News on www.cryptomundo.com is that a new expedition is going to Cameroon to hunt for the living dinosaur.Whilst I think it is great that someone is going to look for mokele-mbembe, I have my reservations about the main investigater. The latest stories from the Congo on sightings of the big MM have been by creationist ministers,based in the area. I understand that the main investigater is also a creationist. This makes me doubtful about any proof they may bring back. If you are trying to prove a theory you may go to any lengths to do it. We have all seen disgraced scientists, over the years, on the news who have been caught out falsifying research results.(I think cloning was the recent one).I don't want to get into a debate about creationism, it is not my belief but I respect others right to believe it.However I doubt their objectivity in researching cryptids. The BaAku pigmies in the area call MM the spirit of the forest and at various times have identified it from pictures as a rhino, a diplodicus and a gorilla. They may of course be wise and just telling researchers what they want to hear.What I do know is that Lac Tele where MM is supposed to live , is not deep enough to house a dinosaur. It is between about 4 feet and 12 feet deep.There may be the odd giant turtle in there or even a large croc, but a dinosaur would not be swimming in it...just paddling a long wetting it's ankles. It will be interesting to see what comes back . I am sure Loren on cryptomundo will keep us informed.
It was taken in the dark but it looks to me like an otters bottom as it dived into the water. It has the same shininess a wet otter has. Be interesting to see if any more is published about it
Dan Scott Taylor was born 19th June 1940, in Memphis, USA and departed this world after complications from surgery on 23rd July 2005.Hehad a lifetime interest in submarines and other water inventions. Once, at the age of nine he tried, unsuccessfully, to float his bicycle by attaching home made floats!
Dan joined the US Navy when he was 18 years old and became a torpedo man on submarines, participating in the U.S. blockade of Cuba in 1962. He then went on to study submarine design at the Georgia Institute of Technology and later worked building mini-submarines. In the mid-60s, he piloted a submarine searching the Mediterranean for a Hydrogen bomb lost when a B-52 aircraft went down. His interest in building and re-inventing continued throughout his life including building a 90-foot windmill to generate electricity and a 4,000 gallon aquarium. He tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to refurbish a hydro-electric dam. One of Dan’s catchphrases was nothing I make ever works the first time..
Dan decided to build his own submarine. Still working full time, the sub took him over four years to complete. He intended to use it to explore Loch Ness.In 1969, he brought his one-man submersible to Loch Ness. Painted yellow and named viperfish It weighed 5,000 lbs, and was 20 feet long.Dan had to take an umbrella with him as the hatch leaked and on one voyage he couldn’t close the hatch properly. Rather than abandon the dive, he went down until the pressure helped shut the hatch and then pumped the water out. He laughed while others worried for him waiting on the bank of the Loch. A brave man indeed!Dan swore that something had turned the Viperfish around in the Loch. No mean feat as it was so heavy, and he gave chase. Unfortunately, Viperfish only did a maximum of 7 knots (about 8 miles an hour) and he lost it. This made him determined to return with a faster vessel.Dan’s theory was that the Loch Ness creature was a giant eel.
Dan had to retire after suffering a stroke in 1995, which left him blind in one eye and deaf in one ear. With the agreement of his wife, he sold his house to finance building a new submarine.The new sub was to be named Nessa after the Celtic goddess of water.Nessa was 42 feet, 30 tons and went at 22 knots. It was to have a biopsy device fitted to collect a piece of skin from the Loch Ness creature for analysis. Powerful halogen lights and infrared cameras were also going to be fitted as Dan’s first attempts at the Loch had been hampered by the near invisibility of Loch Ness waters, due to the peat particles in the water. Nessa would have seated 4 people and allow them to stay underwater for days. It was, of course, painted yellow. The submersible was 75% completed when Dan passed away. He left it to a fellow enthusiast of his and she further bequeathed it to a marine exploration research group in 2007. They have adapted Nessa and renamed her Dan Scott Taylor 2. Dan would have been proud his sub was being put to such good use.
This blogger knew Dan personally, and can confirm that everyone whoever had contact with him, would agree he was a gentleman. He had unfailing optimism and a sense of humour. She promised Dan that she would meet up with him at Loch Ness, the next trip he made with Nessa. Sadly it was not to be. The world has lost a fine person with a true pioneering spirit.
Seeing is believing or is it? The majority of cryptozoological and paranormal activity evidence relies on eye witness testimony. Anyone who has studied psychology will have come across studies that show eye witness testimony to be unreliable.
, Lake monsters and new animals to science. It is not yet an accepted science by mainstream standards. Paranormal research involves anything seen as strange or different to everyday experience, from ghosts to UFOs. Most of the evidence is anecdotal i.e. stories ,or people saying they have seen something and reporting this. Little concrete evidence such as blood samples or bones of unknown creatures have been found. Photographs can be altered, so are often discarded as fakes by the scientific establishment
There are occasional success stories such as the coelocanth.This is a prehistoric fish discovered still living in the waters off Africa and Indonesia.
The most well known study on eye witness testimony was by Loftus(an American psychologist) in 1979 .This experiment has been repeated many times by psychology undergraduates in the classroom and has always come up with the same results. The students are shown a video of an incident( a car accident or bank robbery). They are then divided into groups in which some are witnesses and some are detectives.What the witnesses don’t know, is that the questions they answer are in different formats.
Witness 1 is asked open questions e.g. What colour was the car?
Witness 2 more closed questions e.g. Was the car blue or brown?
Witness 3 closed and leading questions e.g. The car you saw was blue yes?
Even when shown the film again, after questioning witness 3 will say they could have sworn the car was blue. If asked again 3 months later they will repeat the car is blue.Human beings have the capacity to fool ourselves that something untrue is true and stick to that idea stubbornly
How does that reflect on a scientific genre that relies on eye witness testimony for it’s evidence? The correlation often cited between whisky drinking and sightings of the Loch Ness phenomena comes to mind.
In order for eye witness testimony to be become scientifically acceptable ,it has to be made more reliable by scientific method. A standard would need to be set to be used by everyone involved in this research. It would also prove useful to law enforcement agencies as a tool.
The first step would be to have the evidence i.e. eye witness testimony, recorded as soon as possible after the event has taken place. Any lapse of time would cause some deterioration of the memory or embellishment from discussion with others. E.g Witness 3 in the study above had some of their peers convinced the car was blue despite having previously stated otherwise. This would mean a pro forma ( in the form of an observation chart or record)would have to be readily available to complete. Around Loch Ness , for example ,it could be available from visitor centres and eating establishments, just to pick up and take away, should something occur.
It would need to not only consist of the expected questions ,on age, gender etc. of witness, description of sighting, weather conditions, other witnesses, but also information that some witnesses may not want to reveal. There would need to be questions on the witnesses health. Do they wear spectacles? Were they wearing them at the time? Were they under the influence of alcohol or medication/ drugs? ( If so how much had they drank?) Had they had mental health problems or suffered from hallucinations ( not in them selves mutually exclusive), dizzy spells or memory loss? Have they seen this phenomenon before? (dates and times).
Only by eliminating all possibilities can the evidence be classed as a true record. The problems inherent in this are obvious, in that one must rely on the witness being truthful about any health conditions and that these same conditions may disbar the evidence from being classed as reliable.
However in the method’s defence, Brigham et al (1982)(an american psychologist), found only 34.2% reliability of eye witness testimony in a field setting, so any method that can improve on that is a positive. The only way forward would appear to be a field trial of the method. The drawback to this is Nessie does not appear on cue, nor do paranormal activities appear when called.
So many fake nessie experiments have taken place, where something is planted for visitors to see, that only a true scientific method can rescue this type of research from farce. The people who undertake these fake experiments , have the best interests at heart, but do more harm than good by making cryptozoology a joke.
In order for any science to be accepted, as the so called new social sciences have been, by the scientific establishment, a method of investigation that can be replicated must be utilised. In eye witness testimony a better approach must be found.
That method may be by necessity intrusive on participants private lives but without some sort of scientific measure, cryptozoologists and paranormal investigators will constantly be beating their heads against a brick wall .To become accepted at an academic level necessitates improving on present scientific methods to accommodate what is normally not measurable phenomena. In other words, make seeing believable. Only by making eye witness testimony more reliable can these studies move on to a firm footing.
Loftus E F Eye Witness Testimony Cambrige Mass:HavardUniversity Press 1979
Brigham J.C, Maass A., Snyder L.D. and Spaulding K.
Accuracy of Eye Witness Identifications in a Field Setting Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1982 42 673-681
New book on kindle- myths, murder, monsters and magic in modern day Loch Ness
New Cryptofiction book out
mysterious creatures roam the countryside,what is the secret of the horror tunnel and what are the modern day witches up to with the fifth reich? our Friends from the book Dark Ness once again meet cryptids and danger . s
Mother, author, cat lover, amateur cryptozoologist, cook and bottle washer, some times lover, single parent,middle aged,a mad woman without an attic, red wine and chocolate lover.Now housebound due to ill health so an armchair researcher.Too wheezy to sit in a hide and watch for cryptids anymore lol.Have now taken up crafting when I feel able.I now have a Fiction book out on amazon Kindle Dark Ness by Tabitca Cope set in, you guessed it, Loch Ness with monsters , murder , myth and magic.
