The Loch Ness Monster is
one of those enigmatic mysteries that are so difficult to prove.
If there is a monster lurking under the water of the Loch, then it's being
very elusive. Of course, the water is deep and dark, making for a
needle-in-a-haystack type of search.
The main thrust of evidence
for the Monster is eyewitness testimony. If so many people are seeing
weird things in the Loch, then something strange is going on. But,
as of now, there is no compelling evidence that suggests that the Loch
Ness Monster is anything but a lively piece of folklore.
There is a lot about the
Loch that is mysterious that has nothing to do with the Monster.
It is a remote location, lying in the midst of dense forests 7 miles southwest
of the city of Inverness. The Loch also has the dubious distinction
of being the former home of the black-magician, Aleister Crowley.
I think the web page for
Loch Ness Monster Research Society sums it up best for us:
Science deals with facts,
physical evidence upon which it can produce answers. No physical evidence
has yet been found of the beast of Loch Ness, thus science can offer no
explanation for the sightings,
other than optical illusions, misinterpretation of natural phenomena.
The only flaw in this logic
is that it, if we read it correctly, takes a common view of "science,"
referring to it almost as an organization rather than as a method of discovery.
The Nessie researchers should use science to prove their theorem
correct. As yet, they have been unable to do so. When they
can offer some compelling scientific evidence that the Monster exists,
then skeptics will have to admit the possibility. Until then, it's
all eyewitnesses and grainy photos. That's just not enough!
Further reading of The Loch
Ness Monster Research Society shows that they understand that need for
scientific proof. To tell you the truth, I hope that the existence
of the Loch Ness Monster is one thing they can prove.