Saturday, October 1, 2022
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
You are viewing: Home > News > Creatures, Myths & Legends > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
Creatures, Myths & Legends

New Loch Ness Monster photo surfaces

By T.K. Randall
August 4, 2012 · Comment icon 115 comments



Image Credit: sxc.hu
Nessie hunter George Edwards has published a photo showing an object in the waters of Loch Ness.
[!gad]The cruise operator has been searching for definitive evidence of the creature for years and believes that this new photograph is what he's been looking for. Edwards claims that he took the picture near Urquhart Castle in November last year, delaying its publication because he had sent it away for analysis.

The image can be viewed - here.

Fellow Nessie hunter Steve Feltham who has taken up permanent residence at Loch Ness was impressed by the find. "It is the best photograph I think I have ever seen," he said. "I think the images are fantastic - thatís the animal I have been looking for all this time."

Loch Ness Project leader Adrian Shrine however was unconvinced. "It looks like the object is stationary in the water, and a matter of metres from the photographer, who is at a higher elevation," he said. "Looking at the texture of the water, the object is about 2ft long, but it could be anything."
Loch Ness cruise boat operator and veteran Nessie hunter George Edwards yesterday published his photograph, which drew praise from a fellow monster expert, who described it as the best evidence that Nessie exists.


Source: The Scotsman | Comments (115)


Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #106 Posted by MisstreeDove 10 years ago
So another (possibly) hoaxed Nessie picture? Alright then. Nothing new. And why do people always think that because we're skeptical, we don't care or are not interested in the paranormal?
Comment icon #107 Posted by orangepeaceful79 10 years ago
So another (possibly) hoaxed Nessie picture? Alright then. Nothing new. And why do people always think that because we're skeptical, we don't care or are not interested in the paranormal? Because its easier for them to demonize and write off people who don't agree with them than it is to attempt to wrap their heads around an opposing viewpoint.
Comment icon #108 Posted by U. N.Owen 10 years ago
Is it a double standard that anger is directed at skeptics rather than at the guy who deceived them? This is a nice line, but it doesn't quite bear that much analysis. I myself am very angry at any hoaxer involved in the paranormal - but I have no means of getting at them. I think that newspapers that have been hoodwinked by hoaxers should sue the person who perpetrated the hoax for deception (in ths case the`Daily Mail` as the former and George Edwards as the latter). However, this never happens, and do you know why? It is because the newspapers treat paranormal stories as `silly season` fill... [More]
Comment icon #109 Posted by U. N.Owen 10 years ago
UPDATE Are those who have some vested interest (monetary, emotional, etc) in the subject (particularly paranormal subjects) less likely to own up when caught out pranking/hoaxing? How many times have psychics, mediums, alternate archaeologists, paranormal researchers, monster hunters, etc been caught out pranking/hoaxing and how many have then actually owned up? This is a damned good question to ask. Hoaxers seem to be a `species` in their own right. They can hardly be bracketed in with `believers` since they need to knowingly use tricks to deceive others, which means that they can't also be d... [More]
Comment icon #110 Posted by U. N.Owen 10 years ago
Because its easier for them to demonize and write off people who don't agree with them than it is to attempt to wrap their heads around an opposing viewpoint. This won't do. Who on earth is `demonising` sceptics - other than just expressing occasional irritation with them? Examples needed! In what way can scepticism be described as an `opposing viewpoint` when it is the attitude which is dominant on this forum, particularly in the cryptozoological part of it? Why do you assume that people who happen to disagree with you are incapable of un derstanding your viewpoint? For that matter, why do yo... [More]
Comment icon #111 Posted by orangepeaceful79 10 years ago
This won't do. Who on earth is `demonising` sceptics - other than just expressing occasional irritation with them? Examples needed! In what way can scepticism be described as an `opposing viewpoint` when it is the attitude which is dominant on this forum, particularly in the cryptozoological part of it? Why do you assume that people who happen to disagree with you are incapable of un derstanding your viewpoint? For that matter, why do you assume that posters can be neatly cartegorised into `believers` and `sceptics`: I am sometimes one and sometimes the other, and, I must say, I have noticed t... [More]
Comment icon #112 Posted by Mider 10 years ago
The keel of an overturned fishing boat?
Comment icon #113 Posted by U. N.Owen 10 years ago
Awww. Now settle down. I'll admit, "demonize" was probably a touch dramatic for what I was trying to get across. Sometimes my word choice isn't as precise as I'd like. I wasn't referring specifically even to a particular skewering I've recieved here regarding my skeptic nature. I was speaking in sort of fluffy, vague, general terms and you called me on it. So good on, you mate! I don't fancy myself anyone's hero. I say way too many stupid things for that sort of title. I do know however that I have recieved more than a few personal attacks here in the forums and in personal messages that were ... [More]
Comment icon #114 Posted by U. N.Owen 10 years ago
Lastly - it is nice to hear from you again UN Owen. It seems that its been awhile. Thanks for that Orange:it's appreciated. I come and go - that's just my style. I also take on board much of what you have said above.
Comment icon #115 Posted by Night Walker 10 years ago
In this sense an attitude of sceptical cynicism and the hoax culture are in accidental cahoots: the hoaxers always ensure that paranormal stories are continually made to look silly and this then allows the cynics to never take the subject seriously enough to do anything to confront the hoax culture. Hoaxers seem to be a `species` in their own right. They can hardly be bracketed in with `believers` since they need to knowingly use tricks to deceive others, which means that they can't also be deceiving themselves whilst they're about it. I do not agree with the above points. It is my experience ... [More]


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

 Total Posts: 7,334,889    Topics: 301,868    Members: 198,384

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles