Society & Lifestyle >
Mythology & Folklore
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs the Loch Ness Monster real?
Results so far:
| No | 53% | 627 votes | Total: 1172 votes | |
| Yes | 47% | 545 votes |
No
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThere is history in northern Scotland that pre-dates William Wallace by more than 600 years. It has survived brutal attacks from the English and is more timeless than any ghost story that has been told about the historic isle.
About 23 miles (37 km) southwest of Inverness, there is rumored to be a 40-50 foot-long creature with elephant-like skin, a giraffe-like neck, two short fore legs and three humps harbored in the depths of Loch Ness.
There have been hundreds of reported sightings of such a creature from as early as the 6th Century A.D., but little is known about the actual creature. Though there have been land sightings, it prefers to stay hidden-out of sight of humans-but once in awhile, it surfaces long enough for some to catch a glimpse of what is said to resemble pleiosaur-like creature.
In the spring of 1958, the proprietor of the Foyer's Hotel, which is situated in an elevated position overlooking Loch Ness, Hugh Rowand, and his wife were seated in their garden looking at the loch when a stationary fin-shaped object in the water near Sand Point caught his eye. A few seconds elapsed and the object seemed to spring to life as it shot across the loch. Rowand estimated that it was at a rate of about 30 miles per hour (20-25 knots).
This was enough to make a believer out of Rowand. Surely he had heard stories of the creature, but this wasn't enough to prove anything.
A member of the Northern Naturalists Organizations Peter O'Connor from Gateshead, Durham recalled seeing a similar creature, also from the garden of Foyer's Hotel, with a number of other people in May of 1960. At first he said he thought it was a rowboat, but with a second glance, he could see a brown colored object which was slowly sinking back into the loch.
Three days later, O'Connor went for a walk along the shore beside Foyer's Bay and the monster glided into view. He walked into the water up to his waist to get a closer view. He described the creature's features as "small and sheep-like with a very small neck." Its skin appeared to be smooth, he reported.
While there have been significantly less reports of this in recent history (the last decade), those that have been reported within the last year seem to have found that the creature sustains the same characteristics as those from centuries earlier.
In March of 2007, Sidney Wilson, an English tourist from Nottingham, took a cruise down the loch to view the sights. As he approached Urquhart Castle, two powerboats appeared to be leaving a large wash in their wake. Sidney took two quick photographs of the boats and on the second one, there appeared to be something in the water. After enlarging the image, Wilson could see what appeared to be a head and a fin.
While all reports were strikingly similar, my own account of the monster is quite different.
Nine months ago, I had an encounter at Loch Ness. On several occasions, I did see what looked to be something disturbing the water, which, had I not been skeptical, could have mistakenly to resembled the elephant-like skin and giraffe-like neck of such a creature. I am fairly confident, however, that they were merely ripples in the water. But I did not see a head peering out of the loch, despite the murkiness of its waters.
As the cruise ended, I was overcome with disappointment. "Another childhood delusion," I thought. I wanted to believe that there was a chance that the ripples in the water actually was some pre-historic monster, but I suppose my imagination got the better of me.
I knew that there has never been a reported contact made with "Nessie," and that every reported sighting has been from a far off location, and the photographs, which are proof to someare typically gray and leave a lot to be desired.
Even the most famous photograph of the creature, taken in 1934 by Robert Kenneth Wilson, a British gynecologist, was proven to be a fake. This leaves me with little hope that there could be anything but a few conspirators waiting on the shores of Loch Ness.
Despite this, there still seems to be some sense of truth to be found about the mythical monster.
George Edwards, a skipper of Loch Ness Royal Scot cruiseline told me that Loch Ness alone has more fresh water than all lakes in England and Wales combined. It is the largest body of water, by volume, in the UK, and the second largest by surface area, next to Loch Lomond. At an estimated 812 feet (248 meters) at its deepest point-about 200 feet deeper than the tower of London is high.
This certainly gives the loch a sense of mystery and peculiarity. Not only that, but Scotland skies do not reflect well on the loch, and its depth makes the water look exceedingly black. This makes the area feel desolate and untouched. If there were some sort of monster in Scotland, this would be a perfect place for it.
There have been a number of privately funded investigations of Loch Ness, most have been unsuccessful.
Project Urquhart, named for the castle, which stands on the shore of the loch, was organized by "Nessie" enthusiast, and BBC news correspondent Nicholas Witchell to get scientists interested in studying it. Despite rumors that there were caves and tunnels in the loch, which might be stowing the monster, no evidence of this was found. However, sonar did pick up some large contacts in the loch that they could not explain. They tracked four sonar contacts in midwater that were far too large to be any known fish.
Operation Deepscan, the largest and most intense search for proof of the Loch Ness Monster, was a sonar exploration of Loch Ness, which would sweep the unfathomable depths of the loch from shore to shore. In October of 1987, 24 boats left the dock with equipment, which could target objects as small as one foot.
On the first day of the exploration, three strong sonar contacts were recorded to be from 725 feet (78 meters) to 590 feet (180 meters) made just off Whitefield, opposite Urquhart Bay. The object entered the sonar at 570 feet (174 meters) and was tracked for 140 secondsone boat tried to move forward to engage the target, but was unsuccessful.
The operation cost was estimated to be about 1 million and, as reported by Adrian Shine, leader of the Loch Ness project, all contacts were unlike any which could be expected from the loch's known inhabitants. They were all in deep midwater. All were reported to be much larger than a shark and of considerable strength.
While neither of these accounts are solid proof that such as sea serpent exists, I can certainly understand the fascination with the loch.
There is something in all of us that would have us hope that there may still be something out there. Personally, I would like to believe that there is something hiding in the depths of Loch Ness. And if ever there were such a creature, Loch Ness would be a perfect hideout. Its serene atmosphere makes it conducive to such a myth, and makes it believable. It is difficult to let go of these illusions, which have been ingrained in us since childhood. There is something in all of us that makes us inclined to believe that there is something magical in existence, perhaps for some people, this is the Loch Ness Monster.
Learn more about this author, Erin Thompson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
The water sparkled like someone had poured glitter on its surface. Along the beach of the loch (the Scottish word for lake), a man walked, a camera in his hand as he enjoyed the wonderful autumn day. It was Sunday and Mr. Gray walked leisurely, not expecting anyone or anything to be around the lake at that time.
The harmonious silence that only nature could create was suddenly broken by the sounds of splashing, as if something large had fallen into the loch. Going to investigate, Mr. Gray was shocked to see a large tail striking the water repeatedly. Quickly gathering his wits, Mr. Gray took a sequence of pictures before the thing from the loch disappeared into the murky gray-green waters. Out of the five pictures that Mr. Gray had been able to take, only one picture came out. He sent that one picture to Professor Kerr of the Glasgow University, who's skepticism of the image, while understandable, fell on the deaf ears of the residents that lived in Lewiston, who believed that there was something more to the picture.
A picture taken a year later only confirmed the belief of the residents; something was living in the waters of the lake. While Mr. Gray's photo had been the very first to have, supposedly, been taken of the creature of the loch, it was quickly pushed to the back of people's minds in favor of this clearer, better developed picture now known as the Surgeon's Photo.'
While sightings date back to 500 A.D., the photos instantly alerted people to a possible mystery residing in the lake and word spread much like an infectious disease. Today, thousands of tourists travel to Loch Ness in hopes that they may catch a glimpse of the legendary creature and maybe stop in Lewiston to hear the tales of the various sightings, or to meet an eyewitness.
So, the question now turns to what else can the monster' be? The speculation of what the creature could be, ranges from a dinosaur, to other mythical creatures, to normal creatures with mutations, to inanimate objects, and finally, to creatures that were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The first in this long list of creatures is called a plesiosaur. The plesiosaur was a marine dinosaur which existed during the late Cretaceous, early Jurassic periods. This dinosaur matches almost identically to the descriptions, given by eyewitnesses, of the monster of Loch Ness, with a long neck, small head, four flippers and a large but blunt body. The thing that discounts this creature is that the last of its kind was supposed to have died nearly ten thousand years ago.
The next creature we look at is the Kelpie, which is a creature from Scottish folklore. Most stories that involve the Kelpie describe it as a magnificent horse that when mounted, would instantly spring into a full gallop, taking its hapless victim for a wild ride, the ride could last anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours depending on how far the kelpie had wandered in its search for quarry. At the end of the ride, the kelpie, with the victim still on its back, would plunge into the frigid waters of its home, usually a loch or river, to devour its prey.
The normal creatures are a seal with an abnormally long neck, a giant squid, a giant eel and even a pod of Orcas. The belief is that the seal would have mutated from inbreeding, but there is no evidence to support the theory. While a giant squid is more probable, it is also improbable. The giant squid is believed to reside in the deeper parts of our oceans, therefore, seeing one that close to the surface of the water is extremely unlikely, and given the fact that they are only likely to surface when close to death, the remains should have been found shortly afterward. A giant eel is also considered unlikely for the same reasons as mentioned for the giant squid. The pod of Orcas, however, is the most probable, and, unfortunately, is automatically discounted due to the fact that in about ninety-percent of the sightings, only one creature is sighted, and a lone Orca is unusual.
At one point, skeptics even claimed that the pictures were of creations made by the photographer, a prank by children, a bird, and even a log. Even an escaped elephant was considered to be a possibility until the ascertained that no elephants had been unaccounted for on the day that the photo was taken.
The fact remains that the people who spotted the unusual creature, given the varied vocations, would have discounted ordinary things before making their claims. There have been sightings made from doctors, psychiatrists, and even veterinarians, not to mention policemen, people from various governments, and even a couple skeptics. These people, I am sure, would know the difference between a log and something else. The fact that skeptics world-wide are still using the log' theory is an insult to even the most intelligent mind.
The question that should now be asked is, what would these people have gained from telling someone about their sightings, taking pictures, etc? Other than fifteen minutes of fame, they get ridiculed for the rest of their lives. There are plenty of people who claim to see something and later renounce it as fake, but most of the people who have seen the creature of the loch have not backed down in their faith that they saw something.
Could such a creature, like the monster, exist in a lake, like Loch Ness? Yes. There is plenty of fish for food, and if it doesn't eat fish, there is algae and the vegetation that reaches the banks of the lake. Though it is hard to say what the creature could eat, it is assumed that the main part of its diet involves fish. Also it is believed that there is an unknown access to the ocean from the loch. So there is even a possibility that the creature only resides in the loch to procreate.
If such a creature could exist, where is the proof? Many witness accounts, videos, and pictures aside, what is left? Skeletal remains. The fact is that the ecosystem has its own natural cleaning crew. Many creatures eat the skeleton of others, from insects to deer. Nature walks do not always reveal the skeletons of the inhabitants. The oceans have many creatures with no skeletons, their only remains being a few teeth, unless they are caught in such a way to leave an impression on rock. There is a possibility that like the elephant, there is a graveyard' that these creatures go to, to pass on. The fact that there are no bones, does not necessarily mean that there is no such creature, it could mean that humanity has not yet figured out where, or how, to look.
There is another marine creature that should be brought up as a reference to this discussion. That creature is called a coelacanth. The Coelacanth were thought to be extinct, their fossils were dated to belong in the prehistoric eras of the Devonian, Paleozoic and Mesozoic. When the first man caught the supposedly extinct fish, in 1938 South Africa, it was believed to be a hoax. Shortly after, there were sightings for several years, then another fish was caught in the Comoros in 1952, however, there was still doubt. Finally, in 1988 pictures were brought to the attention of scientists that showed the coelacanth in its natural habitat. That evidence coupled with the fact that since 1952 more than 200 of the fish had been caught and scientists realized that the fish was not someone's idea of a joke, nor was it extinct.
The story of the Coelacanth should provide evidence that sometimes people can be wrong. Also since the time that it was discovered that the Coelacanth had survived millions of years other creatures have been discovered to have survived the struggle with time. So why not the Loch Ness Monster?
In conclusion, the question should not be whether the creature is real or not, but whether it is possible for its existence. Because it is not often seen by man and does not leave remains in its wake isn't proof positive that the creature doesn't exist. After all, the only remains we had of the Coelacanth were those of fossils.
Sources:
www. nessie.co.uk
http://e n.wikipedia.org/wiki /Loch_Ness_Monster#1 933
http://www.crypto zoology.com/cryptids /nessie.php
Learn more about this author, Chrystina Trulove.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
