Major new Loch Ness Monster search will be biggest in 50 years

[UM-Bot]

A major new effort to find evidence of the Loch Ness Monster is set to take place later this month.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/369072/major-new-loch-ness-monster-search-will-be-biggest-in-50-years

[Cho Jinn]

Godspeed, though you’d have an easier time proving Nessie was real by alleging it contributes to climate change, peed on some hookers in Moscow, or that it almost overthrew the U.S. government.

[Essan]

They're going to spend money to try and prove that trees, birds, mammals, fish, waves, wind and boats exist?   

 

[iAlrakis]

4 hours ago, Essan said:

They're going to spend money to try and prove that trees, birds, mammals, fish, waves, wind and boats exist?   

 

you forgot mermaids :-) 

[Splendor Solis]

Didn't they already test the Loch, looking for any unknown DNA and discover nothing unusual, thus proving there is no

[MysteryMike]

People needs to accept Nessie is just a tourist attraction and folklore. Nothing more.

We can find whales in the ocean but we can't find a large creature in a lake???

[Cho Jinn]

27 minutes ago, MysteryMike said:

People needs to accept Nessie is just a tourist attraction and folklore. Nothing more.

We can find whales in the ocean but we can't find a large creature in a lake???

If Nessie was a whale, I guess we should have found it by now, yes.  Creative mind, indeed.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

7 hours ago, Splendor Solis said:

Didn't they already test the Loch, looking for any unknown DNA and discover nothing unusual, thus proving there is no

yup, you are right.
-----------------------

Yes, the eDNA test result of Loch Ness is a scientific investigation into the environmental DNA present in the lake. The test was conducted by Professor Neil Gemmell from the University of Otago, who collected 250 samples of water from different locations and depths around Loch Ness. The test revealed the DNA of various animals, such as minnows, amphibians, humans and dogs, but no evidence of any large unknown creature¹.

[MysteryMike]

2 hours ago, Cho Jinn said:

If Nessie was a whale, I guess we should have found it by now, yes.  Creative mind, indeed.

My point is we're always seeing large creatures in the ocean. Large creatures in a lake should be seen often as well.

[Loggins]

My vote is for a giant eel. Whales btw, come up for air very frequently. So there is that.

[Roshman]

Rinse and repeat. This was done some years back looking for unknown DNA.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-49495145

[DJansen]

...sigh.  I'm sure the results will be different THIS time

Edited August 4, 2023 by DJansen

[Cho Jinn]

18 hours ago, MysteryMike said:

My point is we're always seeing large creatures in the ocean. Large creatures in a lake should be seen often as well.

How large is “large”, and what kind of creature are we proposing?

[Dejarma]

On 8/3/2023 at 12:02 PM, UM-Bot said:

A major new effort to find evidence of the Loch Ness Monster

some people really are fekin stupid

[esoteric_toad]

Tourism must be down.

[+DieChecker]

Biggest in 50 years? Bigger then that time they lined up dozens of boats and did fish finder... sonar... of the entire loch? I'll believe it when I see it. Interest is dwindling, and so is money to fund such projects.

Edit: Apparently that was 24 boats in 1987.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loch_Ness_Monster

Which would be 36 years ago.

Edited August 5, 2023 by DieChecker

[Eldorado]

The biggest search for the Loch Ness Monster in more than 50 years is getting under way in the Scottish Highlands.

Two hundred volunteers are to help record natural - and any unusual - sights on Loch Ness from vantage points on land.

Almost 300 have signed up to monitor a live stream from the search, which is taking place on Saturday and Sunday.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66614935

[Still Waters]

I think this will be interesting to watch whether you believe in Nessie or not.

It's currently being shown on BBC iPlayer, I've added it to my watch list.

[MysteryMike]

These folks are never gonna learn at this point huh...Nessie is just folklore, a tourist attraction.

[dragon1440]

So theres a difference between this time and other times. they have found there is an underwater cave system as well as flooded caves along the shoreline. That new information is very valuable in finding the truth.

[Abramelin]

On 8/5/2023 at 12:17 AM, Cho Jinn said:

How large is “large”, and what kind of creature are we proposing?

It's supposed to be a 'monster'.

 

[Cho Jinn]

So what is it about a "monster" that requires it to be at the surface all of the time, or otherwise force it to otherwise live in some conspicuous way?

Edited August 26, 2023 by Cho Jinn

[MysteryMike]

7 hours ago, dragon1440 said:

So theres a difference between this time and other times. they have found there is an underwater cave system as well as flooded caves along the shoreline. That new information is very valuable in finding the truth.

You don't know what environmental DNA is don't you? That there alone would have revealed the existence of such creatures by now such as Bigfoot.

Sturgeons, seals (They've swam up the loch), waves, floating logs, etc.

And yet in the oceans people are always seeing whales. Yet a large creature can go undetected in a lake for so long? There'd also need to at least be a breeding population of at least 10 to thrive.

Mystery solved. Move along.

Edited August 27, 2023 by MysteryMike

[dragon1440]

https://www.spygen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Environmental-DNA-review.pdf

[dragon1440]

2 hours ago, MysteryMike said:

You don't know what environmental DNA is don't you? That there alone would have revealed the existence of such creatures by now such as Bigfoot.

Sturgeons, seals (They've swam up the loch), waves, floating logs, etc.

And yet in the oceans people are always seeing whales. Yet a large creature can go undetected in a lake for so long? There'd also need to at least be a breeding population of at least 10 to thrive.

Mystery solved. Move along.

I know quite alot about it actually. And it has a lot of disadvantages including finding things already in database, not unknown animals. Also there is a good 5% of dna they dnt get when sampling. Depending on closeness to the source it can also give false readings. For example lets just use the eel theory. If there is a pocket of eels in a space near the shore but not any where else in the loch, and you take your sample from near that source your going to end up with a lot of eel dna. For example near a mouth of a river where eels congregate. I provided a whole breakdown for you. eDNA is as reliable as a polygraph test (which is usally not admisable in court). Just because a science is "new" does not mean it is always more accurate. There is still a long way to go before it is perfect. In fact the newer the tech the more likely an error. Between people still learning how to use, read, and collect the data there is a high chance of human error.