Just when you thought it was safe to go back in Loch Ness

View Comments (19)

• I want it to be Nessie. I know it isn't.

  • Know the feeling, I hope the Yeti and Bigfoot are real too. Want to go sideways for a second, I know you don't need, but thought you might get a kick (pun?) out of this

    http://bastiat.mises.org/2013/08/was-keynes-a-brilliant-investor/

    Which leads to me to my real point. Because of you and a handful of others here over the years, I ran across that at one of the sites of my continuing education, and I can't remember if I ever passed it on. Think I might have but it might be a rerun that I got here from a "lesson"

    http://mises.org/

    If you passed it on thanks, see somebody listens, if it's new, they have some good stuff. Heavy, but good.

• What's the difference between the Loch Ness Monster and the G-spot? A man will look for the Loch Ness Monster.

• I've long wondered why Hollywood has never done a big special effects Loch Ness Monster movie. Unless they did and I missed it.

  • On Golden Pond. Jane Fonda was the monster.

    • Jane Fonda is a cu..cu..cu..chupacabra

• Looks like the back side of a receding wave to me, as for a an aquatic prehistoric leftover, no so much.

• Global climate change is destroying Nessie's habitat. I predict they will evolve to a land based mammal and conquer Scotland by 2017.

  • Scotland as already been conquered by socialism, Nessie will have to wait in line.

• Long time no sea

  • I sea what you did there^^^^^

• Well, one mustn't rule anything out, I suppose, but when you get to the actual video and it goes to the long shots, you will see that this whatever-it-is is exactly parallel with the waves and ripples much nearer the shore. I would say it is rather unlikely that the shoremost ripples are caused by the one bigger thing moving in the water, as the surface is virtually flat between them -- in other words, no cause/effect between them. Wind does however do funny things like that, epecially where the landscape is going to do funny things with air movement. A simple series of gusts would be enough to churn up a sequence of disconnected ripples, never mind what can happen when you're in a bowl of mountains.

  • You are describing a "rogue wave" and that's exactly what this was.

    • To get a rogue wave you need other waves, since the rogue wave is created by addition. I see a small amount of wind pattern on the lake, but no waves whatsoever. And look at the picture - unless it's photoshopped it's an impossible shape for a wave. See how it curls at the left end? Waves don't curl like that.

      I'm not a Loch Ness nutjob, just saying the photo doesn't look like any kind of wave I've ever seen, and I'm a guy who rejects 99% of sailboat art because the wind and wave and sails are painted unscientifically.

      • I don't know where the picture above came from. I watched the video at the link, and in spite of the the misdirection of the narration, I saw a wave.

        • I hear you. If the picture above was photoshopped to make a wave look like a serpent... well, that would be pretty much what we expect from modern journalism. If that's what happened and I am now participating in propagating a fraud, that really pisses me off.

        • I'd like to see the still photo in motion. It was taken from a completely different angle and appears much closer. Why back off and reduce the angle to the water? Simplest explanation is this was done by a second year art student for a film class he wasn't interested in or someone trying to get a job at msnbc.

• *sigh* OK, 'fess up. Who else clicked the Play arrow?

• LOOK! It's FLIPPER!!!!