Aug 31, 2023 04:07 PM
(This post was last modified: Aug 31, 2023 04:08 PM by C C.)
https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/08/meteo...sightings/
EXCERPTS: . . . If the Loch Ness Monster as an unidentified animal is extremely improbable, does this mean the residue reports will always be left unexplained? [...] In an overlooked article in Journal of Meteorology, Terance Meaden once tried to solve the issue by proposing a rare meteorological phenomenon (Meaden, 1976)...
[...] Small whirlwinds (so-called ‘water devils’) have been observed over the surface of Loch Ness (and other lochs) but they are seen very rarely, which explains why inexperienced observers mistook them at a distance for the Loch Ness Monster. There are perhaps other meteorological explanations for Loch Ness Monster sightings which plausibly explain a few residue reports. Reflections of tropospheric clouds have long been suggested; however, they are a poor explanation since they appear flat on the surface of the loch (most Loch Ness Monster reports instead describe a monster hump or multiple undulating humps above the water surface). This rules out ordinary cloud reflections.
As a teenager, I once travelled on holiday to Loch Ness and observed an unusual meteorological phenomenon during summer of 2007. This was of noctilucent clouds over the loch. [...] What amazed me the most was the luminous reflection of these clouds which I had perceived slightly above surface of the water...
[...] Could reflections of NLCs explain some unexplained Loch Ness Monster reports? I began two years ago to analyse residue reports of the Loch Ness Monster which might have been reflections of NLCs. ... My study passed peer-review and was recently published in Coolabah’s special issue on “On gases, clouds, fogs and mists”..... (MORE - missing details)
EXCERPTS: . . . If the Loch Ness Monster as an unidentified animal is extremely improbable, does this mean the residue reports will always be left unexplained? [...] In an overlooked article in Journal of Meteorology, Terance Meaden once tried to solve the issue by proposing a rare meteorological phenomenon (Meaden, 1976)...
[...] Small whirlwinds (so-called ‘water devils’) have been observed over the surface of Loch Ness (and other lochs) but they are seen very rarely, which explains why inexperienced observers mistook them at a distance for the Loch Ness Monster. There are perhaps other meteorological explanations for Loch Ness Monster sightings which plausibly explain a few residue reports. Reflections of tropospheric clouds have long been suggested; however, they are a poor explanation since they appear flat on the surface of the loch (most Loch Ness Monster reports instead describe a monster hump or multiple undulating humps above the water surface). This rules out ordinary cloud reflections.
As a teenager, I once travelled on holiday to Loch Ness and observed an unusual meteorological phenomenon during summer of 2007. This was of noctilucent clouds over the loch. [...] What amazed me the most was the luminous reflection of these clouds which I had perceived slightly above surface of the water...
[...] Could reflections of NLCs explain some unexplained Loch Ness Monster reports? I began two years ago to analyse residue reports of the Loch Ness Monster which might have been reflections of NLCs. ... My study passed peer-review and was recently published in Coolabah’s special issue on “On gases, clouds, fogs and mists”..... (MORE - missing details)