and the rest, I dropped out somewhat from intense interest as there's frustratingly little progress in Fortean affairs over spans of years.
 
Pleisosaurs would have been too large to have been effectively cold blooded.

Again, not to say that my friend Ed filmed three of them somehow left over from millions of years ago, which is impossible, but yes - I didn't keep up with the subject, but years back the "dinosaurs were cold-blooded" traditional view was quite challenged, I recall, by the alternate view that no, they were warm-blooded. After all, in just recent days, literally days ago, research aired on mainstream UK news confirmed that the dinosoars never "became extinct" but in fact had a huge gene pool allowing them to easily adapt, and that they're with us today largely in the form of birds, which of course are warm-blooded. Some could have been cold-blooded, others warm.

To update on my account and on the video film, I'm out-of-touch with Ed, and will speak to our mutual friend in some days about contacting Ed. The mutual friend is busy in a band over weekend, then I'm away all next week - so after that. It's occurred to me however that our mutual friend might not have his current contact details either (ouch). I'll report back here when I see how things go. If I could even just get Ed over the phone, I could at least find out where this happened and other details I didn't take in.
 
Last edited:
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.

It wasn't Loch Ness, no. If I can re-contact Ed I'll find out where.
 
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.

But there's a reason Scotland doesn't have a large and thriving reptile population.
 
But there's a reason Scotland doesn't have a large and thriving reptile population.

It doesn't have a thriving population of large reptiles, but itdieshave a large reptile population. Most of which are warm blooded and live in nests. That's not to be clever, but it ilkustrates the point about diversity in the group.
 
Again, not to say that my friend Ed filmed three of them somehow left over from millions of years ago, which is impossible, but yes - I didn't keep up with the subject, but years back the "dinosaurs were cold-blooded" traditional view was quite challenged, I recall, by the alternate view that no, they were warm-blooded. After all, in just recent days, literally days ago, research aired on mainstream UK news confirmed that the dinosoars never "became extinct" but in fact had a huge gene pool allowing them to easily adapt, and that they're with us today largely in the form of birds, which of course are warm-blooded. Some could have been cold-blooded, others warm.

To update on my account and on the video film, I'm out-of-touch with Ed, and will speak to our mutual friend in some days about contacting Ed. The mutual friend is busy in a band over weekend, then I'm away all next week - so after that. It's occurred to me however that our mutual friend might not have his current contact details either (ouch). I'll report back here when I see how things go. If I could even just get Ed over the phone, I could at least find out where this happened and other details I didn't take in.

Not to be nit-picky but Plesiosaurs weren't Dinosaurs nor closely related, in fact they're origins are still very unclear apparently. So the the research on Dinosaurs doesn't really apply to them. But warm bloodedness is a very broad term, and pretty ill defined.
 
How about around Balmoral and Glamis?

Since people are having fun re Scotland and creatures, how about this true story with a Scottish twist? In the 1980s a bunch of us used to share a very large house in London, and one Sunday maybe eight of us decided to go to the cinema, and to see the only movie ever made in the language of Lap (of Lapland). That is literally so far as we consciously knew all we knew about it. We didn't have a TV, didn't connect much with the mass media, so saw no trailers. Waiting for it to start, I got talking to a friend, a lady who'd lived in, maybe was from, Scotland, but without the accent. In talking she told me of her friend up there in the highlands who actually kept a grizzly bear (I've since encountered them in the wild, but not relevant here). She told me it was the only tame grizzly, and was used in every film you'd see of the time needing a bear. (Her friend found its tameness tested once when they had a bit of a play, and it put his head in its mouth!) I forget the bear's name, but let's call it "Fred". And I then remembered reading of this bear as it once got loose once and spent several days free in the highlands, which she affirmed. Talk above of haggis on legs and of beings in Balmoral reminded me of this one. Anyway, the film, taking place in old Lapland, began. Really, none of us had heard anything about this film consciously other than that it was in Lap, so sounded interesting for that reason. But at one point, of all things, there's suddenly a bear attack - and immediately my friend goes, "Oh, that's Fred!"

What are the chances? (yes, people will say she'd unconsciously heard of the movie but I doubt it) .... and what would a Scot wandering in the Highlands after a number of drams think when he saw a grizzly bear? Just curse the effects of his scotch?

Ah, his name was Hercules, and here's one of a number of links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hercules_(bear)
 
Last edited:
Hercules was never off the TV back in the 1970s and 80s, especially on "And finally" bits on Reporting Scotland or Scotland Today, so any Scot meeting the beast would know exactly who he was. Being bear-shaped and all.
 
Hercules was never off the TV back in the 1970s and 80s, especially on "And finally" bits on Reporting Scotland or Scotland Today, so any Scot meeting the beast would know exactly who he was. Being bear-shaped and all.

There was no internet etc back then, so I've never looked him up. Pretty amazing - a grizzly which literally would not kill a living creature, even when starving. I've lived on the edge of Yellowstone Park, and there, they're not so finnicky as to refuse uncooked meat, occasionally human or otherwise!
 
So to reiterate, I'll see if there's any chance of tracking down Ed around next week-end. Thinking it over, I want to be as clear as can be about what I recall quite some years ago about the film. Thinking back, it isn't that one actually saw the creatures themselves (on the film that is - Ed saw a head and neck), to clarify that, not even a hump as I recall. But they were so near to the surface, perhaps just touching the surface in their centre, that from water-displacement it was very clear what kind of length one was looking at, but also some idea of width - for example that the phenomena were not sinewy like very long serpents but had real width of some yards. An analysis of the film, since you can see all the dry-land features around, would even render a good estimate of speed. Thinking about it, another thing is the somewhat-peculiarity that all three, not being near to each other but appearing separately, to my recollection all took just the same route towards the near shore, then a turn taking them down the loch which I recall as going away from the viewer. It was almost like watching a loop or re-run of the event as I recall - though I stress that the video was not looped but staightforward filming, since Ed was panning in and out and making different movements throughout. You'd more expect them to make some different movements from each other, but I don't recall that they did.
 
You'd more expect them to make some different movements from each other, but I don't recall that they did.

This sounds honest (not that I think you aren't) and it immediately reminds me that having recently been in a boat offshore from Oban (which was being followed by a number of Common Seals) they tend to move as one school/shoal/pod of aquaforms when close together, and to demonstrate different tracks in the water when further apart.

I'm no expert, but common-sense would suggest that this has got at least something to do with the wake/swash/cavitation under the water, and/or near the surface. Put it another way: they will tend to "go with the flow" when close. And any "flow option" (ie the ability to take a different track) might be an observable metric of the size of animals (and might even be a species-defining characterstic, within video footage or pictures).

Does my hypothesis make sense? Almost like wake turbulance categories for large aircraft, coupled with aerobatic seperation minima, but applied to putative sea monsters?
 
F. W. Holiday interviewed many witnesses to creatures in the loughs of western Ireland and was bemused by the number of enormous creatures apparently dwelling in tiny bodies of water. He finally decided they had to be paranormal entities of some sort (in his The Dragon and the Disk, aka Creatures from the Inner Sphere).

No one's mentioned the possibility, but could the precisely duplicated trajectories of the things in the water suggest mini-subs or USOs?
 
F. W. Holiday interviewed many witnesses to creatures in the loughs of western Ireland and was bemused by the number of enormous creatures apparently dwelling in tiny bodies of water. He finally decided they had to be paranormal entities of some sort (in his The Dragon and the Disk, aka Creatures from the Inner Sphere).

No one's mentioned the possibility, but could the precisely duplicated trajectories of the things in the water suggest mini-subs or USOs?
I wonder about mini-subs in Loch Ness. It's a good place for depth testing, and I also ponder the possibility of other countries sneaking one in there, just to see if they can.

I've put The Dragon and the Disk on my book-list, it sounds interesting.
 
I know it's been mentioned before, but I'm getting a disturbing sense of deja vu over this thread.

That said, this that may be related to the amount I'm drinking so that I can forget about the omnishambles that is the present political ruling class in Britain; I think/hope that's not too party-political for this forum!!
 
Last edited:
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.

I'd like to thank you for taking time to do this. Just so you don't think we all remain anonymous i'm Richard Freeman, Zoological Director of the Centre for Fortean Zoology, though it wouldn't have taken Sherlock Holmes to have worked that out. I wouldn't discard your account at all and would love to see the film if it ever re-emerges. I don't think there are any pre-historic reptiles in these cold lochs but there may well be some odd things that visit them, especially if they are connected to the sea.
 
I'm no expert, but common-sense would suggest that this has got at least something to do with the wake/swash/cavitation under the water, and/or near the surface. Put it another way: they will tend to "go with the flow"

If I understand you correctly, you mean that they'd go along for the sake of ease with any natural water movement? If so, that's not what was happening. This was not a wide loch, and the water seemed quite still, no movement at all. Whereas these three 'things' were large and clearly able to decide exactly where they wanted to go 'at will'.
 
No one's mentioned the possibility, but could the precisely duplicated trajectories of the things in the water suggest mini-subs or USOs?

But Ed's experience began by seeing a 'typical' head and long neck sticking up out of the water. Then this went down into the water, in order to move or swim, and it's at that point that he started filming. He saw something looking biological (even if paranormal!).
 
I'd like to thank you for taking time to do this. Just so you don't think we all remain anonymous i'm Richard Freeman, Zoological Director of the Centre for Fortean Zoology

Hi Richard. I hope to look into this soon having just got home. In fact, not good news, but my mutual friend with Ed and I it suddenly turns out will be at a funeral together. That day won't be the occasion to raise this subject, of course, but soon after. To see what he thinks: Ed is/was essentially his friend, not so much mine.

I've had a few Fortean experiences of my own in life, if nothing spectacular, and I suspect very many people have. But this incident, though not my own experience, has clearly always stuck in my mind due to the fact that there is (or was) evidentiary film of it. Personally I think it'd be a pity if that film was never entered into the general domain.
 
Last edited:
I'm starting to think of Fred Hoyle's The Monster of Loch Ness, in which Nessie turns out to be an artificial life-form created by aliens as a "spy-sub" to watch the earth naturalists who are studying the lake. The aliens themselves appear as spheres of light about half-a-meter wide -- which is a whole other fortean subject!
 
Just checking in. I haven't forgotten this topic and will get back with how the result goes. Even my 'mutual friend' thinks he still has the footage, but comments that - and now I remember this - we got it on some kind of format that we couldn't play, some unusual format. He thinks he has it, but I would never go public with it, neither of us would, unless Ed agreed. I'll get back on this.

Basically I posted on this originally knowing or intending for it to be simply an anecdotal report. But I surely understand the requests to see the footage. So that's the one thing for me to get back about: whether the footage is agreed to be shown or not. I'll get back on that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top