AI Magazine Summary

Nessletter - No 070 - 1985

Summary & Cover Nessletter (Rip Hepple, Ness Information Service)

Ever wanted to host your own late-night paranormal radio show?

Across the Airwaves · Narrative Sim · Windows · $2.95

You’re on the air. Callers bring Mothman, Fresno Nightcrawlers, UFO sightings, reptilian autopsies, and whispers about AATIP and Project Blue Book. Every reply shapes how the night goes.

UFO & UAP Cryptids Paranormal Government Secrets Classified Files High Strangeness Strange Creatures
The night is long. The lines are open →

20,263

issue summaries

Free. Always.

Support the Archive

Building and maintaining this collection is something I genuinely enjoy. If you’ve found it useful and want to say thanks, a small contribution keeps me motivated to keep expanding it. Thank you for your kindness 💚

Donate with PayPal

AI-Generated Summary

Overview

Title: NESSLETTER Issue: 70 Date: June 1985 Publisher: NESS INFORMATION SERVICE ISSN: 0264-7001

Magazine Overview

Title: NESSLETTER
Issue: 70
Date: June 1985
Publisher: NESS INFORMATION SERVICE
ISSN: 0264-7001

This issue of the NESSLETTER focuses on the Loch Ness Monster, featuring a detailed review of Ronald Binns' book 'The Loch Ness Mystery Solved', updates on ongoing research projects, and reports of various sightings and related phenomena.

Henry Bauer's Review of 'The Loch Ness Mystery Solved'

The issue begins with a review by Henry Bauer of Ronald Binns' 1983 book, 'The Loch Ness Mystery Solved'. Bauer states that while the book is well-written, it could dissuade potential investigators. He notes that Binns' proffered solution is a combination of mirages and misinterpretations of inanimate objects, birds, otters, and deer. Bauer criticizes Binns for not arguing his case coherently, instead attacking other evidence with loaded language, misrepresentation, and innuendo, and engaging in character assassination. Bauer highlights that Binns fails to address hard facts such as Dinsdale's film, sonar echoes from large, rapidly moving objects, and underwater photographs from the Academy of Applied Science. Instead, Binns ridicules less firm data and tentative efforts. The review details several factual errors in Binns' book, including misdated photographs, incorrect definitions of historical structures, and miscalculations regarding field of view. It also points out Binns' misrepresentation of historical accounts and his tendency to use loaded language and ad hominem attacks against individuals involved in Nessie research.

Bauer argues that Binns' interpretation of the Dinsdale film is specious, as he fails to address the core evidence attested by the RAF regarding the object's speed and wake, while misrepresenting the report's findings. The review also criticizes Binns for ascribing thoughts and emotions to researchers and for making sweeping generalizations about the lack of evidence. Binns' book is described as using rhetorical devices to create misleading impressions and contains self-contradictions, such as arguing the tradition of aquatic monsters was invented after the fact, while also acknowledging old Highland beliefs.

Despite its flaws, the review acknowledges that Binns' book is a useful resource for its acquaintance with relevant writings and newspapers. It also notes that the book inadvertently strengthens the case for Nessie by pointing out absurdities in some theories and raising valid points about the lack of scrupulous verification by some authors. However, the review concludes that these are minor virtues compared to the book's overall sourness and deviousness.

Loch Ness Project and Other Investigations

Tony Harmsworth provides an update on the Loch Ness Project, detailing plans for a three-to-four-week intensive operation commencing in late July. They have acquired an ex-naval motor fishing vessel, which they are fitting out with gear to search the northern deep water basin. The aim is to establish contact with large, previously detected deep water targets and, if stationary ones are found, to attempt to grapple them. Harmsworth also relays comments from Aidrian Shine, who clarifies that he has never stated Nessie never comes to the surface. Shine believes that surface watching is ineffective due to the rarity of sightings and that the hunt needs to move underwater. He prefers echo sounding sonar for its clearer interpretation over side scan sonar, though it is less versatile. Shine suggests that underwater photography is more suitable for Loch Ness, while the clear water of Loch Morar is ideal for photography, with plans to use Loch Ness sonar techniques in Loch Morar.

Roger Parker of 'Partech' is also at the loch again, continuing his sonar equipment expeditions, which he has undertaken most years since 1975. 'Partech' specializes in marine and environmental instrumentation and has worked quietly without seeking publicity.

Other Sightings and Reports

Steuart Campbell's Article: Steuart Campbell's article 'The Surgeon's Monster Hoax' from the British Journal of Photography is discussed. Campbell concludes that the Surgeon's photograph shows the tail of an otter. The review notes that while Campbell's article is comprehensive, it makes some assumptions that could affect his findings. A letter from Campbell commenting on NIS 69 is also mentioned, with the editor of 'Skeptical Inquirer' yet to publish Bob Rines' response.

Lake Tahoe Cousin: Erik Beckjord sends a clipping about a large creature filmed at Lake Tahoe. A film crew captured footage of a creature resembling a skin diver or a large fish, with a wake estimated at 20 feet long. The creature itself was estimated to be 10 to 15 feet long. The film was developed and said to be good, with a pocket camera also capturing frames. The article notes that while this is the first film of the monster, it has been around a long time. Beckjord is negotiating to acquire rights to enlarge the image and may spend the summer at Lake Tahoe due to increased monster appearances.

Sea Serpent Report: The sea serpent report from NIS 61 is revisited. Joe Zarzynski sends a clipping about a sighting off Newport Beach, USA, where surfers saw a large black back that was not a whale. The creature surfaced about 10 feet away and was described as not whale-like, with no dorsal fins and a different skin texture.

Icelandic Sighting: A report from Iceland describes two bird hunters seeing a pair of unidentified creatures, larger than horses, playing on a beach after emerging from Lake Kleifarvvatn. The creatures moved like dogs on shore and swan with the motion of seals. Footprints found on the beach were larger than horsehoofs but similar to a cow's, with three toes.

Chesapeake Bay Sighting: A summary of recent happenings in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, mentions 75 reported sightings. One incident describes an animal answering the description of 'Chessie', seen as 20 to 30 feet long with a snake-like head, propelling itself through 6 to 8 feet deep water.

Other Mentions and Notes

Bob Rines: Bob Rines of the Academy of Applied Science is mentioned as planning to be at Loch Ness in early August.

Dinsdale Film Controversy: The issue delves into the controversy surrounding the 1975 Dinsdale film, with Erik suggesting mapping the bottom and sending divers to photograph the area to resolve whether objects are on the bottom or in the water. Erik also announces plans to open a Cryptozoology Museum in the Los Angeles area.

Rupert Gould: The review of Binns' book extensively discusses Rupert Gould, a noted researcher of sea serpents and monsters, whose works are listed. Binns is criticized for denigrating Gould's contributions and character.

Inconsistencies and Absurdities in Binns' Book: The review highlights several inconsistencies and absurdities in Binns' book, including his arguments about the 'tradition' of aquatic monsters, the road construction near Loch Ness, and the frequency of sightings versus otter activity. The book's authorship is also questioned, with the dust jacket mentioning only Binns, while the title page and preface indicate co-authorship with R.J. Bell.

On the Other Hand: The review concedes that Binns' book is useful for its comprehensive coverage of writings and newspapers and that it raises valid points against Nessie, such as Campbell's inconsistency and the lack of scrupulous verification by some authors. However, these are deemed minor virtues compared to the book's overall negative tone.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the ongoing debate surrounding the Loch Ness Monster, the critical analysis of research and publications related to it, and the reporting of various unexplained phenomena from around the world. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical inquiry, valuing substantive evidence and rigorous analysis, as demonstrated by Henry Bauer's detailed critique of Binns' book and the reporting of ongoing scientific investigations like the Loch Ness Project. There is a clear emphasis on distinguishing between well-supported evidence and speculative or biased interpretations.