Underwater Sonar Robot Discovers A Real Loch Ness Monster (Prop) (discovery.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Underwater Sonar Robot Discovers A Real Loch Ness Monster (Prop) (discovery.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday April 17, 2016 @02:30AM from the doing-a-science dept.

A Norwegian oil company is finally performing a sonar scan on the bottom of Loch Ness, creating a high-resolution map of the Scottish lake that's reputed to contain a mysterious lake monster. "Operation Groundtruth" will be using a marine robot named Munin, and they've already identified a 27-foot-long shipwreck and disproved rumors of a 27-foot-long "Nessie trench" where the cryptid creature could be hiding. The Scottish tourism agency has issued a press release about the robot's discovery of a life-sized model of the Loch Ness monster used in a 1970 film, which had sunk during the filming more than 45 years ago. "The agency's statement said 'Nessie found'," reports Discovery News, "with an asterisk at the bottom reading 'replica model'."

62 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ping by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 02:32 · Score: 2, Funny

Quick! Call CNN! This could be the MH370!
1. Re: Ping by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 02:49 · Score: 0
  
  I doubt it. Maybe pieces of Pan Am Flight 83?
2. Re:Ping by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 03:25 · Score: 0
  
  Quick! Call CNN! This could be the MH370!
  Nah.
  It's the love child of Jimmy Hoffa and Amelia Earhart.
Surely you mean MH17... by denzacar · 2016-04-17 03:05 · Score: 0

Cause MH17 and MH370 are actually the same plane.
It's all a conspiracy by CIA and secret reptilian government to discredit Putin and thus prevent him from his crane-leading endeavors.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
1. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by OzPeter · 2016-04-17 03:47 · Score: 2
  
  Cause MH17 and MH370 are actually the same plane.
  It's all a conspiracy by CIA and secret reptilian government to discredit Putin and thus prevent him from his crane-leading endeavors.
  My god .. the stupidity of that site is unbounded. And I could refute many of their "points" just by looking at the same evidence that they were presenting.
  
  --
  I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
2. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by spyfrog · 2016-04-17 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  How is the weather in St. Petersburg today? As lousy as in Sweden?
3. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by denzacar · 2016-04-17 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why ask me? Ask wunderground.com.
  
  --
  Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
4. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by denzacar · 2016-04-17 05:46 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  My god .. the stupidity of that site is unbounded. And I could refute many of their "points" just by looking at the same evidence that they were presenting.
  Never go here. You might suffer an aneurism. And then they'll replace you with a double.
  
  --
  Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
5. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by FatdogHaiku · 2016-04-17 07:53 · Score: 1
  
  ...It's all a conspiracy by CIA and secret reptilian government to discredit Putin...
  Sir, implying that reptiles secretly control the government is an insult to reptiles everywhere!
  
  --
  You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
6. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 14:51 · Score: 0
  
  ...It's all a conspiracy by CIA and secret reptilian government to discredit Putin...
  Sir, implying that reptiles secretly control the government is an insult to reptiles everywhere!
  Sir, implying that Putin needs someone else to discredit him is just plain wacky!
7. Re:Surely you mean MH17... by denzacar · 2016-04-22 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  That's what they want you to think.
  
  --
  Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Nessie by ledow · 2016-04-17 03:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apart from the obvious all-encompassing bollocks that is Nessie (including destroying quite a nice loch with crap tourism shite):
This kind of calls in question all the viability, and highlights the pointlessness, of all the previous "Nessie searches" that didn't even find a 45-foot prop that we knew roughly where it was.
1. Re:Nessie by Alomex · 2016-04-17 03:36 · Score: 2
  
  destroying quite a nice loch with crap tourism shite
  Destroying? Not that there's any hyperbole there or anything.
2. Re:Nessie by Jiro · 2016-04-17 03:37 · Score: 1
  
  The prop stays on the bottom of the ocean and doesn't move around. Unless you're specifically searching the bottom of the ocean, you wouldn't have any reason to find it when looking for living monsters.
3. Re:Nessie by Knuckles · 2016-04-17 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  The prop stays on the bottom of the ocean and doesn't move around. Unless you're specifically searching the bottom of the ocean, you wouldn't have any reason to find it when looking for living monsters.
  It's not an ocean.
  
  --
  "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
4. Re:Nessie by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 04:48 · Score: 0
  
  Hey! He's short, ok? Everything looks like an ocean to someone that size.
5. Re:Nessie by SuricouRaven · 2016-04-17 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  The world has many, many large lakes. But few have claims of a monster, and none are so famous as Nessie. It's a local industry, like all the shops around Roswell selling plastic aliens.
6. Re:Nessie by peragrin · 2016-04-17 06:39 · Score: 2
  
  NO but it is as deep as a shallow one, with the max death around 750' and it sits only 50' above ocean level.
  There are a few lakes in the world that are deep like that, what they suffer form is the tools needed to explore the depths are too big for the boats that can fit on those lakes.
  this has only changed in recent years.
  
  --
  i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
7. Re:Nessie by Schmorgluck · 2016-04-17 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly, it's been decades since serious cryptozoologists dismissed Nessie on the basis that the loch's turbid waters didn't allow for enough photosynthesis to sustain a sufficient biomass to feed a large species. Their most prominent theory besides hoaxes is that maybe some visiting seals have been magnified by optic phenomena akin to a fata morgana.
  
  --
  There's nothing like $HOME
8. Re:Nessie by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 08:01 · Score: 0
  
  maybe some visiting seals have been magnified by optic phenomena
  sure!
9. Re:Nessie by mccalli · 2016-04-17 09:46 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Massively disagree with 'destroying'. I've taken the family to the Nessie museum twice, a few years apart, and both times I was impressed by the attitude there. They go to great pains to show that Nessie isn't any of the things normally attributed to it (not a plesiosaur because the landmass is in the wrong place for the time of the plesiosaurs, not a large whale or similar, not a large mammal at all because of unusually low fish density due to the waters being clogged with peat etc., etc.), and they also show all the fakes and take you through how it was done.
  
  They don't really come out on the side of Nessie existing at all in fact. I think that's an excellent attitude for such a museum to have, and I was impressed both times. The monster is treated as a bit of fun, and nothing else.
10. Re:Nessie by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 15:00 · Score: 0
  
  True enough. A few do though... the Lake Erie Monster ("Bessie") was first reported in 1793 (years before Nessie became mainstream), and there have been sporadic sightings ever since.
  I suppose Bessie would have an easier job of hiding in Lake Erie (25667 km^2) than Nessie would in Loch Ness (56 km^2)...
11. Re:Nessie by ledow · 2016-04-17 20:37 · Score: 1
  
  Go there in the summer, at the height of tourist season.
  I'm not talking physical damage (it's a loch), I'm talking making a place you wouldn't want to be in longer than it takes to start the car and fight through the traffic to get out of there.
12. Re:Nessie by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-18 03:10 · Score: 0
  
  NO but it is as deep as a shallow one, with the max death around 750' and it sits only 50' above ocean level.
  There are a few lakes in the world that are deep like that, what they suffer form is the tools needed to explore the depths are too big for the boats that can fit on those lakes.
  this has only changed in recent years.
  um, 4 of the 5 great lakes are as deep or deeper than that... I'm sure there are others on the planet that are that deep...
13. Re:Nessie by RockDoctor · 2016-04-20 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  Try going down the East side.
  I do know what you mean. Once, courtesy of a bike tyre that was shedding rubber all over the place, I had to cycle from Fort Augustus to the bike shop in Inverness in August. Absolute fucking nightmare. But, to be honest, I blame the fucking car-dwelling grockles, not the relatively small amount of Nessie-ism.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Cameras Everywhere by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 03:19 · Score: 2, Interesting

The fact that almost everyone is walking around with a camera these days means that if Nessie is real there should be an increase in new pictures of her roughly equivalent to the increased proportion of camera-hours (the number of hours that people with cameras or mounted video cameras are watching) around Loch Ness. I don't keep up on cryptozoology news, but a quick search didn't indicate any headlines to that effect. So it's likely Nessie doesn't exist (or has died I suppose).
This same logic applies to Big Foot, aliens (the number of amateur astronomers pointing CCDs up at the sky these days is amazing), ghosts, etc. I don't have much hope that logic will change many minds though.
1. Re: Cameras Everywhere by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  Nessie was never sighted before the first photo of it. And later relatives of the photographer admitted that it was a hoax. So the only reason why we even consider the existence of nessie is a hoax.
2. Re: Cameras Everywhere by Type44Q · 2016-04-17 08:28 · Score: 0
  
  Nessie was never sighted before the first photo of it.
  Asshole (I'm not necessarily addressing you per se but rather that orrice which you appear to be forming words with), if youd done the slightest bit of research on the topic you're mouthing - I mean assholing - off about, you'd know that there've been sightings reported for centuries, including two opposing armies that put down their weapons to behold the fucking spectacle...
3. Re: Cameras Everywhere by dave420 · 2016-04-17 20:37 · Score: 1
  
  And you'd realise that the claims you put so much trust in are dubious to say the least. We get it - you really want Nessie to exist - just don't attack people for being rational because they shine a cold, hard light on your pet belief.
4. Re:Cameras Everywhere by k6mfw · 2016-04-18 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  This same logic applies to Big Foot,
  what gets me is these Bigfoot hunters have lots of drama in their videos but ***none*** of those guys have what I would say definite video (all those shows are high drama and like reality shows they are a total turnoff for me). I'd only be convinced if they have the discipline to spend months (years) out in wilderness to get wild animal shots. i.e. the Snow Leopard, Empire Penguin, and that camel like animal in middle Gobi desert where camera crew lugged all kinds of equipment in addition to food and water, at great expense including detrimental physical health. The miracle of the latter is they get fantastic Natl Geographic quality footage (probably a lot more footage but maybe lighting, framing, and focusing were not that great). But then maybe there has but they found lots of other animals but no Bigfoot.
  Getting back to Nessie (which I don't think exists), there is the Open ROV underwater drones http://www.openrov.com/ that don't cost that much so maybe we can get lots more "eyeballs" looking what really is down in that water.
  Incidently, I heard Big Foot a few times before (no not the big scary monster). This is NORAD's callword for directing Air Guard aircraft in the Western Defense Sector on 271.000 MHz.
  
  --
  mfwright@batnet.com
5. Re:Cameras Everywhere by RockDoctor · 2016-04-20 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  there should be an increase in new pictures of her roughly equivalent to the increased proportion of camera-hours (the number of hours that people with cameras or mounted video cameras are watching) around Loch Ness.
  If, indeed, they're camera-hours looking at the loch. most of the grockles are taking photos of each other, not of the loch itself. And people are generally not very good at observing things that they're not expecting (which is the big hole at the centre of the "many eyes" hypothesis of code review).
  I doubt that the number of camera-hours looking at the loch is much higher than it ever was.
  So ... three weeks later after getting back to Nowhereville, Countyshire, someone notices that there's an odd looking wave on the loch in one of the pictures. Well, great, but without there being a number of other shots of the same scene, from different viewpoints and times there is little chance of actually extracting wave motion characteristics, which were some of the arguments used in the 1970s for interpreting oddities recorded by the film cameras.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
6. Re:Cameras Everywhere by RockDoctor · 2016-04-20 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  Getting back to Nessie (which I don't think exists), there is the Open ROV underwater drones http://www.openrov.com/ [openrov.com] that don't cost that much so maybe we can get lots more "eyeballs" looking what really is down in that water.
  Since I've probably spent more hours swimming in Loch Ness than you (or indeed, almost anyone else in this thread), I happen to know that the water is pretty murky. As in, you'd be lucky to see your own feet if you were treading water. While it may be less murky deeper down (seen that when I've been SCUBA diving ; it's low density peat-rich river water coming down onto the more dense loch water ; here the density difference is from water temperature, not salinity), the actual volume of water you'd be able to survey would be negligible.
  For a bulk survey, sonar is far and away the best technique. And that question was answered in the 1970s.
  I've considered OpenROV for other projects. I wouldn't waste my time or money for it for a dead question like Nessie.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Replica? by pgfuller · 2016-04-17 03:23 · Score: 1

Ye cannae have a 'replica model' of something that (probably) does not exist.
1. Re:Replica? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-04-17 03:53 · Score: 2
  
  Ye cannae have a 'replica model' of something that (probably) does not exist.
  Damnit, don't get all "facty" and everything!!
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
2. Re:Replica? by ColdWetDog · 2016-04-17 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  Sure you can. Replica "Star Wars" everything. Replica "Star Trek" everything.
  Reality is quite overrated.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re:Replica? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 05:34 · Score: 0
  
  Those are all replicas of real props that were used in movies. The props themselves aren't replicas.
4. Re:Replica? by tom229 · 2016-04-17 05:42 · Score: 2
  
  Considering that nessie is supposed to be a plesiosaurs, of which we have skeletal evidence, you certainly could create a replica that would satisfy your pedantic definition.
  
  --
  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
5. Re:Replica? by pgfuller · 2016-04-17 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  You can suppose whatever you like about something for which there is no actual evidence. In any case that makes the prop a replica model of a plesiosaur - of which I agree there is ample evidence.
6. Re:Replica? by pgfuller · 2016-04-17 12:36 · Score: 1
  
  Star Wars and Star Trek actually exist. That is, there really are objects like light sabres and space ship models that were made to be used in the movies. In some cases you can buy the original objects or they exist in collections. Mostly though we would be buying replicas of those objects since they are more abundant and less expensive. Now if there was a computer model used only for CGI and never physically produced, you could still consider a model of it to be a replica because it is made based on the detail of the original.
7. Re:Replica? by pgfuller · 2016-04-17 12:37 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry. I was in a foul mood and wanted to get into an argument with the internet. Happy cruising.
8. Re:Replica? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-04-17 12:57 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry. I was in a foul mood and wanted to get into an argument with the internet.
  Well, in that case, YOU'RE WRONG!! (I hope that helped a little bit.)
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
9. Re:Replica? by pgfuller · 2016-04-17 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  What, call that an argument! That is just contradiction - the automatic gain-saying of what the other person said. Don't worry. On another reply I have already been called a pedant. Hoping to get him to compare me to the Nazis next.
10. Re:Replica? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-04-18 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  Hoping to get him to compare me to the Nazis next.
  Yeah, I always count it as a personal win when some bozo compares me to the Nazis. I just make another entry in my "Godwin Log" and call it a day. lol
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
11. Re:Replica? by Coren22 · 2016-04-19 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  You damn NAZI!
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
12. Re:Replica? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-04-19 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  You damn NAZI!
  Woo hoo! Twice in one day, I'm on a roll!! (And I think I get extra points for the capital letters, too!)
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
13. Re:Replica? by RockDoctor · 2016-04-20 06:58 · Score: 1
  
  Awww, come on. Be a bit more subtle with setting up the Python skits. Even I could see that coming.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
14. Re:Replica? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-04-20 15:14 · Score: 1
  
  Awww, come on. Be a bit more subtle with setting up the Python skits. Even I could see that coming.
  No you couldn't!
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
15. Re:Replica? by RockDoctor · 2016-04-21 22:04 · Score: 1
  
  Awww, come on. Be a bit more subtle with setting up the Python skits. Even I could see that coming.
  No you couldn't!
  [SELF] Nails feet to perch. Fish is not happy.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
But how did the prop get lost? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 04:05 · Score: 0

They probably panicked when they saw the real lock Ness monster and dropped the prop.
1. Re:But how did the prop get lost? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-18 01:47 · Score: 0
  
  Director didn't like the shape of the prop and told the set designers to remove some buoyant material to change it. The prop predictably sank.
Slashdot, you're slow by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 05:55 · Score: 0

This has been been on mainstream news sites for most of the week. (Here's an example from wednesday: http://nos.nl/artikel/2099016-onderzoekers-vinden-monster-van-loch-ness-of-toch-niet.html) If you're this late to the party, there's little point left in coming at all.
1. Re:Slashdot, you're slow by whipslash · 2016-04-17 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  A bit slow on this one. But now nerds like us can discuss and argue to our hearts' content
A "Model" by SuperKendall · 2016-04-17 06:06 · Score: 1

Rabbits freeze when they see motion. Why not a sea monster?
Chances are Nessie ate the model years ago and that it's now able to assume its form.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
'Finally' by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 07:49 · Score: 0

There have been many sonar scans of the loch, including at least one other whole-loch scan. I'm not sure why this one is being called a 'first', except maybe that it's at a particularly high resolution.
ObXKCD by Deadstick · 2016-04-17 08:39 · Score: 1

https://xkcd.com/1235/
Inter-dimensional portal detector? by RogueWarrior65 · 2016-04-17 10:22 · Score: 1

But do they have a device to detect the obvious inter-dimensional portal that Nessie swims through to avoid being found?
1. Re: Inter-dimensional portal detector? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 23:06 · Score: 0
  
  Nah, Nessie is both Jack the Ripper and a Time Lord, explains everything.
Coincidence? I think not! by Irate+Engineer · 2016-04-17 12:44 · Score: 1

...they've already identified a 27-foot-long shipwreck and disproved rumors of a 27-foot-long "Nessie trench" where the cryptid creature could be hiding...
Did they check underneath the 27-foot-long shipwreck to see if the 27-foot-long Nessie trench (and Nessie) was underneath? Ha! I didn't think so! It can't be a coincidence.

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
I for one say by Anonymous Coward · 2016-04-17 15:27 · Score: 0

Props to them!
Nessie, Nessie, Nessie! by bitterblackale · 2016-04-18 06:52 · Score: 1

(It's only a model)
27 feet != ship wreck by fygment · 2016-04-18 23:56 · Score: 1

It's a boat wreck ... and a small one at that.

--
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.