Loch Ness monster study

[Commander CMG]

A scientific trawl of the waters of Loch Ness by researchers hoping to uncover the truth behind the myth of the famous monster has made a “surprising” finding.

Professor Neil Gemmell from the University of Otago in New Zealand, who led the study, said his team had managed to test most of the main theories about the Loch Ness monster.

Read More

[Stiff]

"We've tested each one of the main monster hypotheses and three of them we can probably say aren't right and one of them might be."

But which three aren't and which one 'might be'? I'm intrigued now.

[Dradan]

I read about this expedition a few months ago. It sounded interesting, so id like to know more about the results.

[Minimalists]

Well, hope it comes up with something.....

[Dejarma]

i wonder how much this "study" is costing? a complete waste of time & money imo-- oh well, there ya go

[Carnoferox]

I'm at least certain that the plesiosaur explanation has been ruled out, not sure about the sturgeon, catfish, seal, etc. though.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Carnoferox

[Timothy]

3 hours ago, Dejarma said:

i wonder how much this "study" is costing? a complete waste of time & money imo-- oh well, there ya go

It’s good to get a bit of actual science though. Have a better idea of what is actually in the loch. And if anything could explain some of the apparent sightings. 

That’s much more valuable than the usual BS on this subject. Maybe not more valuable for tourism though...

‘Prof Gemmell admitted that part of the reason for the delay in publishing the results was due to a series of failed attempts to film a television documentary.

Negotiations with a series of production companies ended without a deal.’

Probably because the production companies wanted to do one of those sensationalised documentaries like the mermaid one! 

[Dradan]

4 hours ago, Dejarma said:

i wonder how much this "study" is costing? a complete waste of time & money imo-- oh well, there ya go

If you dont want science to study unexplained mysteries such as loch ness.. then why are you on this site?

Edited June 2, 2019 by Aldves

[Dejarma]

40 minutes ago, Aldves said:

If you dont want science to study unexplained mysteries such as loch ness.. then why are you on this site?

there's no mystery 

edit to add:

sorry, i forgot to say= IMO

Edited June 2, 2019 by Dejarma

[Dejarma]

1 hour ago, Timothy said:

Maybe not more valuable for tourism though..

well there ya go.. the bleeding obvious will always rule= "money"

same with the ufo/ aliens on this planet enigma.."money" is the only reason these enigmas are still around today...

i see it.. i think most see it nowadays but there will always be a few whose logic is good at blocking out the bleeding obvious...

i wonder if there will be a few in the equivalent of places like this in 50/100 years time STILL pontificating over the meaning of crop circles?- oh joy

[Golden Duck]

3 hours ago, Timothy said:

It’s good to get a bit of actual science though. Have a better idea of what is actually in the loch. ...

Exactly! That's what they ate actually going to find. 

Quote

The DNA is currently being extracted from our filtered water samples at the University of Hull. From there it will go to French and Swiss laboratories to be metabarcoded and sequenced.

What will we find? Well undoubtedly there will be DNA sequences derived from bacteria, protists, algae, invertebrates, and the traces of fish, birds and other vertebrate life known from the loch.

What we’ll get is a comprehensive survey of the biodiversity of Loch Ness, but whether we’ll find anything unusual, such as a giant catfish, sturgeon or eel, or a species unknown to science, who knows. 

https://theconversation.com/monster-hunt-using-environmental-dna-to-survey-life-in-loch-ness-98721

What's the problem with spending money on science that hasn't been done before? 

[pallidin]

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

...What's the problem with spending money on science that hasn't been done before? 

Exactly. Nothing wrong at all.

[DavidDownUnder]

4 hours ago, Dejarma said:

well there ya go.. the bleeding obvious will always rule= "money"

same with the ufo/ aliens on this planet enigma.."money" is the only reason these enigmas are still around today...

i see it.. i think most see it nowadays but there will always be a few whose logic is good at blocking out the bleeding obvious...

i wonder if there will be a few in the equivalent of places like this in 50/100 years time STILL pontificating over the meaning of crop circles?- oh joy

It must be a terrible and overbearing hardship and responsibility for you of not only knowing the correct answer to every question and mystery in the universe, but to know explicitly that you also know that know and that everyone else is wrong . . .

[the13bats]

while i believe scientific study , real science, not for flash and profit bs is great i dont really get why dear true believers get so darn butthurt over some things that they feel compelled to lash out in childish ad hominem attacks, why not use that time to make your case rather than waste the time making yourself look ridiculous?

its fairly obvious there is no "monster" in the loch, the only good picture is a fake and a lot of studies have been done that show what could or couldnt thrive there,  so if a person wants to make fun of the obvious who cares?

this will be another study that ends with no creature, even if there is something like a huge eel or rare whale they wont find it, it would be cool if i am wrong but the past 5 decades say i will be on the mark.

can someone pass the salve to the true believers.

[pallidin]

1 hour ago, the13bats said:

while i believe scientific study , real science, not for flash and profit bs is great i dont really get why dear true believers get so darn butthurt over some things that they feel compelled to lash out in childish ad hominem attacks, why not use that time to make your case rather than waste the time making yourself look ridiculous?

its fairly obvious there is no "monster" in the loch, the only good picture is a fake and a lot of studies have been done that show what could or couldnt thrive there,  so if a person wants to make fun of the obvious who cares?

this will be another study that ends with no creature, even if there is something like a huge eel or rare whale they wont find it, it would be cool if i am wrong but the past 5 decades say i will be on the mark.

can someone pass the salve to the true believers.

I think the excitement over this study is the way in which the science is being performed... collecting and analyzing water-borne residual DNA to identify and define aquatic inhabitants.

To me, the science behind it is awesome.

 

[Dejarma]

4 hours ago, DavidDownUnder said:

It must be a terrible and overbearing hardship and responsibility for you of not only knowing the correct answer to every question and mystery in the universe, but to know explicitly that you also know that know and that everyone else is wrong . . .

it's an opinion

[Stiff]

How long would DNA last in water? I guess it's possible that some of the creatures identified could be long gone (decades rather than 000's). Or could it prove to be older?

[Dradan]

7 hours ago, pallidin said:

I think the excitement over this study is the way in which the science is being performed... collecting and analyzing water-borne residual DNA to identify and define aquatic inhabitants.

To me, the science behind it is awesome.

Yes, precisely. This isnt just another survey with underwater cameras or sonar scans. We have had plenty of those already. This is a new way of researching the mystery surrounding loch ness, that hasnt been done previously.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Aldves

[the13bats]

9 hours ago, pallidin said:

I think the excitement over this study is the way in which the science is being performed... collecting and analyzing water-borne residual DNA to identify and define aquatic inhabitants.

To me, the science behind it is awesome.

 

im not excited as some and sounds like some of those who are havent done the reading i have on the subject, but sure it would be awesome to find something, i hope they do.

think about this mass DNA testing, lots of hurdles, lots of dead end testing and testing of long known creatures, or deceased creature for who knows how long there is zero chain of evidence, so if they come back and claim they found XXXX DNA and say that means that XXXX is alive living in the loch thats the end of the real science right there because finding DNA in a mass collection in a body of water doesnt prove the creature lives there.

my concern is DNA of some sort will be hailed as proof a huge unknown creature, a lake monster lives in the loch.

i just hope this is not just another "flipper picture". modern version.

[pallidin]

3 hours ago, the13bats said:

im not excited as some and sounds like some of those who are havent done the reading i have on the subject, but sure it would be awesome to find something, i hope they do.

think about this mass DNA testing, lots of hurdles, lots of dead end testing and testing of long known creatures, or deceased creature for who knows how long there is zero chain of evidence, so if they come back and claim they found XXXX DNA and say that means that XXXX is alive living in the loch thats the end of the real science right there because finding DNA in a mass collection in a body of water doesnt prove the creature lives there.

my concern is DNA of some sort will be hailed as proof a huge unknown creature, a lake monster lives in the loch.

i just hope this is not just another "flipper picture". modern version.

Exploratory science has absolutely no concern for the bias you are presuming.

It will, rather, gather sub-suface residual DNA in effort to define which aquatic creatures have recently or are currently living there, even if it excludes the "Loch Ness monster"

Very outstanding approach, I would say.

 

 

Edited June 2, 2019 by pallidin

[the13bats]

6 minutes ago, pallidin said:

Exploratory science has absolutely no concern for the bias you are presuming.

It will, rather, gather sub-suface residual DNA in effort to define which aquatic creatures are currently living there, even if it excludes the "Loch Ness monster"

Very outstanding approach, I would say.

 

 

jeff meldrum a bigfoot true believer and attention seeker has letters in front of his name, he claims to work unbiaed in the name of science, he is about the most closed minded ego driven non science based researcher i can think of at the moment,  imho of course.

my issues and concerns are very real and do not vanish because "exploratory science" has been stamped on it.

this expedition will not prove if there is a "monster" in the loch or not, there will be countless species that will not show up in their DNA gather yet are known and seen in the loch, others not known will show up but will be small creatures.

if by some chance they nap DNA from something large an unknown or rare whale or eel as examples will they hail that as "the monster" ? rest assured someone will,

but in the end this will not really give much if any more info than is already known, wait and see.

its not that im not hopeful i am but im more realistic.

 

[pallidin]

7 minutes ago, the13bats said:

jeff meldrum a bigfoot true believer and attention seeker has letters in front of his name, he claims to work unbiaed in the name of science, he is about the most closed minded ego driven non science based researcher i can think of at the moment,  imho of course.

my issues and concerns are very real and do not vanish because "exploratory science" has been stamped on it.

this expedition will not prove if there is a "monster" in the loch or not, there will be countless species that will not show up in their DNA gather yet are known and seen in the loch, others not known will show up but will be small creatures.

if by some chance they nap DNA from something large an unknown or rare whale or eel as examples will they hail that as "the monster" ? rest assured someone will,

but in the end this will not really give much if any more info than is already known, wait and see.

its not that im not hopeful i am but im more realistic.

 

My only "hope" are the results of this truly outstanding scientific approach... for or against.

[Dradan]

15 minutes ago, the13bats said:

jeff meldrum a bigfoot true believer and attention seeker has letters in front of his name, he claims to work unbiaed in the name of science, he is about the most closed minded ego driven non science based researcher i can think of at the moment,  imho of course.

Really, that guy is one of the most respectable personalities within the field of cryptozoology. I agree with you, theres plenty of pranksters and hoaxers, such as todd standing, but jeff meldrum is not one of them.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Aldves

[the13bats]

im not picking on you but i just dont see this as being all epic like it is to you,

lets go to fully speculate with a theory and say they find Plesiosauria DNA i use that creature since it seems to be what true believers want nessie to be,

it would be pretty darn wild considering everything known about that extinct species says they couldnt thrive in the loch and even if they were there they could hardly hide.

so they find some wild DNA it doesnt at all prove that creature lives there in a population.

 

Aldves

13 minutes ago, Aldves said:

Really, that guy is one of the most respectable personalities within the field of cryptozoology. I agree with you, theres plenty of pranksters and hoaxers, such as todd standing, but jeff meldrum is not one of them.

i will make this one reply since this is a loch ness thread and i didnt post that to derail, if you want to discuss meldrum go start a thread, most feel about him as i do,

he is far from most respected, known is not respected, sure he is PAID to be in docs and do lectures, he is well seen thats about his own ego and being a "personalities" doesnt make one credible or mean they have integrity, i have been told when called out on misinformation at lectures he diesnt defend his theory with science but just goes ad hominem on the person who exposed his mistake.

he has made countless mistakes and clings to theories long proven wrong,

while i havent seen him hoaxing or playing pranks spreading misinformation isnt any better like his misconceptions Gigantopithecus was bipedal, not a knuckle dragger.

another he hailed snow walker just like he does PGF, no way it can be a man in a suit that his research proves its 9ft tall and not a man, epic fail, known hoax, 6ft man in fur suit, did meldrum admit his human and made a mistake, of course not ego too big and fragile, of course not.

it goes on and on  go start a thread and see what others think of meldrums work.

 

[kapow53]

They live in your mind