The Loch Ness Monster, sometimes called Nessie or Ness (Scottish Gaelic: Niseag), is said to be a mysterious and unidentified animal, or group of animals, claimed by some to inhabit the Scottish loch of Loch Ness, the largest freshwater loch, or lake, in Great Britain by volume. Nessie is usually categorized as a type of lake monster. Along with Bigfoot and the Abominable Snowman, Nessie is one of the best-known mysteries of cryptozoology. Most scientists and other experts find current evidence supporting Nessie unpersuasive, and regard the occasional reports of sightings as hoaxes or misidentification of mundane creatures or natural phenomena. However, belief in the animal persists among many people around the world, with the most popular theory being that it is a plesiosaur.
Although no evidence exists to suggest the alleged creature's sex, the nickname "Nessie" sounds feminine, so the creature is often referred to as if female.
Its disputed "scientific" name, chosen by the late Sir Peter Scott, is Nessiteras rhombopteryx. The name, based on Greek, means "the wonder of Ness with the diamond shaped fin" although skeptics note that it is an anagram of "Monster hoax by Sir Peter S" (defenders say it also an anagram of "Yes both pix are monsters-R", the 'R' referring to monster hunter Robert Rines).
[edit]History of alleged sightings
Rumors of a monster or animal living in the loch are claimed by believers to have been known for several centuries. Some have argued that a history of monster sightings in the loch provides circumstantial evidence supporting the creature's existence.[citation needed] Others question the accuracy or relevance of such tales, and argue that they were generally unheard of before the early 1960s when a strong wave of interest focused on the first clear examples of Nessie sightings in the 1930s.[citation needed] For example, an alleged sighting in October 1871 by a "D. Mackenzie", who supposedly described seeing something that moved slowly before moving off at a faster speed, has been repeated in several places [1][2][3][4], no original 1871 source for this report has been discovered, indicating that it may be an invention.
There have been far too many sightings to list in a single article. Many are of poor quality due to distance and other poor sighting conditions; some are cases of misidentified deer or boat wakes; and of course, there have been several hoaxes. There are some, however, which cannot be so easily explained.
[edit]Saint Columba (565)
The earliest report cited is taken from the Life of St. Columba by Adamnan, written around the 7th century. It describes how in 565 Columba saved the life of a Pict, who was being supposedly attacked by the monster. Adamnan describes the event as follows:
"...(He) raised his holy hand, while all the rest, brethren as well as strangers, were stupefied with terror, and, invoking the name of God, formed the saving sign of the cross in the air, and commanded the ferocious monster, saying, "Thou shalt go no further, nor touch the man; go back with all speed." Then at the voice of the saint, the monster was terrified, and fled more quickly than if it had been pulled back with ropes, though it had just got so near to Lugne, as he swam, that there was not more than the length of a spear-staff between the man and the beast. Then the brethren seeing that the monster had gone back, and that their comrade Lugne returned to them in the boat safe and sound, were struck with admiration, and gave glory to God in the blessed man. And even the barbarous heathens, who were present, were forced by the greatness of this miracle, which they had seen, to magnify the God of the Christians".[5]
Skeptics question the reliability of the Life as evidence for the Loch Ness Monster's existence, noting that it relates other implausible events, such as an incident in which Columba slays a wild boar by the power of his voice alone. They also point out that the event is said to have occurred on the River Ness, not in the Loch, and that Adamnan reports Columba encountering and conquering assorted "monsters", at various places in Scotland, throughout his "life". Additionally, they point out that there are no other reports of the Loch Ness monster attacking anyone, and that it is normally portrayed as shy. In fact biographies of the early saints were often embellished, and even invented - their purpose being not historical record but religious persuasion.
[edit]Land sightings
Although sightings of the creature on land surrounding the loch are said to date back to the sixteenth century [6], modern interest in the monster was sparked by a sighting on 22 July 1933, when Mr George Spicer and his wife saw 'a most extraordinary form of animal' cross the road in front of their car. They described the creature as having a large body (about 4 feet high and 25 feet long), and long, narrow neck, slightly thicker than an elephant's trunk and as long as the width of the road (about 10-12 feet wide); the neck had a number of undulations in it. They saw no limbs because of a dip in the road obscuring the animal's lower portion. It lurched across the road towards the loch 20 yards away, leaving only a trail of broken undergrowth in its wake. [7]
On 5 January 1934 a motorcyclist called Arthur Grant nearly hit the creature while approaching Abriachan on the northeastern shore. It was 1a.m. but there was bright moonlight. Mr Grant saw the animal's small head attached to a long neck. It saw him and crossed the road back into the loch. Grant dismounted and followed the creature to the loch, but only saw ripples where it had entered. [8] However, it is said that he had admitted that the sighting was a joke for his friend [9].
In another 1934 sighting Margaret Munro, a young girl working as a maid, observed the animal for 20 minutes. It was about 6.30 am on 5 June, and she saw it on the shore from a distance of about 200 yards. She said it had skin like an elephant's, a long neck, a small head and two short forelegs, or perhaps flippers. The sighting ended when it re-entered the water. [10]
Land sightings continued infrequently until 1963, when a poor-quality film was taken at a distance of several miles. [11]
[edit]Sightings in the loch
In May 1943, C.B. Farrel of the Royal Observer Corps was distracted from his duties by a sighting of Nessie. He was about 250 yards away from it. He saw 20 or 30 feet of a body, and a neck held about 4-5 feet out of the water. It had large eyes and the body seemed to have a 'fin'. [12]
In December 1954 another sonar contact was made by the fishing boat Rival III. The vessel's crew observed sonar readings indicating a large object keeping pace with the boat at a depth of 480 feet. It was detected travelling for half a mile in this manner, before contact was lost [13].
[edit]Three sightings in one night
On June 17, 1993 Edna MacInnes, and David Mackay, both of Inverness, reportedly watched the monster for ten minutes, according to the Today programme on BBC Radio 4. MacInnes described it as forty feet long, pale brown, and with a long neck held high out of the water. [14]. After swimming along the surface, it then sank into the water. Although the monster was a mile from the shore, MacInnes claimed she had to run along the shore to keep up with it.[15]
"I was scared when the wash from its wake lapped on the shore, but I just kept running behind it. By the time it plunged below the surface I was running as fast as I could go," She added.
Forty minutes later they saw it again, and Mackay attempted to take a photograph, but only managed to get a picture of its wake. [14] [15].
Later the same evening it was reportedly seen by James MacIntosh of Inverness along with his son, also named James [14]. Young James saw it first, saying "Dad, that's not a boat [15]." They also described a pale brown creature with a long neck; this time it was heading away from the shore [15].
The third sighting that night was reported by Lorraine Davidson. She saw a large wake in the loch, when no boats were visible for miles. The wake also appeared to be different from a boat wake, but in what manner is not stated in the report. [14].
[edit]Photographs and films
[edit]The 'Surgeon's Photo'
One of the most iconic images of Nessie is known as the 'Surgeon's Photograph' and for many years was considered good evidence by believers in the monster, but has since been revealed as a hoax by one of its creators.
Suspicions about the photograph were articulated long before the confession. Robert Kenneth Wilson never claimed he had photographed the monster. He said he had only photographed "something in the water". The photo is often cropped to make the monster look huge, while the original uncropped shot shows the other end of the loch and the monster in the centre [16].The ripples on the photo fit the size and circular pattern of small ripples when photographed up close, not large waves. Some argued the photo was that of an otter or a diving bird.[citation needed]
Analyses of the original uncropped image created further doubt. Just a year before the hoax was revealed, the makers of Discovery Communications's documentary Loch Ness Discovered did an analysis of the uncropped image and found a white object evident in of every version of the photo, implying that it was on the negative. "It seems to be the source of ripples in the water, almost as if the object was towed by something.", the narrator said. "But science cannot rule out it was just a blemish on the negative.", he continued.
The photo was confirmed as a hoax in the deathbed confession of Chris Spurling, son-in-law of Marmaduke Wetherell. Spurling claimed the photo was of a clay model attached to a toy submarine. Wetherell, a big game hunter, had been tricked into searching for an imaginary monster around the loch based on evidence which turned out to be the result of children's prank. He was publicly ridiculed in the Daily Mail, the journal which employed him. To get revenge, Marmaduke Wetherell set this hoax up, with the help of Chris Spurling, a specialist in sculpture, Ian Marmaduke (his son), who bought the material for the fake Nessie, and Maurice Chambers (an insurance agent), who was to call and ask Robert Kenneth Wilson (a surgeon) to show the pictures.
[edit]The Taylor film (1938)
In 1938 Mr G.E. Taylor, a South African tourist, filmed something in the loch for three minutes on 16mm colour film, which is now in the possession of Dr Maurice Burton. However, Dr Burton has refused to let Loch Ness investigators such as Peter Costello or the Loch Ness Investigation Bureau see the film. A single frame was published in his book 'The Elusive Monster'; noted cryptozoologist Dr Roy P Mackal has called this "positive evidence." (Janet and Colin Bord, 'Alien Animals' (Granada 1986) p18)
[edit]The Dinsdale Film (1960)
In 1960 aero engineer Tim Dinsdale filmed a hump going across the water throwing up a powerful wake unlike a boat. JARIC analysed it and said that the object was "probably animate". Others were skeptical, saying that the hump cannot be ruled out as being a boat [2] and claimed that when the contrast is turned up too high a man can be clearly seen in a boat [3]. Some have questioned this because the version they were watching was a pirate and the film in the pirate may be more susceptible to being a fake attempt of imitating the film and that it could also be a film of a boat that Dinsdale later sent out to track the hump's route and to compare it.
In 1993 Discovery Communications made a documentary called 'Loch Ness Discovered that featured an enhancement of the film. A computer expert who enhanced the 1960 Dinsdale film had noticed a shadow in the negative that wasn't very obvious in the positive. By enhancing and overlaying frames, he found what looked like the rear body, the rear flippers, and 1-2 additional humps of a plesiosaur-like body. He said that: "Before I saw the film, I thought the Loch Ness Monster was a load of rubbish. Having done the enhancement, I'm not so sure". [14]
Some have argued against this saying that the angle of the film from the horizontal, and the sun's angle on that day made shadows underwater unlikely [17]. Some people (even believers) claim the shape could have been undisturbed water that was coincidentally shaped like a plesiosaur's rear end [18]. But the same source also says that there might be a smaller object (hump or head) in front of the hump causing this [18]. Nonetheless, the enhancement did show a smaller second hump and possibly a third hump.
[edit]Searches for the monster
[edit]The LNPIB sonar study (1967-8)
Professor D.G. Tucker, chairman of the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering at the University of Birmingham, England, volunteered his services as a sonar developer and expert at Loch Ness in 1968. The gesture was part of a larger effort helmed by the Loch Ness Phenomena Investigation Bureau (LNPIB) from 1967-1968 and involved collaboration between volunteers and professionals in various fields. Tucker had chosen Ness as the test site for a prototype sonar transducer with a maximum range of 800 meters. The device was fixed underwater at Temple Pier in Urquhart Bay and directed towards the opposite shore, effectively drawing an acoustic 'net' across the width of Ness through which no moving object could pass undetected. During the two-week trial in August, multiple animate targets six meters (20 ft) in length were identified ascending from and diving to the loch bottom. Analysis of diving profiles ruled out air-breathers because the targets never surfaced or moved shallower than midwater. A brief press release by LNPIB and associates touched on the sonar data and drew to a close the 1968 effort:
The answer to the question of whether or not unusual phenomena exist in Loch Ness, Scotland, and if so, what their nature might be, was advanced a step forward during 1968, as a result of sonar experiments conducted by a team of scientists under the direction of D. Gordon Tucker... Professor Tucker reported that his fixed beam sonar made contact with large moving objects sometimes reaching speeds of at least 10 knots. He concluded that the objects are clearly animals and ruled out the possibility that they could be ordinary fish. He stated: "The high rate of ascent and descent makes it seem very unlikely that they could be fish, and fishery biologists we have consulted cannot suggest what fish they might be. It is a temptation to suppose they might be the fabulous Loch Ness monsters, now observed for the first time in their underwater activities!"
[edit]Andrew Carroll's sonar study (1969)
In 1969 Andrew Carroll, field researcher for the New York Aquarium in New York City, proposed a mobile sonar scan operation at Loch Ness. The project was funded by the Griffis foundation - named for Nixon Griffis, then a director of the Aquarium. This was the tail-end of the LNPIB's 1969 effort involving submersibles armed with biopsy harpoons and ultimately the most successful. The trawling scan, in Carroll's research launch Rangitea, took place in October. One sweep of the loch made contact with a strong, animate echo for nearly three minutes just north of Foyers. The identity of the animal remains a mystery. Later analysis determined that the intensity of the returning echo was twice as great as that expected from a 10 foot pilot whale. Calculations placed the animal's length at 20 feet.
[edit]Submersible investigations
Earlier submersible work had yielded dismal results. Under the sponsorship of World Book Encyclopedia, pilot Dan Taylor deployed the Viperfish at Loch Ness on 1 June 1969. His dives, though treacherous and plagued by technical problems, were routine; they produced no new data. The Deep Star III built by General Dynamics and an unnamed two-man submersible built by Westinghouse were slated to sail but never did. It was only when the Pisces arrived at Ness that the LNPIB obtained new data. Owned by Vickers, Ltd., the submersible had been rented out to produce a Sherlock Holmes film about the Loch Ness Monster. When the dummy monster broke loose from the Pisces during filming and sank to the bottom of the loch, Vickers executives capitalized on the loss and 'monster fever' by allowing the sub to do a bit of exploring. During one of these excursions, the Pisces picked up a large moving object on sonar 200 feet ahead and 50 feet above the bottom of the loch. Slowly the pilot closed half that distance but the echo moved rapidly out of sonar range and disappeared.
[edit]The Big Expedition of 1970
During the so-called "Big Expedition" of 1970, Roy Mackal, a biologist who taught for 20 years at the University of Chicago, devised a system of hydrophones (underwater microphones) and deployed them at intervals throughout the loch. In early August a hydrophone assembly was lowered into Urquhart Bay and anchored in 700 feet of water. Two hydrophones were secured at depths of 300 and 600 feet. After two nights of recording, the tape (sealed inside a 55 gallon steel drum along with the system's other sensitive components) was retrieved and played before an excited LNPIB. "Bird-like chirps" had been recorded, and the intensity of the chirps on the deep hydrophone suggested they had been produced at greater depth. In October "knocks" and "clicks" were recorded by another hydrophone in Urquhart Bay, indicative of echolocation. These sounds were followed by a "turbulent swishing" suggestive of locomotion by the tail a large aquatic animal. The knocks, clicks, and resultant swishing was believed to correspond to predation - an animal pinpointing prey via echolocation and then moving in for the kill. The noises died out when craft passed along the surface of Loch Ness near the hydrophone and resumed when craft had reached a safe distance. During previous experiments, it was observed that call intensities were greatest at depths less than 100 feet. Members of the LNPIB decided to attempt communication with the animals producing the calls by playing back previously recorded calls into the water and listening via hydrophone for any results - which varied greatly. At times the calling pattern changed, other times it increased or decreased in intensity, sometimes there was no change at all. Mackal noted that there was no similarity between the recordings and the hundreds of known sounds produced by aquatic animals. "More specifically," he said, "competent authorities state that none of the known forms of life in the loch has the anatomical capabilities of producing such calls."
The rhomboid fin photograph, the "flipper" photograph. The image is known to have been retouched from the original. The Museum of Hoaxes shows the original unenhanced photo.
[edit]Robert Rines's studies (1972, 1975 and 2001)
In the early 1970s, a group of people led by American patent lawyer and founder of an organization which he named the Academy of Applied Sciences, Robert Rines, obtained some underwater photographs. One was a vague image, perhaps of a rhomboid flipper (others have argued the object could be air bubbles or a fish fin). On the basis of this photograph Peter Scott, a British naturalist, announced in 1975 that the scientific name of the monster would henceforth be Nessiteras rhombopteryx[19] (Greek for "The Ness monster with diamond-shaped fin"). This would enable Nessie to be added to a British register of officially protected wildlife (but compare [20]). It has been noted by London newspapers that Nessiteras rhombopteryx is an anagram of "monster hoax by Sir Peter S." Monster-hunter Robert H. Rines replied that the letters could also be rearranged to spell "Yes, both pix are monsters--R."
The underwater photos were reportedly obtained by painstakingly scouring the loch's depths with sonar, over the course of days, for unusual underwater activity. An underwater camera with an affixed, high-powered light (necessary for penetrating Loch Ness' famed murk) was then deployed to record images from below the surface. Several of the resulting photographs, despite their obviously murky quality, did indeed seem to show an animal quite resembling a plesiosaur in various positions and lightings. There was one of what looked like the head, neck and upper torso of a plesiosaur [21]. Close examination would show a head shape and even an eye. Another showed a "gargoyle head". This was found to be a tree stump during Operation Deepscan. A few close-ups of what is alleged to be the creature's diamond-shaped fin were also taken, in different positions, indicating movement.
However, the "flipper photograph" above has been highly retouched from the original image. The Museum of Hoaxes [22] shows the original unenhanced photo. Charlie Wyckoff said that someone retouched the photo to superimpose the flipper. He claimed that the original enhancement showed a much smaller flipper. No one is exactly sure how the original came to be this more flipper-like version. [23]
In 2001, the Academy of Applied Science, known for Robert Rines' photographs, videoed a powerful V-shaped wake going across the water on a calm day [24]. They also found what looked like a decaying carcass of an animal.
[edit]Discovery Loch Ness (1993)
In 1993 Discovery Communications went to research the ecology of the loch. It did not focus completely on the monster, but also on the nematode population and the number of fish in the loch. They discovered a new species of nematode. After expecting only a few fish, they caught twenty fish, all in one catch. This seems to have increased the estimated of number of fish in the loch about nine times.
Later, with sonar, they found disturbances in the loch, a rare kind of underwater storm that occurs if energy (eg. from a wind) is stored in the loch and there is a inbalance between the warmer and colder layers in the loch. The next day while looking at printouts of this strange event, they found what looked like three sonar contacts, each with a powerful wake behind it.
The search was later shown with the analyses and enhancements of the 1960 Dinsdale Film, the Surgeon's Photo, and the Rines Flipper Photo as a program called Loch Ness Discovered.
[edit]GUST Expedition (2001)
A controversial expedition by the Global Underwater Search Team (GUST) was made in 2001. Using advanced sonar equipment, they tried to look for the monster. One night, a small sonar contact moved from the screen. Another time, some disturbance was seen, and was caught on film, although it was very vague.
The expedition was shown as a program called Loch Ness Monster: Search for the Truth.
[edit]Controversy
This expedition sparked controversy with many Christian groups because a witch cast a spell on the loch prior to the expedition. This witch, Kevin Carlyon, often goes to the loch to cast spells, especially for the 'Nessie on the Net' webcam. Some Christians have even told people not to go to Loch Ness because of this.
[edit]BBC investigations (2003-4)
In July 2003, the BBC reported an extensive investigation of Loch Ness by a BBC team, using 600 separate sonar beams, found no trace of any "sea monster" (i.e., any large animal, known or unknown) in the loch. The BBC team concluded that Nessie does not exist. [25] In 2004, a documentary team for Channel 4 (primarily consisting of special effects experts from movies) deliberately tried to make people believe there was something in the loch. They constructed an elaborate animatronic model. Despite setbacks, it was a success, and numerous sightings were reported on the day, in the places they performed the hoaxes.
[edit]Explanations
[edit]The plesiosaur theory
The monster is commonly identified as a plesiosaur, a prehistoric aquatic reptile with a long neck. Plesiosaurs became extinct millions of years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous Period during the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event, but believers in Nessie suggest that a breeding colony survived in isolation in Loch Ness.[citation needed] Supporters of the plesiosaur theory also say that the coelacanth was also thought to be extinct since the time of the plesiosaurs and was rediscovered in 1938. The coelecanth is an ocean-dwelling fish, and many specimens have been found since 1938.
Arguments against the plesiosaur theory include the fact that the lake is too cold for a cold-blooded animal to survive in easily. Believers respond that there is some evidence that dinosaurs (which were contemporaries of plesiosaurs) were warm-blooded [26], although this remains controversial.
Sceptics say that air-breathing animals like plesiosaurs would be easily spotted when they surface to breathe. Supporters of the plesiosaur theory say that plesiosaurs may have lifted only their nostrils above the surface to breathe; Robert Rines and Sir Peter Scott once said that "animals can adapt" and that "some reptiles can stay in water for a long time". "Many accounts if head sightings speak of 'horns' or 'ears', which may be extentions if the nostrils into breathing tubes. With any ripple on the water it would not be difficult for a Nessie to breathe undetected. In flat calm conditions, the surface is constantly dimpled by rising fish and again the animal would be likely to go unnoticed" [27]
In addition, palaeontologist Leslie Noè points out that the neck bones of plesiosaurs (specifically Muraenosaurus) also makes the theory unlikely because "The osteology of the neck makes it absolutely certain that the plesiosaur could not lift its head up swan-like out of the water."[28] Believers respond that there is no evidence that the monster is specifically a Muraenosaurus and over time the neck muscles could have become stronger.[citation needed] Some also believe that it is not a real plesiosaur, but a distant relative.
Other skeptical arguments include the notion that the lake is too small to support a breeding colony. Sunlight does not penetrate very deep into the water because of peat washed into the loch from the surrounding hills. This limits the amount of algae in the loch, thereby reducing the number of plankton, small fish, and then large fish up the food chain. It is therefore unlikely that the loch's supply of food would be enough to support animals as big as a plesiosaur, particularly a breeding population of plesiosaurs.
A final argument against the plesiosaur theory is that the Loch itself formed only 10,000 years ago during the last ice age.[citation needed] Believers respond by saying that there is a possibility that a small colony of plesiosaurs could have gotten accidentally land-locked after the Ice Age.
According to the Swedish naturalist and author Bengt Sjögren (1980), the present day belief in lake monsters in for example Loch Ness, is associated with the old legends of kelpies. Sjögren claims that the accounts of lake-monsters have changed during history. Older reports often talk about horse-like appearances, but more modern reports often have more reptile and dinosaur-like-appearances, and Bengt Sjögren concludes that the legends of kelpies evolved into the present day legends of lake-monsters where descriptions of the monsters changed to a more "realistic" and "modern" version, reflecting greater awareness of, and interest in, dinosaurs and plesiosaurs. This idea, would need to change the kelpie from a creature of folklore to one of seeming reality. Believers argue that older witnesses compared it to what they knew, and since they had never heard of plesiosaurs they couldn't compare it to them. As an example, early explorers of Australia described an animal that "stood like a man, had a head (sometimes two) like a deer, and jumped like a frog." They were laughed at, but today anyone who claimed kangaroos didn't exist would be considered crazy.
There are some people who think that the monster will never be proven to exist, because they believe that one day the monster may become extinct before it is accepted by science.
[edit]The tree theory
In a series of articles for New Scientist in 1982 Dr Maurice Burton proposed that sightings of Nessie and similar creatures elsewhere could be caused by slowly fermenting logs of Scots pine in the loch's cold waters rising to the surface. The rotten logs could not release the gases caused by their decay, due to their high levels of resin sealing the gas in. Eventually the gas pressure would burst a resin seal at one end of the log, propelling it through the water - sometimes as far as the surface. He claimed that the shape of tree logs with their attendant branch stumps closely resemble many descriptions of the monster.
Four Scottish lochs are very deep, including Morar, Ness and Lomond; of these, three have monster legends; the same three have native pinewoods on their shores and/or major river catchments; the one with no legends (Lomond) doesn't.
Surfactants resulting from the decay of the log, plus the gas, result in a more visible foamy wake, as reported in some sightings. Beached pine logs showing evidence of such deep-water fermentation have been found.
An objection to this idea is that some lakes have reports of monsters, despite their having no pine woods nearby. A notable instance is the Irish lough monsters [29].
The Bords' Modern Mysteries of Britain (Guild Publishing 1987), p302 reports a monster sighting on Loch Lomond in 1972, although of course a single report does not make a tradition.
“The Loch Ness Saga,” by Dr. Maurice Burton, New Scientist, June 24, 1982, p. 872; July 1, 1982, pp. 41-42; July 8, 1982, pp. 112-113.
[edit]Seiches and boat wakes
Loch Ness, due to its long, straight shape, is subject to some unusual features affecting its surface.
A seiche is a large, regular oscillation of a lake, caused by a water reverting to its natural level after being blown to one end of the lake. The impetus from this reversion continues to the lake's windward end and then reverts back. In Loch Ness this process occurs regularly every 31.5 minutes [30].
Boat wakes can also produce unexpected effects in the loch. As a wake spreads out from a boat passing up or down the loch, it hits both sides roughly simultaneously and reflects back to meet again in the middle. Here they interact to produce standing waves that are much larger than the original wake, and can have a humped appearance; by this time, the boat has gone on and the unusual waves are all that can be seen. [31] [32]
However, there are wake sightings which appear to go against the theory. One reason is because the loch is glass calm during these sightings and no boats are nearby. A bar tender named David Munro saw a wake zig-zagging, diving and reappearing. He ended up with 26 people in the car park. He was very sure it was a creature [23]. Some sightings tell of a beginning of a V-shaped wake, as if something were underwater [24]. Additionally, in many wake sightings the wake is shaped unlike a boat[14].
[edit]The elephant theory
Another theory put forward by Neil Clark [33], the curator of paleontology at the Hunterian Museum in Glasgow has suggested that Nessie could in fact simply be a elephant swimming; which is given credence by a traveling circus which passed the area at the height of the sightings. [34]