Comments on: Loren is Youtubed

By: sasquatch

sasquatch — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 12:11:52 +0000

Yeah Voodoochild; I did catch the contradiction, also the BBC sonor scans he mentioned have since been exposed as not being as extensive as claimed. That fact was not brought up-maybe due to time limitations? Anyway, my opinion is that this thing is pretty big when compared to the waves, I’d say just what is clearly creature (their could be more underwater) and not it’s wake; is about 12-15 feet long. I’ve been on lakes and oceans enough to have a decent intuitive feel for wave size to feel confident in my estimate. There DOES appear to be a bulbous head, (fairly) long, thin neck and larger massive area that trails behind…The closest thing I can think of that matches? Plesiosaur.

By: Tengu

Tengu — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:58:06 +0000

a family of otters would swim in a row.

Grey seals are bigger and there is certainly (certainly according to the NHM) a seal(s) in the loch.

what is the scale of the thing, anyway??

By: CryptoGoji

CryptoGoji — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:12:03 +0000

Nice interview Loren. Otters swimming in a row? maybe a few, but not enough to bring a 70′ line. I still think that this other man is only fooling himself to be on tv, but somebody had to take the opposing viewpoint and he was prolbaly as good as anybody.

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 04:33:53 +0000

Otters in formation? It must be the British Otter Patrol! Cue patriotic music and newsreel footage.

By: Cryptonut

Cryptonut — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:11:12 +0000

Loren: Very aticulate, and you fairly represented the evidence and didn’t look to puff anything up more than it was, until more can be gleaned from the video evidence, talking with the individual who did the filming, etc. On the other hand, Nickell’s point of view was ridiculous. It’s as if being a skeptic gives one the freedom to say everything is bogus without any investigation at all. Did he have any more evidence to prove that they were otters? He wants to lump some other sightings into every one of them without any investigation on his part. No credibility.

By: asrai

asrai — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 22:54:23 +0000

Nice job!

And having looked at this footage again I still don’t think that it is a otter or otters swimming in a line. First of all the otters he is talking about, lutra lutra, are highly territorial and live alone for the most part. So I don’t think we’d see a bunch of them swimming in a line. Also it would take a lot a otters to give the appearance of a 70′ creature.

By: Pvolitans

Pvolitans — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 22:50:53 +0000

Good job Loren!

A stream of otters swimming in a line seems a lot less believable. I can understand why you’d shake your head. If we’re talking about multiple animals moving in tandem, explain why there are no heads bobbing up for air around the large mass that is trailing the obvious head and neck? Are the otters taking breaths in synchrony now? Are they timing their breathing?

I’m seriously skeptical of the skeptic’s explanation, at any rational level. There is obviously one large mass moving behind the head and though I wouldn’t jump the gun to say it’s plesiosaur, I’d say that it’s something that would compel further study.

Point of interest: to prove the hypothesis that ‘Nessie’ might migrate like salmon along tributaries, then these tributaries would be the perfect chokepoints for observation.

By: jerrywayne

jerrywayne — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:50:42 +0000

I thought Nickell gave a plausable, if not definitive, explanation for what appears on the video. On the other hand, it was unfortunate that Coleman countered Nickell’s negative evidence (no sonar “sightings” during the major scan of Ness; no remains found of “Nessie” over the years; not enough food source for a breeding colony of “monsters” at Ness) with an ad hoc assumption that the legendary creatures of Ness come to and leave the lake by land and waterway.

By: Crypt_Raider

Crypt_Raider — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:50:04 +0000

Very nice!

I agree that it’s possible that previous sightings were of otters and such, and that them swimming leaves a trail as they break through the waves, BUT a 70′ trail, I don’t think so.

I was also impressed to see that you were open to different opinion and other explanations. Allot of the time when Cryptozoologists are called to the plate they’re normally so desperate to prove something’s existence that they seem crazy and unwilling to see things for what they also may be! It really gives the field of Cryptozoology a bad name.

You on the other hand, handled it superbly. Kudos!!!

Also I was not aware of the book you had wrote. It seems very interesting. I will have to pick up a copy.

Nice work!

By: sschaper

sschaper — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 18:15:24 +0000

Well done! You gave a very credible presentation, increasing the credibility of cryptozoology. Very well done, Loren.