It was Maurice Burton, more than anyone, who had the most to write against this picture. Here we concentrate, not on arguments for this being a monster photo, but on arguments against this being such a photo. For you see, when arguments are made for and against, one could imagine a pendulum swinging towards " hoax" or through " inconclusive" towards " real" as the debate ebbs and flows. Maurice Burton stated his case and ever since the pendulum has spent most of its time beyond " inconclusive" in the " hoax" area.

A statement which has nothing to do with the main argument, so we class this as deflection. Again, the commenter says my argument is weak but offers no logic or data as to why. Sixth point rejected. Before we look at the JARIC report mention should be made of the inconsistency of the length and time of the film.

Photographs of the Loch Ness Monster

On the 15th September a member of the Mountain expedition, James Fraser, filmed an object on the Loch using a 16mm cine camera with a 150mm lens attached. It was filmed at Urquhart Bay in poor conditions. The object was said to be about 2 to 2.5 metres long and was filmed at a distance of approximately 1.2 km. It was argued at an annual Linnean Society meeting that the film evidence showed what looked to be a seal. Others agreed that it resembled an otter or a whale. The film is now missing but stills were published of some water disturbances and a mysterious object.

Seven members of the newly formed LNIB (Loch Ness Investigation Bureau) observed an object travelling through the water at Urquhart Bay during an expedition in 1962. It was the 18th of October and it was in the afternoon that they filmed an object approximately 200 metres away, described as being a 'long dark shape'.The Search for Morag, my favourite book on this subject, applies a very rigorous acceptance criteria for sightings. None of the sightings in the book is talked up in any way, and it is perfectly acceptable that what the witnesses have seen is an unusual phenomena. At the moment, the press and the 'official' register are treating this like a magic show. In 1966 the film received publicity again, having been analysed by the Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Centre (JARIC) which included the statement that the object was 'probably animate'. [25] [22]

In the light of all this, fellow sceptic, Steuart Campbell, wrote to him in preparation for his 1986 book, " The Loch Ness Monster: The Evidence". Burton gave a fuller account of his alleged trip to O' Connor's location which was summarised by Campbell: In the decades since, there have been dozens of high-profile attempts to prove the existence of the monster. In 2003, the BBC funded an extensive search using 600 sonar beams, which turned up nothing. In 1991, when the lure of Loch Ness became too strong to ignore, he gave up his job, sold his house and embarked on full-time monster-watching, summer and winter, rain, shine or driving snow.

Dinsdale, T. 1975. Project Water Horse: the True Story of the Monster Quest at Loch Ness. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. Campbell, S., 1995. Nessie model explanation suspect (letter). Skeptical Inquirer, March/April, 62–63.

SIR – BBC News at Six blames “the Conservative Government ” every time it finds something to criticise, but when it reported Birmingham City Council’s bankruptcy, it never once mentioned that it is Labour-controlled.

When Monsters come Ashore

So the report does not point to the object being the monster but nothing more exciting than a local fishing boat. Gemmell said the sheer volume of eel DNA surprised him and his team. And, maintaining a straight face, he added: “We don’t know if the eel DNA we are detecting is from a gigantic eel or just many small eels.” I suppose obsession is one way of describing it. But the way I see it, this is such a small country we're living in and we now understand just about every inch of it. Well, this is something we don't have an explanation for. It's inevitable that we have to admit there's something unexplained in Loch Ness. I have to accept that the first thing I film probably isn't going to be the final piece of evidence. I'll carry on until the mystery is solved - until we've got to the bottom of it." Maybe, though, it's more love affair than obsession - one that began when a seven-year-old boy arrived in Loch Ness on a family holiday in 1970. He went to the local exhibition with his father, who bought him a Nessie portfolio as a souvenir. That was all it took. The proprietor of the Foyers Hotel agreed to help Dinsdale by using one of his boats, and this was filmed near where he saw the creature and where it finally travelled parallel to the shore.