The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
New video footage, apparently somewhat compelling, of Loch Ness Monster
stv.tv — An amateur scientist believes he could have captured the Loch Ness Monster - on videotape. Yorkshireman Gordon Holmes was carrying out experiments at the famous loch when by chance he happened to spot a strange creature in the waters. Now his film of the incident is causing a sensation.
c4h5n3o- 1612 diggs
- digg it
- KittySpark1es, on 10/11/2007, -51/+12Let me guess...Global Warming?
- hiPpymIck, on 10/11/2007, -17/+7..no - bid for World Heritage Status ..it takes 5 years
http://www.stv.tv/content/news/north_scotland/display.html?id=opencms:/news/north_scotland/Highland_bid_for_World_Heritage_Status#cooliris - jmontes, on 10/11/2007, -5/+111If you haven't seen the video yet -- don't get too excited. Keep your expectations low and maybe you won't be disappointed.
- Glugory, on 10/11/2007, -25/+22Dugg down as lame. It's just more blurry crap. Wouldn't surprise me if the guy faked it.
- pogfreak, on 10/11/2007, -19/+52I'd prefer more pics of the snog tees girl
- gxcdesign, on 10/11/2007, -27/+14Gotta love their Scottish Accents eh?
- sfpfc, on 10/11/2007, -45/+15you should be punished if you believe in loch ness, bigfoot, or finding any humor in family guy. it does not exist.
- shadus, on 10/11/2007, -35/+24I think it's good that people still treat the loch ness monster as a possibility, people evaluate the evidence rather than just rejecting it out of hand, well at least the real scientists do. That's what makes science better than religion-- it's open to its own mistakes and evaluates new evidence when it surfaces.
- eridius, on 10/11/2007, -3/+35@shadus
The problem is that people put too much credence in it without any hard evidence. Sure, it's a possibility, but so far all of the hard evidence is against it, and all of the purported evidence for Nessie is either a confirmed fake or obviously not real.
While being open to new possibilities is a good thing, it's too easy to take it too far. Just because it's a possibility doesn't mean I shouldn't be critical of it without any evidence. - weezerjoker2, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4Credibilitay
- hdtvdust, on 10/11/2007, -40/+8shadus...that may be the dumbest thing ever said on Digg. Science has LONG since proven there is no Lochness Monster. There is far more evidence against hte Lochness Monster than there is against God...of which there is NO evidence against.
- kitwaites, on 10/11/2007, -18/+44@gxcdesign
The "amateur scientist" has a retarded accent, not Scottish. The UK equivalent of a redneck.
@hdtvdust
Evil, pain, injustice, multiplicity of religions and Occam's Razor are five arguments against God. - deepdiggdude, on 10/11/2007, -1/+58ANSWER:
Watch the video very closely and you will see the shape spread out and advance sometimes in two directions. This is caused by a school of fish, much the same way starlings form dark patches in the sky when enough birds collect together. Note that nothing actually breaks the surface. - Spikito, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34Is it just me, or does that guy have a HUGE forehead?
- DildoOreilly, on 10/11/2007, -15/+6Whoever thinks this video is "sensational", has to be the stupidest waste of sperm and egg to walk the planet.
- ophello, on 10/11/2007, -13/+33@ kitwaites
"Evil, pain, injustice, multiplicity of religions and Occam's Razor are five arguments against God."
He said there is no evidence against god, not arguments. for every argument for god, there is one against it, but neither constitute evidence.
Would you want to live in a Universe where God held your hand and disallowed pain and evil and forced you to be a good person? if you think that pain and evil are reasons that god cant exist means you would rather live in a universe with a tyrant who controlled you and never let you think for yourself, learn for yourself, and experience the range of emotion and truth we are capable of experiencing.
would you rather live in a universe where god was obvious and everyone knew he was there?
people have such screwed up ideas about god -- including those who practice religious beliefs. the best god lets you choose for yourself. this means evil and pain for some. but it is better. - grogan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9@shadus
Religions often do continually re-evaluate core beliefs. Take a look at all of the denominations of Christianity, for example. Or look at what Martin Luther did in taking the Christian church back to its roots when he didn't believe in some of the tenets of Catholicism. - synclare, on 11/26/2008, -1/+39If your town/country made a big chunk of money from international tourists looking to see a "monster" - then you'd probably keep the joke going too.
- themastersb, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3WOAH! That guy's head is huge! Maybe he saw an otter?
- audiowizard, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6Scotland...they'll stop at nothing to get in the news....
- AWBoy666, on 10/11/2007, -27/+5Wow.......there are some amazingly ugly people over in England......
- enlightenme, on 10/11/2007, -0/+42The logical explanation here is that there is a 1000 year old monster that doesn't breed and roams the lake, occasionally rising above water when nobody is looking.
- spearce, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15do you have to go to school to become an "amateur scientist?"
- Thex1138, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Could be a mini-sub?
- jotty, on 10/11/2007, -0/+37@ awboy666
scotland is not in england. scotland is in scotland. - anroo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Tow rope. Yawn.
- Fhwqhgads, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2*****, *****, and more *****.
Especially in today's world of photoshop, etc. - Fhwqhgads, on 10/11/2007, -12/+8"you should be punished if you believe in loch ness, bigfoot, or finding any humor in family guy. it does not exist."
---------------------------------------
dugg up! - xtmno3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22@Spikito (#6968337) said: "Is it just me, or does that guy have a HUGE forehead?"
So big it is a fivehead. - haterofps3, on 10/11/2007, -10/+9@ophello
Correct me if i am wrong but there is no credible evidence towards a God( IE Supernatural Being). Credible meaning that you can't recite passages from a Holy Book as these books have been proven to be the work of men and can be dismissed as they lack any scientific evidence pointing to a god. One can't say "Look at the world and say isn't it beautiful, god is in the wind, the trees, the sun and the moon. God is in all that is good and decent in the world." As this isn't evidence in fact this is your opinion and while it might make a good poem it isn't by any means proof.
So if their is no scientific proof(something tangible, observable) that god exists then god doesn't exist. Just like Nessy if there isn't any proof that some giant serpent like creature lives in the Loch then it doesn't. If they want to keep looking for NessyGod let them if they find either it will be an amazing discovery.
I will believe in a god when amputees get their limps back and I will believe in Nessy when I see the creatures remains washed up on shore. People have been looking for God for thousands of years and have found nothing but Abracadabra. - themoose, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Some previous nessie hoaxes for those who're interested. Pretty interesting read!
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/nessiehoaxes.html - snapcase, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Why are "amateur scientists" like this bozo given such credibility? He says that the legend of Nessie stands up to scrutiny? Yeah right. Sorry but there is ZERO scientific evidence that a large aquatic creature like Nessie could live and sustain itself in an inland lake like Loch Ness. For Nessie to actually live in the Loch, there would have to be a sustainable population of the creatures to have existed for the millennium and a half they say Nessie has existed. So now to make the story plausible you have to have at least a large handful of these gigantic creatures in an inland lake, that would need to eat more than what a lake that size can provide, and even supposedly breath air, and the best we can get is a blurry picture of something vaguely beneath the water?! If Nessie were real there should be dozens of clear sightings every single day, and there should also be crystal clear photographic evidence by this time as well. Instead what we get are people who are either foolish enough to believe they saw Nessie, or are just out for the attention, that pop up every now and then with an "eye witness testimony" or some blurry photographs or video that are so vague and can be explained convincingly as something normal so easily that it's laughable. I would love for Nessie to be real as much as most people, but people have to take it upon themselves on occasion to actually open their eye's and realize the truth that is staring them straight in the face. Dreams and fantasies are nice, but in the end that's all they are.
And in my opinion it looks like a log. - JamesWilson, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7@xtmno3 (#6970839)
"the tumor was so big it was a three-mur"
Scrubs - Castarose, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1useless vid
- texpundit, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Am I the only one that finds Scottish brogues *hot* when spoken by women?
- Killerah, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3@ kitwaites
None of those things you mentioned are actually arguments against God.
Evil, pain and injustice are talked about at length in the Bible, how do they make any argument against God? Have you ever read the old testament? You practically can't turn a page without running into some sort of evil, pain, or injustice that we people make! Proverbs 19:3 says "A man's own folly ruins his life, yet his heart rages against the Lord". One of the great things about God is that He still welcomes us into his family despite all the evil, pain, and injustice we cause to happen to ourselves and each other. God sees the mess we're in and when we return to Him He doesn't care about all the things we did to get ourselves there, He just wants to forgive us and give us another chance! I agree with ophello about why it's better this way. Harder, but better.
Multiplicity of religions is something that makes perfect sense if you believe what the Bible says is true. It says that the devil "masquerades as an angel of light", being a believer of the Bible I would be surprised if since the fall of man the devil never thought to make any sort of false religion in an attempt to combat truth and make as big of a mess in God's creation as possible!
As to Occam's Razor, I don't really see how that's an argument against God at all. The only thing it does is say "I don't really have to believe in God, therefore I shouldn't, and I won't". That doesn't sound like an argument against God, it's maybe an argument against the choice of belief in God, but it seems to me to be unusable as evidence against God. In my mind there is enough evidence in God's creation that Occam's Razor has no relevance at all. Can someone explain to me where the universe came from? What was the spark that started everything in motion? Did some sort of cosmic fart produce every piece of matter in the universe from the billions of galaxies and stars and worlds down to the molecules and atoms and electrons? Can something come from nothing? I have a hard time believing that even given eons of time something as enormously complex as the human body could evolve from some ooze. - tilleyrw, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5OK. Let's run through this again.
1. Jesus was a prophet. He was a human. Nothing fancy, a simple human.
1.1 At the age of 18 he journeyed to India and began learning yoga and associated disciplines.
1.2 By the time he was 24, Jesus was Enlightened.
1.3 He returned to the Middle-East.
1.4 Question: Why doesn't the canonical bible speak of the years between 18-24?
2. It was only after the Council of Nicea that the Christian church labeled him the "Son of God" and of the "Virgin Mary".
2.1 Before the Council, Jesus was merely a prophet.
2.2 Mary was not a virgin. No miracle. The Aramaic word meaning "young woman" was mis-translated as "virgin" to create a "miracle" onto which the common man could latch.
3. Jesus preached peace, love, harmony, and non-violent protest. Remember Mahatma Gandhi? Political powers don't like non-violence.
3.1. He was busted on trumped-up charges and executed by the Caesar of the time.
4. Certain men saw the political power inherent in this "Jesus Christ" movement and wanted to secure power over others.
4.1. Thus the Catholic Church was born.
Q: Why does the C. Church preach against abortion and birth control?
A: They want more followers. Simple political analysis. When people are embroiled in Family Life, they don't have time to create dissent.
Q: Why condemn human sexuality and sexual expression?
A: Sexuality is a powerful energy source for self-realization.
When a person realizes that they have a connection the Divine within themselves, they realize that they don't need a priest to connect them to God. This is bad for business.
Let's recap: The church is all an act of self-interest. Listen to the Message, not the messenger! - Killerah, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1@tilleyrw
1. First off, where are you getting that Jesus went to India to learn yoga? Are you just speculating that to answer your own question? I'd like to propose an answer to your question: Because the four gospels were written to tell the story of the important parts of Jesus' life - His birth, His ministry, His death, and his resurrection. In John 2:4 we see Jesus preform His first miracle, and notice what He says right before He does it "my time has not yet come". This marks His first miracle and the start of His ministry, and that is why the four gospels don't record what happens between 18-24, because they're not biographies, they're records of His birth, ministry, death, and resurrection written to convey the message of salvation. I hope that answers your question.
2. The Christian church existed before the Council of Nicea, therefore so did the belief that Jesus is the Son of God. The word Christian means one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus always claimed that He was the Son of God, the council of nicea happened in an attempt to unite the church in their understanding of this concept and dispel false doctrines that were creeping into the church. If you say that there was just one word that the doctrine of Mary's virginity was hanging on then how do you explain Matthew 1:18 which says "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit."? It seems to be more than just some word describing Mary's youth that might have been mis-translated.
3. Jesus was executed because the pharisees wanted to keep their power, we see in Mark 3:1-6 that they start to plot how to kill Jesus when they see that He has true power and all they have is a set of ultra restrictive rules they have based around a religion that God set up for His people. But what they charged him with was blasphemy because He claimed to be the Son of God! Mark 14:61-64 shows this happening, without Jesus claiming to be the Son of God, then what exactly was He busted on? Where are you getting that He was busted on "trumped up charges"? Some historical record? Or are you just filling in the gaps of what you believe about Jesus with what you can speculate? What were these trumped up charges for this man who did nothing wrong?
4. Yeah, no argument here, I'm not a part of the Catholic Church, I totally agree with this statement. It was indeed created as a means of securing power and funding from the common people. Lots of people bear the name of Christ with ulterior motives, ever heard of Benny Hinn? As a side note, Luther is a sweet movie about Martin Luther and his fight against the Catholic church. You should watch it regardless of your beliefs, it's pretty historically accurate and it's a sweet story about a guy who stands up for what he believes and fights the man in spite of the threat of death.
an A to your first Q: I'm not so sure about the catholic church, but abortion is wrong because it's taking a person's life, simple as that. It's murder, there's no two ways about it. People can justify it all they want, but that's just what it is. If the mother of the parent put the child up for adoption and someone came in and killed the child immediately after birth would it be considered murder? Of course! Why should a couple of months make a difference? When that heart stops beating murder has been committed. Birth control I'm not so sure about I'm pretty sure there are methods of birth control that don't involve murder, but I haven't looked into it too much.
an A to your second Q: The church doesn't condemn human sexuality or sexual expression at all! It's all good within the context of marriage. Without marriage it creates an emotional attachment to a person that hasn't given any solid commitment to you. This is how women get used and this is why abortion is such a big deal, if sexual behavior was constrained to marriage like it was meant to be then we probably wouldn't have abortion at all. Also it's important to understand what marriage is, it's a covenant between two people to love each other and stay together no matter what until they die, most people these days don't seem to understand this. Even in the church divorce rates are astronomical. Having sex with a whole bunch of people you're not married to creates all these emotional bonds with people you don't have any substantial commitment to and that's just not healthy. Plus it destroys a lot of the value on your intimacy with your wife if and when you want to get married. Not to mention the fear of STDs, having to deal with pregnancy and abortion, etc.
I'm not sure what you're talking about with the whole "self-realization" thing, for you sex is all about yourself? It seems to me that it should be all about your wife (or probably girlfriend in your case) and pleasing her, if both of you have that focus it would be more pleasurable for the both of you I'm sure. Sex isn't a connection with the Divine, nor is God based on feelings. Because you feel pleasure and you feel a connection with the divine it's not based on anything other than just what you feel. You're absolutely right when you say that you don't need a priest or pastor to connect to God, Christianity has never been about the religion it has always been about the relationship with God, religion is just a means to cultivate that relationship and strengthen your fellow believers in their relationship with God.
Lets recap: The church doesn't hate you or want to condemn you, it's there to help you connect with God. God doesn't need your money (though many organizations that come in His name want it).
- hiPpymIck, on 10/11/2007, -17/+7..no - bid for World Heritage Status ..it takes 5 years
- musicmixingguru, on 10/11/2007, -3/+36next thing we find on digg will be bigfoot
- RocketSeason, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22One can only hope...
- oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+130bigfoot enhanced & stabilized: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/files/mk_davis_pgf.gif
- redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+36@ooliquidnightoo
wow. looking at it like that pretty much convinces me it was just a man in a suit. great gif! - brocklese, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11Can anyone find this on youtube or something that is not Windows Media Player?
- danielbachhuber, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6Amen. Why isn't this in flash?
- praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -4/+13Bigfoot is my favorite animal.
- davehendrix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+35They guy that took that bigfoot footage, of course, later admitted on his deathbed it was faked.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37507 - Rezatron, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Bigfeets
- dodus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Better find him soon, before that kid that shot the huge wild pig does. He's on the hunt, you know.
- Thex1138, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@ooliquidnightoo
Nice piece of work...changes the perspective quite a bit....still he's got that sasquatch swagger about him.. :-) - tconnect80, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Couldn't be a man in a gorilla suit
no ***** way no you know he's real.
As for the Loch Ness video, it's a school of fish or a shadow on the water. - troub, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Nice reference to the D.
Saaaa-squatch. . .
We know your legend's real. - noodlez, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5lets just send the google maps street vans to the loch
nessie will practically jump out of the water at them - CapeKid, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out of focus monster roaming the countryside. Run. He's fuzzy. Get out of here."-Mitch Hedberg
- Icklehamsta, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@brocklese
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Dhg7jQQooA8
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16When the Scottish Tourist Board got behind the Nessie phenomenon, the quality of the movies sure improved. These are quite decent production values.
- redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+26you think so? i thought it looked like a blurry line moving in the water. this doesn't even come close to some of the recent UFO hoaxes i've seen.
- kamel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Obviously fake. Everyone knows he vacations at Bear Lake in the summer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_Lake_Monster. And if for some reason he's still in Scotland:
Sir Cort Godfrey of the Nessie Alliance summoned the help of Scotland's local wizards to cast a protective spell over the lake and its local residents and all those who seek for the peaceful existence of our underwater ally.
- Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+64Why keep waiting for camera footage? Throw some round the clock thermal imaging type stuff on the lake for a week or so. With technology these days you gotta think that someone could use something besides a camera to locate the largest creature in the water. Surely a private company would have done something by now with that as to prove it exists would be a cash cow.
- Suislide, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Never thought about it before.....good idea. We have the technology for it, why not? (Price, i know. :-( )
- redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+49simple answer:
there is no such thing as the loch ness monster. - jivemasta, on 10/11/2007, -1/+30Yeah, we can see what jupiter's core is made of but we can't look a couple of miles under water on our own planet.
- TwistedRonin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+29I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of law against using those methods. I mean it's not good business to have a myth thats a tourist attraction debunked.
- bobmagoo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4i agree, though I think it's more than just a myth, its like a culturally unifying symbol that brings people together and makes the place where they live seem much more intriguing. You get a few wackjobs with grainy footage every once in awhile and the interest/wonder is renewed. seems like a cool idea
- interiot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Well, it *has* been pretty thoroughly searched for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loch_Ness_Monster#Searches_for_the_monster
I don't know exactly why infrared cameras haven't been used much. Though the Loch is really pretty large... it's 23 miles long, 754 feet at its deepest, and contains more freshwater than the rest of England and Wales combined, so IR wouldn't necessarily be conclusive. - fryingpancat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1They won't let anyone do it because if it's proved either way it will destroy the tourist industry who are intrigued by the myth and not actually whether it's there or not. They enjoy searching for it
- localzuk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2And who would front the bill for such a huge analysis? covering 23 miles of lake with equipment isn't cheap...
But some of the methods used to look for it make the scientists just look like they're doing it to keep the myth going.
There was a show on UK TV History recently where they used sonar equipment, on 2 boats and went across the lake in lanes - not doing it at night of course. Wouldn't the fact that whatever it is *moves* instantly make this method pointless? They do 5% of the lake one day, the animal moves, they do more the next - with the thing now in the bit they've done... - thedr96run, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@ interiot
Simply based on Wikipedia's explanations of research done to try to find Nessie, It seems that something could be down there. All of those studies produced positive reinforcement (NOT PROOF) that something exists.
I'm still highly skeptical, but reading this made think there's a possibility of something.
Good quick read of the studies conducted...Thanks! - jhnewt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Nessie is cold-blooded. Thermal imaging won't work.
- molcles, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Why don't 'they' employ all sorts of scientific methods to locate the monster? Well, it's quite clear to me that 'they' haven't because the greatest amateur scientist is already on the case.
- Psykus2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+102Did he ask for $3.50?
- Jolene, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25I need tree fitty...
- SantaClauz, on 10/11/2007, -9/+14... and then he knocked on my door and said "Can I have tree fitty?" Thats when I knew it was him! I said "what do you need tree fitty for!"
Grandma - "n i jus gave him tree fitty day before that..."
"YOU GAVE HIM TREE FITTY? No wonder he always comes back! You can give 'em tree fitty!" - ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+58i told dat god damn lock ness monsta i aint givin him no tree fitty
- tconnect80, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4SC, It's
"And I gave him a dolla' just the day be..."
"she gave him a, YOU GAVE HIM A DOLLA?! GODDAMMIT WOMAN! You know you give im a dolla he's gonna come back wanting more."
- phantomsnow, on 10/11/2007, -7/+71giant unidentified object in a body of water sounds like a terrorist threat. put the loch ness monster on the ***** terrorist watch list is what i say. we go to war with the loch, ***** their ***** all, and nessie surrenders.
***** technology, drop bombs on the bitch- deadowl, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4maybe nessy is cold-blooded, like most sea creatures?
- ronh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You mean like whales? /sarcasm
- Kyan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah, on the no-fly list too. I sure don't want t' end up sittn' next 'a 'im.
- silverchrysalis, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15the 'amatuer scientist' guy looks a wee bit crazy, och?
- oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/11/2007, -8/+33amateur scientist .. isn't that an oxymoron?
- lhbaker, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Isn't just about everybody an amature scientist? Any moron with a microscope is an amature scientist. My seven year old daughter is an amature scientist (but she's not a moron).
- nemobushido, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13"Amateur scientist" is no oxymoron. It just means you aren't a professional scientist. That's no contradiction.
Also, no. Your kid is an "immature" scientist.
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11yeah, obviously a huge monster
- russellnation, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Nessie's getting restless from the global warmings
- Cossa, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Was anyone else extremely irritated that that cooky scientist didn't look at the camera once? And, I had previously thought I liked that scottish accent. Boy is it irritating.
And to the point of the article. I could take a piss in a puddle that looked more like a mythological creature.- faz9, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The guy is from England, not Scotland. Unless you meant the female hosts accent.
- desistere, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3"Apparently somewhat compelling" to whom?
- thoran85, on 10/11/2007, -51/+2Wow they can't say Lake, its lake not lock!
- leetdood, on 10/11/2007, -4/+42Loch. it's a ***** loch.
- ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -11/+8just for the record loch isnt an irish pronunciation of lake, its a body of water in its own right.
- ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2whoops, meant scottish
- localzuk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Indeed, the term applies to both lakes and see inlets. It isn't restricted to Scotland either. It is a Gaelic word so any country which has that sort of background will see influences from it - such as the Isle of Man. There are even some loch's in Hawaii and in the Falklands.
- GavinZac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You win teh prize!!!!
- psbpv3o, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2umm....this is a dupe...
- Gizza, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@psbpv3o (#6967702)
I'm not usually one to call dupe, in fact I never have before. But come on, this already made the front made TODAY. It was on the front page when I hopped on this morning like 3 hours ago.
- Gizza, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@psbpv3o (#6967702)
- GGERG15, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8is it me or does the guy who got the footage look like he cuts people up in little bits in his basement?
- zybch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Looks and sounds a lot like David Thewlis!
- arcterex, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Anyone else just see a shadow from a log or cloud, greatly amplified by the tight and long zoom?
Or am I just being cynical again?- afx1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2a fast moving log or a cloud that creates a wake
- ByronT, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4lol "apparently somewhat compelling"
- designwiz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0hmmm amateur scientist tryin to make a quick buck.... wad a waste, though i really appreciate his effort if there was any !
looks more like a 90 yr old granny goin for a nude bath! - lkmbrd, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18More compelling footage from Toyota:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gCe-1LYj_4o- Satanael, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Holy crap is that the same guy from this video?
- melat0nin, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5"Shoot it! shoot it!"
..***** yanks. - MadMaxx426, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3"..***** yanks."
Oh I see... so if someone yells "shoot it", they must be a gun-crazed American? Yep..makes sense.It's not like the British invented the act of big game hunting or anything...
Pot calling Kettle... come in Kettle... - drachemorder, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Given that people can create pretty much any image they want to these days using special effects, I'd say that practically the only way to get irrefutable evidence of a monster is to shoot it. And even then, you'll need to get about a dozen scientists to document it and measure it and sign notarized statements about it before you grind it up into sausage, or else no one will believe you.
- melat0nin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@MadMaxx
The guy that shouted it was American. And yes, it does seem to be a feature of american culture that the best way to treat something unknown is to shoot it. Look at that massive boar the other day...
- Sakk, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22pfft, send the google van over there. It catches people coming out of strip clubs, surely it can catch nessie eatin your lootz.
- kuek1991, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4And don't forget ET with his laser beams
- lhbaker, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I couldn't make myself watch past the part at the beginning when the anchor turns and says: "Well, Nicola, seems Nessie's back in time for summer."
- clkou, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1This does help prove something I've long suspected: European tv personalities are nothing special to look at.
- jotty, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0
- barbobot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Just in time for tourist season.
Seriously though, this is the best video? There are thousands of people who go there every year and this is the best?
/skeptic - iamanalog, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2oh man I'm half staff for the accents.
- modifiedbears, on 10/11/2007, -3/+19Before you go laughing this off look at the research.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lochness/legend2.html
"Although zoologists have yet to conduct the full-scale investigation Rines hoped to trigger, the loch continues to yield intriguing sonar hits. In 1987, an expedition called Operation Deep Scan used a flotilla of 20 sonar-equipped boats to sweep the loch with a curtain of sound; the operation yielded three underwater targets that could not be explained. In the early 1990s, the BBC's Nicholas Witchell helped organize Project Urquhart, the first extensive study of the loch's biology and geology. Although they weren't looking for monsters, the expedition's sonar operators detected a large, moving underwater target and followed it for several minutes before losing it. And during the 1997 expedition featured in NOVA's Loch Ness film, Rines and his longtime colleague Charles Wyckoff detected yet another puzzling underwater target. According to the expedition's sonar expert, marine biologist Arne Carr, it was a moving target, appeared to be biological in nature, and was about 15 feet long—the size of a small whale."- willrjmarshall, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Yes.
And what would it eat?
A creature the reported size of Nessie wouldn't be able to live on the fauna living in a Loch that small. - localzuk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4why would you think that? A body of water 23 miles long and in some places 754ft deep can sustain a lot of life.
- willrjmarshall, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Yes.
- Autrix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Its a log.
- Sylveran, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18It's a crashed weather balloon! :P
- themouth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2WHAAAAAAATTTT.....
rolls down stairs
alone or in pairs
and over your neighbor's dog
it's great for a snack
it fits on your back
it's log log log
It's looo-oog it's looo-oog
It's big it's heavy it's wood
It's looo-oog it's looo-oog
It's better than bad it's good
- Sylveran, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18It's a crashed weather balloon! :P
- discman, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0Cananyone explain to me and everyone else why there is supposed to be so many people interested in the Loch ness monster why is it this guy for some reason is the only one with footage of iton that day. Surely somebody must have seen the same thing as he did. Also why is it that the footage only lasts a few minutes andwht didnt he call someone on his cell phone while he was filming it ?
- rodbotic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@discman
the Lake is huge, and only small towns are along it's shores.
so it is very unlikely someone nearby would have a videocamera in the same area.
before he zooms in on it, it apears to have a small wake behind it. I was originally thinking it was the shadow of an airplane. - hdtvdust, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3There is no wake "behind it" just fast flowing waves moving past it.
The thing is CLEARLY not moving. The camera is stationary, and it stays in the frame, whilethe water movies out of frame.
- rodbotic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@discman
- yomamaisfat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4We got a floater.
- otep, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1
....Treefitty, indeed. - yoda17, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2
4. Profit! - postal21, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3ITS A STICK!
- goldliop, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3yeah, gotta be honest, i waqs expecting to see a head or something...
and he filmed it during the weekend... why wasnt this heard of earlier.
plus he looks crazy,
so he loses a bit of credibility from me there :P - nreisan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4i refuse to belive any of this *****
until i see a video of the loch ness monster eating tourists in HD
i dont want to hear about it - alabamasucks, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2maybe Bigfoot took up snorkeling?
- poontangpirate, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3THE TRUTH BEHIND THE LOCH NESS MONSTER!
http://www.geek4ums.com/misc/lochness.gif- ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3actually that photo was debunked by the guy who took it, a looong time ago.
- GhostWithToast, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18When is somebody going to 'accidentally' videotape Nessie with a hi-def camera on a tripod?
- DeFex, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8OMG its the loch ness FISH, OTTER or RC BOAT
OCH EYE.
they do this every once in a while to bring in the tourists.
it works almost as well as bleeding religious statues for bringing in the suckers!
funny how the government doesn't have spy cameras there like in the rest of UK- Phil246, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Its also worth bearing in mind that the 2007 golf open championship tournament is to be played in carnoustie, scotland this july.
I wouldnt be surprised that the timing of this is to coincide with those making plans to go over and take advantage of those gullable enough to consider a detour on the way there or back.
- Phil246, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Its also worth bearing in mind that the 2007 golf open championship tournament is to be played in carnoustie, scotland this july.
- Spo8, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3New video footage, apparently somewhat compelling, of mysterious smoke creature roaming island.
Srsly. - StiGUP, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2looks like a submarine....or shadow from above....
- DreamVsPs2, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Am I the only one who thinks its " REAL? "
- ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2i dont necessarily think its real, but at the same time it doesnt look fake to me either. i guess what i'm saying is that its far from conclusive, but i think many are dismissing it too quickly. personally, i dont think its a log or shadow because it doesnt seem to fit right, i wouldnt be too surprised if it ended up being a log, but i think its more than that, even if its just a school of fish swimming near the surface.
- cyclox, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4No... I am totally on board. That is a freakin monster.
- j0eb0t, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22what if the loch ness monster was just blurry in real life?
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4If you live in Scotland, and enjoy using their #1 product, most things ARE blurry in real life! (see my comment below) :-)
- geekwithsoul, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Funniest comment I've ever heard about 'Nessie' -- kudos
- Delphium226, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Blurry and pixellated. Maybe he also has one of those weird electronic voices.
- MachoGrande, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That would be extra scarry.
- r0ryb0ryalis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the [lake bottom]. Run. He's fuzzy. Get outta here."
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3It is too bad nobody in Scotland ever heard of Scuba diving equipment...'case a group of divers going down, with proper search equipment, could easily answer this old question once and for all.
But then, keeping the truth unknown is probably good for tourism. And anyhow, it caters to all those 'religious' freaks who like to believe in miraculous, magical things that defy any kind of reasonable understanding.
If you were expecting anything scientific or even vaguely true about this, just remember one thing:
What is Scotland most famous for?
...Hint: it is best when made with only one kind of malt, and it can be a very enjoyable way to cloud ones perception.
Case closed!
Do you want that on the rocks, or neat, laddie?- ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6they did try that, underwater remote controlled cameras too, the water is very murky, with visibility of only a few feet.
- DEFSMAC, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8if by a team of divers, you mean 10,000, then yes they could easily find it with scuba gear, because lock ness isn't only like 23 miles in length or anything large like that....
- DMBrown, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Oh. . . I don't know, Perhaps Tarmac, Television, The Telephone, The Steam Engine, RADAR, Penicillin, The ATM, Ultrasound and there's a large number more. . . I can't be bothered remembering them, I'm tired.
- hdtvdust, on 10/11/2007, -13/+2I love it when morons mistake a stationary object in fast moving water as a creature moving fast against the current..
Whatever that was, it was NOT moving.- Delphium226, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Your theory might work if Loch Ness was a river with flowing water and not a lake with standing water.
- GavinZac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I love it when morons act like they know everything about everything, without even understanding what a Loch is.
You'll probably find an immortal, unbreathing Plesiosaur in Loch Ness before you find fast moving water.
- cl0n3x, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Is anybody here smart enough to think of the thousands of options of what that could be? First of all, any noob with a camera can film a lake and create a dark shadow effect. Second of all, what about the thousands of other fish are there that nobody has that about could have made that shape? The original filmer of the lochness ADMITTED IT WAS A FALSE FILM; the media is creating a huge hype over nothing.
- lavoie0ca, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6"The myth of the [LNM] has been around since 540 AD." -- Article
Buddy who faked it before wasn't the creator of the myth.
- lavoie0ca, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6"The myth of the [LNM] has been around since 540 AD." -- Article
- buuch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3this is actually the best footage i have found... not definitive, but definitely not corny. i liked it. but i am a skeptic.
- lavoie0ca, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2If that isn't fake footage then there IS something under the water there, thats not just wind chop, and it is moving kind of erratically. don't sturgeon or some ***** live in lakes like that? maybe its some top secret military submarine.
- afx1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"Commander, I think we should conduct our military experiment in a location which will peak no ones curousity. Loch Ness it is."
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4There are these special 'kits' you can buy, that will help you to understand the issue of the Loch Ness creatures.
http://www.beerliquors.com/liquors/singlemaltscotch.htm
I know this to be true, as it was explained to me by the Grand Haggis, himself.- melat0nin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Man, could you stretch this stereotype any further? Please stop.
- feoren, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1There are many problems with this. Why, in these sightings, is there always just a small amount of footage? Any "amateur scientist" who thought he was really seeing hard evidence of something that has been in question for hundreds of years would not simply record the thing from the shores for a few minutes, then pack up his camera and call the news the next day. He would do whatever it took to get as much evidence as he could before the opportunity passed by, and that means spending all day doing whatever he could to get more evidence. This must be fake, and he must know its fake, because people just don't act like that, especially someone his age who is still referred to as an "amateur scientist".
There are other obvious problems. It's going a very constant speed and not swaying at all. No life forms swim like this. Also, just look at his face during the interview. Think about how you would look if you were excited that people were swallowing a lie you made up to validate your life. You'd have exactly that expression. - garfvader, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Eel or oarfish I bet.
- SixesJones, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Hell, I've had Loch Ness monster dozens of times. It tastes like chicken.
- TheNatMan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+0What was this video about again? I honestly couldn't get past their funny scotman-talk. Something about a guy in a scubadiving suit being caught on tape by a non-native English speaker whose face makes a perfect 45 degree angle at the nose?
- Phil246, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5oh he's native im afraid - just from yorkshire, england.
the UK has loads of regional accents - flyg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Scotman-talk? As a Scotsman subjected to an unhealthy amount of US media I often find it equally difficult to get past that yankee twang without collapsing into hysterics. Documentaries from presenters who cant even spell ‘colour’ correctly are particularly amusing.
- cphelps, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0Flyg, you're an idiot.
- webcrumb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The isn't even a typical Yorkshire accent. It's quite effeminate.
- Phil246, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5oh he's native im afraid - just from yorkshire, england.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is 
