Drone Footage of Nessie?

[PurpleLama]

k5t48qGWjE0

Something appears to emerge from the depths, go to 3:54, and see what you think. Purportedly, the person who released this video thinks that it is just the waves playing tricks on us.

[DeDukshyn]

Hmmm . doesn't seem to be related to the waves ... looks a bit plesiosaur-ish ... maybe its the reflection of a cloud?

[PurpleLama]

Hmmm . doesn't seem to be related to the waves ... looks a bit plesiosaur-ish ... maybe its the reflection of a cloud?

Hmm. So you don't know, either. I know you have some skill in spotting trickery in photos and videos. Interesting.

Perhaps it is a reflection of a cloud, how would we tell?

[Bill Ryan]

An anecdote. :)

I lived in Scotland for many years, and I've been interested in Nessie since I was a kid. And many may not know that west of Loch Ness, there's another huge, deep lake called Loch Morar. That has a monster as well, affectionately known as Morag.

Morag isn't sighted so often, because unlike Loch Ness, Morar has no road that runs along the long shoreline. But there have been some dramatic encounters.

One, I read about in a book many years ago. I have no reference right now, but it must be out there somewhere.

A man was trout fishing in shallow water, near the shore, in a glass-bottomed boat. The water was crystal clear. Then suddenly, he found himself looking down through the glass bottom of his boat through about 15 feet of water — at what he described as an enormous reptile, just quietly sitting there on the bottom in the shallows.

He was literally right on top of the thing. :) What he must have felt at that moment can only be imagined.

[onawah]

That looked just like a huge crocodile to me! :croc:
...At first glance. Then I ran it again and it looked more like a long-necked reptile, like Nessie is usually portrayed as.
I would say it's definitely not a cloud reflection, though!

[syrwong]

47531

It is Nessie alright.

(It is strange that the camera was zooming in on the animal as if the cameraman had noticed it, but suddenly it was cut off)

[Mike Gorman]

I see what you mean, I full-screened the video and ran the part a few times: I think it is the leading edge of a cloud, but certainly looks aquatic dinosaurish! Nicely spotted, I suspect cloud. If you look at the depth of water there, it is pretty shallow, a large animal would be breaking the surface by that point IMHO

[syrwong]

We got too used to watching movies in which the abrupt switching of scene is common. The sudden cut off from the zooming in is very fishy. I think the footage becomes too dramatic, like Nessi got scared and moved to deep water, that the uploader of the video felt compelled to delete it. Nessi remains a mystery.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

No way is that a shadow of a cloud. When you take in the wider angle from overhead, you don't see any reflections coming off that water. You need a clear, still surface for that, and that's not the case here. If that isn't a CGI insert, it's a physical (and yes, plesiosaur-shaped) object under the surface. Pretty darn remarkable footage.

[Journeyman]

Here's a very different take from symbols decode on the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot and other monster stories. It's a long post and maybe should even come with a trigger warning if you're a believer in Bigfoot or Nessie, because SD has another explanation involving blackmail and secret communications hidden within news stories:

https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2021/05/13/myth-comms-blurry-evidence-of-monsters/

[DeDukshyn]

Hmmm . doesn't seem to be related to the waves ... looks a bit plesiosaur-ish ... maybe its the reflection of a cloud?

Hmm. So you don't know, either. I know you have some skill in spotting trickery in photos and videos. Interesting.

Perhaps it is a reflection of a cloud, how would we tell?


There's no smoking gun way to tell if that is a reflection or not - but I always try my best to give "the most like alternative explanation" - in all my analysis.

The only problem I have with it possibly being a plesiosaur-ish thingy, is the fact there is no local movement. The neck doesn't move / bend, what looks like "flippers" never move, etc. besides it's slight linear movement as a whole, it is static. Which makes it a bit less believable.

It sure is interesting! The object that looks like Nessie is about 22-24ft long I would guess - comparing to the length of the canoes.

[Bill Ryan]

Here's a very different take from symbols decode on the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot and other monster stories. It's a long post and maybe should even come with a trigger warning if you're a believer in Bigfoot or Nessie, because SD has another explanation involving blackmail and secret communications hidden within news stories:

https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2021/05/13/myth-comms-blurry-evidence-of-monsters/Well — former Avalon moderator Kristin (who we all knew extremely well) had a personal face-to-face encounter with a Bigfoot. Literally face-to-face. She was just a few feet away from the thing, in broad daylight.

And the most dramatic encounter with Morag (the Loch Morar monster) was many years ago, long before the internet, when a couple of fishermen broke their oars over the creature's back when it attacked their boat. (Scottish fishermen don't break their valuable oars for no reason. :) ) I could go on, and on, and on.

In Ecuador, back in 1988, a hiker was attacked by the Ecuadorian version of Bigfoot (called the 'Wawa Grande'), and was hospitalized with a broken arm and deep bites and scratches. He made the mistake of sheltering from the rain under some huge boulders where the Wawa Grande had got there first. (And there are no bears in Ecuador, like black/brown bears or grizzlies.)

These phenomena (and most of the reports) are very real. :)

:focus:

[onawah]

Maybe it was asleep....



Hmmm . doesn't seem to be related to the waves ... looks a bit plesiosaur-ish ... maybe its the reflection of a cloud?

Hmm. So you don't know, either. I know you have some skill in spotting trickery in photos and videos. Interesting.

Perhaps it is a reflection of a cloud, how would we tell?


There's no smoking gun way to tell if that is a reflection or not - but I always try my best to give "the most like alternative explanation" - in all my analysis.

The only problem I have with it possibly being a plesiosaur-ish thingy, is the fact there is no local movement. The neck doesn't move / bend, what looks like "flippers" never move, etc. besides it's slight linear movement as a whole, it is static. Which makes it a bit less believable.

It sure is interesting! The object that looks like Nessie is about 22-24ft long I would guess - comparing to the length of the canoes.

[DeDukshyn]

Maybe it was asleep....



Hmmm . doesn't seem to be related to the waves ... looks a bit plesiosaur-ish ... maybe its the reflection of a cloud?

Hmm. So you don't know, either. I know you have some skill in spotting trickery in photos and videos. Interesting.

Perhaps it is a reflection of a cloud, how would we tell?


There's no smoking gun way to tell if that is a reflection or not - but I always try my best to give "the most like alternative explanation" - in all my analysis.

The only problem I have with it possibly being a plesiosaur-ish thingy, is the fact there is no local movement. The neck doesn't move / bend, what looks like "flippers" never move, etc. besides it's slight linear movement as a whole, it is static. Which makes it a bit less believable.

It sure is interesting! The object that looks like Nessie is about 22-24ft long I would guess - comparing to the length of the canoes.

Well, one might think it would have woken up after its head drifted into the rocks by the shore ...

Obviously there is a lot more footage ... I wonder if the videographer would release the raw footage? Surely if more of the footage showed proof of Nessie, that would be a way more exciting and profitable video to post than a canoe trip? Not that I doubt that weird elusive creatures exist, I jut think that while very interesting, and so far not well explained, this isn't smoking gun proof.

[onawah]

Perhaps it was using its head as an anchor to keep still near the shore--possibly wanting to check out the canoes, but at a safe distance.


Maybe it was asleep...

Well, one might think it would have woken up after its head drifted into the rocks by the shore ...

[DeDukshyn]

Perhaps it was using its head as an anchor to keep still near the shore--possibly wanting to check out the canoes, but at a safe distance.


Maybe it was asleep...

Well, one might think it would have woken up after its head drifted into the rocks by the shore ...


It does move a bit - linearly toward the shoreline and a bit to the right - hence my comment on it "banging its head" on the rocks.

I noticed in the comments, the uploader says he "doesn't see anything there" - that is suspicious, as there is something obviously there.

Another commenter accuses of editing it in to gain views, to which the uploader responds to by saying it was for charity, but does not ever deny editing it in.

In the description is this: "My son has just started working for a company called People’s Cinema. People’s Cinema is encouraging film making from traditional pathways as well as the self-taught. The company helps to empower people’s creativity and gets them noticed in a vastly competitive industry."

It looks to me like it could easily be a still image of a plesiosaur composited into the scene with some very basic editing - it wouldn't take a lot of skill to do this. The way the morphology of the object is 100% static, lends credence to it being a still image.

The fact that it appears out of nowhere as though out of the depths (without its displacement disturbing the surface water whatsoever), would indicate a basic fade and movement transform of one composite slide over another - easy to do with any basic video editor.

The fact that if there was something there, surely they would have more footage of it (the drone would have captured video possibly until it landed - no one captures footage for 2 seconds - even a TV commercial will have well over an hour of footage that gets whittled down to 15 seconds).

I think it is very possible it is an image that has been edited in ...

EDIT: One more point - water has a refractive index of 1.3 - it bends light a fair bit dependent on surface angle - if there was an object below the water the bends of the waves would heavily distort and bend the image -- this does not occur.

I can't un-see it now ... not sure how I didn't come to that consideration immediately..

[Journeyman]

Here's a very different take from symbols decode on the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot and other monster stories. It's a long post and maybe should even come with a trigger warning if you're a believer in Bigfoot or Nessie, because SD has another explanation involving blackmail and secret communications hidden within news stories:

https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2021/05/13/myth-comms-blurry-evidence-of-monsters/Well — former Avalon moderator Kristin (who we all knew extremely well) had a personal face-to-face encounter with a Bigfoot. Literally face-to-face. She was just a few feet away from the thing, in broad daylight.

And the most dramatic encounter with Morag (the Loch Morar monster) was many years ago, long before the internet, when a couple of fishermen broke their oars over the creature's back when it attacked their boat. (Scottish fishermen don't break their valuable oars for no reason. :) ) I could go on, and on, and on.

In Ecuador, back in 1988, a hiker was attacked by the Ecuadorian version of Bigfoot (called the 'Wawa Grande'), and was hospitalized with a broken arm and deep bites and scratches. He made the mistake of sheltering from the rain under some huge boulders where the Wawa Grande had got there first. (And there are no bears in Ecuador, like black/brown bears or grizzlies.)

These phenomena (and most of the reports) are very real. :)

:focus:

I think the page is worth sharing and some of the correspondences in the initial Nessie story are at least suggestive, but of course it doesn't really answer the question as to what level of truth lies behind these stories. Although I like their work, one of SD's weaknesses is a polarised approach. If they think there's comms there then they dismiss the subject as 'tinfoil' which suggests it's disproved, when that's not the case.

I haven't discounted any of these although I think Bigfoot or Wawa Grande etc are more likely than Nessie, simply because the Loch is, presumably*' a closed system, within which it's difficult to conceive of a survivor for that period. Whereas many of the Bigfoot / similar creatures live in areas of extensive wilderness with potential access to underground systems leading who knows where. All of these are also subject to the human factor though. Amongst the genuine accounts there will be the opportunists that need to be sifted out.










*another potential rabbit hole...

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Obviously there is a lot more footage ... I wonder if the videographer would release the raw footage?

Unfortunately no. He commented that upon uploading the video he deleted all the raw footage. That's extremely convenient. And going by the comments, many many people picked out this object instantly, which raises the question why he didn't see anything at all when going through that raw footage. Apparently, he [I]still can't see it even when a description and timestamp is provided. I find that hard to believe. This feels more and more like a stunt, and therefore a fake.

[Ratszinger]

I want to believe it's Nessie but truthfully it's probably a big tree/log/stump close to shore.

[DeDukshyn]

Obviously there is a lot more footage ... I wonder if the videographer would release the raw footage?

Unfortunately no. He commented that upon uploading the video he deleted all the raw footage. That's extremely convenient. And going by the comments, many many people picked out this object instantly, which raises the question why he didn't see anything at all when going through that raw footage. Apparently, he [I]still can't see it even when a description and timestamp is provided. I find that hard to believe. This feels more and more like a stunt, and therefore a fake.

I've done videography and video editing in a professional setting ... deleting raw footage is something that doesn't really happen. When working on a project you often have to convert the raw footage into a codec to make it easier and faster to edit with, and all your files go into a "project folder" - you actually end up with multiple copies of the raw files most often. You generally don't "delete" your project folder after you finish, particularly for reasons of having to tweak something unexpected after the fact (like remove music you get a YT copyright strike against - probably the most common reason ;))

That comment claiming it was deleted (I saw it as well) was also not left by the uploader, but by a viewer.
So I have my doubts if that is actually true.

[PurpleLama]

Thanks for checking it out, Mike. Your input is valuable, when it comes to this sort of thing.

The fact that it does not appear to move much is not a huge stopper for me, as I am unfamiliar with what way the water is moving, and a slow movement of water would allow it to drift and be fairly still while doing so, which might make sense if it were hearing the noisy humans on the bank and wanted to check it out.

What you point out about the refraction of the water and the lack of distortion of the waves going over is a lot more compelling.

These conversations are some of the most fun we have ob this forum, IMO. Thanks to all!

[DeDukshyn]

Thanks for checking it out, Mike. Your input is valuable, when it comes to this sort of thing.

The fact that it does not appear to move much is not a huge stopper for me, as I am unfamiliar with what way the water is moving, and a slow movement of water would allow it to drift and be fairly still while doing so, which might make sense if it were hearing the noisy humans on the bank and wanted to check it out.

What you point out about the refraction of the water and the lack of distortion of the waves going over is a lot more compelling.

These conversations are some of the most fun we have ob this forum, IMO. Thanks to all!


There was one argument in the comments that claimed it was a fake because the object is moving opposite direction of the waves. Surface water and underneath water usually have two distinct layers. For example the lake I live at is long and narrow-ish but water only flows one way through it, regardless of which direction the wind is blowing, so that argumant is bunk and holds no "water", ;) That has no major relevance, except a slight argument could be made that each of those 'layers' has thickness, and near a shore the water movement tends to be dictated by the surface layer. So I think your thinking is generally correct in that regard.

Re: it's movement - it is moving - toward the shore and slightly toward the right - this is clearly visible. The thing is this ... an underwater current does not really move towards shore unless there is an underwater cave right at the shore or a creek that it is draining into. Only surface layer movement (aka waves) move toward shore - so it is unlikely that an underwater current would cause it to drift toward shore.

As far as no movement of its morphology goes, what would be propelling it toward shore if not flipper or body movement, and "underwater" current isn't really a valid explanation? It seems to rise vertically first, out of the depths then moves towards the shore slightly.

And yes the lack of water disturbance and refraction are the more compelling story, that, and the uploader never denying that it has been edited and deterring the responses when asked to something else and never answering that question with a "no", and the fact that his son is in school to make videos to "help ... get them noticed in a highly competitive industry" I think adds up enough in my mind to fairly confidently conclude this is a crafted addition to try to get exposure, likes and views, which would help raise ad revenue for the charity perhaps, and also to help the YT algorithm recommend it to potential viewers.

I think I wanted to believe and that is why I never considered an edit or CGI (usually my first "go to" for a harsh evaluation on these things), but alas, I am 90+% confident this is what we are seeing here.

Crytozoology is still on of my favorite topics! I am always fascinated by the stories, anecdotes, photos and videos, whether real, misidentified, hoax, or art. :) Science still has a looong way to go before it can claim to know "everything".