From the Yorkshire Post:
A SCIENCE enthusiast from Yorkshire is making waves in Scotland after capturing video footage of what he believes could be the Loch Ness Monster.
Gordon Holmes, from Shipley, travelled to the Scottish Highlands to use new hydrophone equipment in an attempt to eavesdrop on Nessie in the water.
But after spending a day trying to get a sound recording of the monster, the 55-year-old believes he has gone one step further by capturing the creature on camera.
Eugene Plawiuk, who occasionally writes on cryptozoological matters, ought to love this, especially since some people have claimed to see a "fin" in the footage (I haven't). Another sturgeon, Eugene?
Actually, this links to a version of this video without the annoying "flip4mac" thing in the middle of the screen.
Note also that the original is supposed to be two minutes long. Hopefully the raw footage turns up before too long.
12 comments:
Perhaps I'm being too skeptical, or the quality is bad, but that looks like a shadow on the water, like an airplane overhad....
I am completely underwhelmed.
Looks like a bloody muskrat.
And Mike, there's no such thing as too skeptical. You can be too cynical, but apolgizing for being skeptical is apologizing for using your brains.
I think its too big for a muskrat. Might be a seal come upriver, or a sturgeon. Or maybe a BABY Pleisiosaur.
I don't see anything which indicates the size of the anomaly, hence I can't discount a muskrat or otter.
Sometimes you can determine the size by the appearance of the waves - small waves look different than big waves. I don't think that's likely here, though. The waves are too indistinct.
Later in the Yorkshire Post piece the guy that took the pictures estimates the length of the shadown at maybe over six feet.
I don't have sound on my computer, so I missed that part.
How did he know the scale? And did this six feet include any of the wake? It can be tough to distinguish between animal and wake at a distance, and the picture is not terribly clear.
The measurement estimates are from the text article I linked to. The guy says it was 100 yards away, but doesn't say how he knew THAT.
Bigfoot going for a swim.
"And Mike, there's no such thing as too skeptical. You can be too cynical, but apolgizing for being skeptical is apologizing for using your brains."
Unless the topic is AGW/Climate Change. Then you MUST BELIEVE!!
"Unless the topic is AGW/Climate Change. Then you MUST BELIEVE!!"
Er no, I was initially skeptical about that too, but the science is pretty overwhelming. Most of the "skeptism" I have seen on AGW/Climate Change revolve around "conspiracies" by the UN, previously debunked psuedo-science and downright just no wanting to beleive it. Essential the the same kind of "skepticism" as embodied by creationists and ID morons when discussing evolution.
Anyway, I need to go put a red mark on my calandar - not only are rabbit and I agreeing, we are being civil. Its a special day.
You see, Mike? people come to this blog and Love breaks out.
How could a "thing" live for so long undetected? It's pretty much in the same mystery/hoax as Bigfoot.
Oh, and BTW, to whomever, just pay the few bucks to get Flip4Mac. It's well worth it.
Post a Comment