Face to face with the Loch Ness Monster: New Proof?

I’ve been providing updates about my creature-themed novel for the last few days, but I thought I’d branch out and share a fascinating story about everyone’s favorite lake monster.

On November 12th, 1933, Hugh Gray snapped what has come to be known as the first – but certainly not the last – photo of the Loch Ness Monster. Take a look.

Many weren’t quite impressed. Instead of a prehistoric creature which has somehow defied the detection of modern science, they saw…

…a dog. With a stick.

Yeah. A dog. How did I miss it?

Look at the photo again and you won’t be able to see anything other than poor Rover.

Into the historical trashcan went this particular Nessie photograph – until 2011, when the author of the Loch Ness Mystery blog conducted an exhaustive analysis of the supposed “dog.”

Guess what? It may not be a dog after all. It may actually be the face of a prehistoric creature which has somehow defied the detection of modern science. I strongly encourage anyone curious, and open-minded enough, to read the original article.

The Sparknotes version goes like this:

1) Under closer scrutiny, it seems the “dog” is missing the entire right side of its face.

2) There is no clear evidence of a stick.

3) There is no wake or turbulence directly behind the dog. Nothing. Not even a ripple.

So why do I keep seeing a dog? Simple. It’s the same reason why people mistake driftwood for a lake monster. Our minds are programmed to recognize patterns out of seemingly random shapes. Skeptics love to throw that fact around. Isn’t it only fair the same rule works both ways? Ironically, our minds may have been tricking us into seeing something incredibly mundane and not what’s really in the photograph.

The author pinpoints this particular section which had so far escaped notice…

https://michaelryancahill.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/rear2bfrom2ballen2bimage.gif

…and puts a face to our little mystery.

Is that the face of Nessie herself? Has a previously invalidated piece of evidence emerged as the real deal? Is the first photograph of the Loch Ness Monster definitive proof of the creature’s existence?

Whatever you may think, one thing is for certain. I don’t see a dog anymore.

Advertisements

9 responses to “Face to face with the Loch Ness Monster: New Proof?

    • Hi, Katerin.

      Thanks for the comment. You are absolutely right on both fronts. As a matter of fact, last Sunday was the 80th anniversary of the first modern sighting. Whether one believes in the monster or not, it is a truly fascinating legend.

      Your blog looks great. I’ll be checking it out!

      Best,
      Michael

      • Yeah me too! lol It was the strangest thing because I gave the binocs to my roommate and, even though the enormous creature was right in front of us..he said that he couldn’t see anything. Maybe there was a rip in the space-time fabric?

      • The sighting happened where there is a lot of highly sensitive military activity so maybe he thought is was a vessel disguised as a seamonster? It def didn’t look artificial to me. No way!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s