Why even a new mysterious video isn’t proof enough of the Loch Ness Monster

Report of Loch Ness monsters continue to appear. The latest report, accompanied by video, is of a creature 20 to 30 feet long that occasionally breaks through the water. While the video clearly shows the moving v-form, it doesn’t reveal the underlying source. The witnesses must have seen something, but so what?

There have been more than 85 theories about what the Loch Ness monster is, ranging from the ordinary (wind gusts, reflections, plant debris, and boat wake waves) to the unbelievable animals (anacondas, killer whales). and sunfish) to the outspoken. (ghost dinosaur). The proponents of these theories are not necessarily familiar with the lake.

Many of the early suggestions by foreign zoologists implied that they thought the lake was salt water, which explains suggestions for sunfish, whales, sharks, and rays. Several theories have been independently reinvented, showing the ingenuity of each generation of Nessie inventors. For example, the idea that the Loch Ness monster was originally a swimming elephant from a visiting circus has resurfaced three times, in 1934, 1979, and 2005. Each time, the person asserted. This idea is original.

Nessie the Reptile

However, the notion that the Loch Ness monster was a prehistoric reptile captured the public imagination in the 1930s. Nessie’s modern origins began in April 1933. Eyewitnesses The first reports of an exotic animal in the lake began in 1930.

However, it was only in August 1933 that witness George Spicer, who had seen Nessie on land, first suggested that the creature was a reptile. Until then, commentators assumed that if there was an animal in the lake, it was some kind of wandering freshwater animal like seals that had found its way from the Moray Firth. Spicer just described it as a prehistoric reptile. He claimed it had a long neck, so five days later, a journalist assumed it was a plesiosaur, a long-necked marine reptile from the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. One (but not the only) popular image of the Loch Ness monster was born.

The fact that the image of the Nessie plesiosaur appeared in August 1933 casts doubt on the very popular theory by Daniel Loxton and Donald Prothero (2013) that Nessie originated in 1933. King Kong film with its depiction of a man-eating, long-necked, swamp-dwelling reptile. It’s more likely that King Kong influenced more than created modern Nessie. The first sightings of the Loch Ness monster were in 1930, and although there were more sightings in 1933, they began in April before King Kong was shown in Scotland.

She is complicated – Most reports of Loch Ness monsters do not have long necks. Biochemist (and Nessie investigator) Roy Mackal says that in 1976 there were more than 10,000 reports of the Loch Ness monster but offers no evidence to support this, and a table in his book Loch Ness Monster contains only 251 reports. I know of 1,452 separate encounters. Only about 20% of the reports mention a neck of any length, so it’s not the monster’s normal shape. In addition, less than 1 percent of the creatures in the reports were described as reptilian or scaly. So I think it’s reasonable to assume that whatever the Loch Ness monster is reported to be, it’s not based on glimpses of a prehistoric reptile.

In fact, the Loch Ness monster has many identifying features. It may not be walruses, elk, camels or visiting extraterrestrials as some have suggested, but could be a multitude of man-made creatures (boats, wakes, debris) and natural (animals, vegetation) and physical phenomena (wind effect, reflection). The Loch Ness Monster can vary in color from pink to black, can be translucent or glossy, hairy or scaly. It may have a hump and a mane, it may have horns and move at great speed, or it may not move at all. No identity captures the variety of Nessie’s reported features.

This suggests that Nessie is a function of human psychology rather than nature. And perhaps it is human psychology rather than nature that has perpetuated Nessie’s ideas since the 1930s.

So what did the latest witnesses see? In fact, we have too little information to draw definite conclusions about what is happening in the footage. The problem with the vast majority of Nessie’s reports is that they simply lack the details you need to identify an animal. And any details reported may be misinterpreted. The fact that the wake movements are visible suggests it is a real animal (rather than trapped vegetation). But was it a 20-30ft long animal or some waterfowl or an underwater otter that created a large body of calm water? We simply will never know.

This article was originally published on Conversation via Charles Paxton at the University of St Andrews. Read the original text here.

https://www.inverse.com/science/loch-ness-monster-new-video Why even a new mysterious video isn’t proof enough of the Loch Ness Monster

Emma James

USTimesPost.com is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – admin@ustimespost.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button