Police: “That there is some strange creature in Loch Ness now seems beyond doubt”
The National Archives of Scotland has recently put a
on the web.
In it, Chief Constable William Fraser says
“That there is some strange fish creature in Loch Ness seems now beyond doubt, but that the Police have any power to protect it is very doubtful.”
This is an internal statement on official letterhead. It’s a police officer, in a letter to a superior, saying that there is “some strange creature” in Loch Ness.
Alright, buddy, wipe that smirk off your face. 😉
I didn’t link to one of the mainstream articles on the release because, holy moly, they can be so prejudiced and don’t seem to feel like they need to do real journalism on anything paranormal.
For example, one article has this line
“Though the sightings proved to be a hoaxes…”
This is from a major wire service…including the grammatical error. The sightings were proved to be hoaxes? Not mistakes? Not genuine? All deliberate attempts to deceive?
I’m never quite sure all journalists understand what the word “prove” means.
The Loch Ness monster had a great example of this in the 1990s. A claim was made that the famous “Surgeon’s photograph” (arguably, the picture that defined the popular concept of how the monster’s appearance) had been a hoax. That was big news across the world…except that the claim wasn’t examined very closely. First, it was simply hearsay: people saying that someone else said it.
Secondly, the story just didn’t cover the facts (in my opinion, and that of some others). The basic story was a model attached to a toy submarine, a quick picture feet from the shore, and then stomping the model.
Well, that might explain the famous image…but the famous image is cropped. It doesn’t show the whole picture. The whole picture doesn’t look like it is near the shore.
Okay, you say, that’s just a matter of perspective.
Yes…but there were two pictures. In the second, the head and neck are at a different angle. Sure, that could be accomplished by using a second head and neck, or re-bending the first one.
But it doesn’t match the story.
People love to publish that something was a hoax. It’s a good way to laugh at the “suckers” who believed it before. “See, ya dope…I told ya it was fake.” That’s fun…but it isn’t science…or even journalism.
The claim of the hoax should reasonably be submitted to the same tests as the original claim.
If you want to read more of the NAS material, you can go
By the way, it’s worth noting that official “orders of protection” have been issued in other cases. In particular, there is a Skamania County (Washington) ordinance protecting Bigfoot.
You can read that (and other information on cryptid protection) in this nice
Cryptomundo post (and comments)
This post by Bufo Calvin originally appeared in the The Measured Circle blog.