According to an article in the Daily Mail, on 31st July, a picture has been circulating the internet purporting to show a sea monster that, so far seems to have eluded identification. It was seen off Saltern Cove, Devon, UK, and has been dubbed by many as a “new Nessie.” The image appears to show a greenish-brown, long-necked “something,” with a reptilian-like head, that was trailing a shoal of fish just 30 yards offshore. According to reports the fish beached themselves just a few seconds later.
The photo was sent to the Marine Conservation Society, who have still to decide exactly what it is. Although theories range from a sea serpent to a salt water crocodile. The lady who took the photograph at first thought that it might be a turtle but the Marine Conservation Society says that not only do turtles not chase fish, but the description doesn’t fit.
When I picked up that article it had already attracted 75 comments.
Meanwhile, over on the CFZ blog site, Jon Downes bemoans what he describes as the “extraordinary level of drivel” that is being written about it around the net. And he thinks that it’s probably a basking shark.
I have absolutely no idea what it might be, although with Jon’s incredible amount of knowledge I’d guess that he’s nearer to the truth than many of the other suggestions concerning its identity.
Unless, of course, our very own Morgawr, the fabled Cornish sea serpent, has forsaken Falmouth Bay for a tip up country!
Exclaves!
1 day ago
4 comments:
Well, it's not a basking shark at only nine feet long and no back fin: my brother is strongly convinced that it is only a piece of driftwood. I tend to go for the Longnecked sealion in this instance, mostly because it is so small and the neck is not really long in proportion to the length (the trunk is at least twice as long as the neck is said to be) but I was usure because of the "Reptillian" head it was supposed to have.
If I were you, I would be extremely careful regarding the Daily Fail's reporting with regards cryptozoological beasties, since their fact-checking ability is not so much woeful as completely absent.
Several years ago, a large Newfoundland dog was photographed on Dartmoor, and was widely mis-identified in the press and elsewhere. The Daily Mail finally uncovered the truth, and published an interview with the dog's owner and also published pictures of the dog its self; it was without doubt the same animal.
Last year two shameless bluffers in Cheshire started a long column of what might charitably be described as complete toot on a Facebook forum page. The gist of their claims was that a large unknown mammal had been seen rooting around dustbins on the estate they lived on. Some time after these initial claims were made, a cropped and heavily down-scaled photograph of the original Dartmoor dog was put up on the forum, apparently as "proof", despite the photograph being of a large mountain with a dog on it, and the claimed haunt of the beast being on the Cheshire Plain.
The Daily Mail published these ludicrous claims more or less unedited, and even went as far as to buy a watermarked photograph of the "beast" from the Metro News to accompany the story (despite their having the original in their photographic archive).
Based on this performance, I would be extremely skeptical of the Daily Mail's ability to check out a silly season story to any extent at all; they likely regard such tales as handy space filler and don't check anything at all, ever.
Thanks for you suggestion, Dale. I was just going by what Jon said, that he thought it was probably a basking shark. And I always "bow" to greater knowledge.
I don't have any real scientific knowledge, especially when it come to the "animal" kingdom. In fact science is a foreign languge to me and, as an OAP, I'm not really up to any close study of it now :)
And, thank you for your comments Dr Dan. I do remember that story about the Newfoundland on Dartmoor, but I don't think the Daily Mail was the only paper to mention it.
I don't actually read any daily papers, and haven't for over 13 years. But the Daily Mail is at least not a tabloid rag, such as some of our UK papers are. Whether they check their facts or not I couldn't say. And when it comes to anomalous images I tend to mainly put them into the hoax file as they're so easy to photoshop these days.
As you point out, we're now into the silly season, so I think that perhaps we should be even more on our guard against such stories.
Post a Comment