Nessie: Exploring the Supernatural Origins of the Loch Ness Monster

Was pleased to find that "Sir Nick" (utterly honorary) Redfern has written a book on a subject that a number of us nosey members of what might be called the "Enigmatological " community have kicked around for several years now. Nick is addressing the speculative hypothesis that perhaps the Ness "creatures" (and numerous "cousins" of theirs worldwide) may not actually be the flesh-&-blood biological entities people have long taken them to be; that, perhaps, they are something supra-normal (cross dimensional?) that weaves its way in and out of our reality. This was an idea put forward years ago by the late Frederick W. "Ted" Holiday, a Brit enthralled with the Loch Ness mystery who became one of the most famous investigators of this phenomenon....as well as someone who started out thinking one thing about these oddities and wound up revising his opinion and viewing them as something else entirely. Holiday died a number of years ago (only middle aged) but Nick Redfern has brought his name and notions fully "back to life" here in this new volume, and done so quite effectively.I discovered Holiday's work back in the late 1960s when he wrote a book titled "The Great Orm of Loch Ness" ("Orm" being a bit of a Nordic variant of the word "Worm"). In this book he did a lot of critical analysis on the Ness "beastie" and opined that maybe this thing was NOT a vertebrate animal. Legends of "Worms" abounded, he found, in medieval Britain, and elsewhere...and these "Worms" were typically EQUATED with DRAGONS...and...equally...with "water horses", "water bulls", and "kelpies". They were described as being wormy-like, gelatinously slimey to look at, SEGMENTED, and prone to live in water but to roam the land as well. In two instances, a story called "The Linton Worm" and another called "The Lampton Worm", these beasties were "dispatched" by armoured knights. They were also said to MIGRATE from waterways to waterways by way of creeks, channels, and such, AND, at times they got TRAPPED in Roman-built CULVERTS and DIED there. And what happened to them then? Reputedly they DISSOLVED...leaving no skeletonized remains behind. Nothing to display as a trophy anywhere. Really? And, because of this Ted Holiday began to speculate that these "worms" WERE worms; invertebrates, and might Nessie be some type of mutated similarity? He considered physical appearances and notioned that maybe the dragon-worms were a giant, mutated form of a creature known from fossil evidence; the Tullimonstrum Gregarium, or "Common Tully Monster", creatures that might well replicate what Loch Ness eyewitnesses had reported seeing. Unfortunately, Tully Monsters were little dinky things only a few inches long (growing giant ones might prove a "stretch", if you'll pardon the pun) and were only found geologically in the United States.Holiday published his theory nonetheless but almost immediately began to revise it. Actually, he completely overhauled it. Well & truly! Investigating lochs over the UK and over into Ireland ("loughs"), he founds instances where such beasties were seen commonly in ponds and bodies of water that were just TOO SMALL to support ANY kind of "populations" of breeding "whatsits". And none of these sighted Nessie kin were EVER seen migrating from one puddle to another. In Ireland Holiday prevailed upon locals to actually DRAIN some of the monster ponds in the wake of sightings and he found...NOTHING. No critters. No remains of critters. It was like people were seeing ghosts. Apparitions. This set Holiday to speculating that the LNM might well be something apparitional as well; something like the eerie Shropeshire "Man Monkey" seen in the 1870s, whereby the creature SEEMED fully real and solid, but which COULD NOT BE STRUCK or even truly touched physically. Further investigations at Loch Ness and in Ireland seemed to link Ness-type monsters with "flying discs" (UFOs), mysterious men in black, legends of black magicians and occult spells and summonings, eerie occurrences centering on dolmens and stone circles (like Stonehenge....and ONE of which has been found AT THE BOTTOM of Loch Ness), amazing...and frustrating...mechanical failings of cameras trying to film Ness creatures, inexplicably fogged filmstrips, and even physical debilitations involving Nessie researchers (Holiday reported frequent attacks of neuralgia when he went to Loch Ness; his teeth aching agonizingly). Holiday became so suspicious of the loch beasties that in his magnum opus "The Dragon & the Disc", he declared there was something "not right" about these things. He even had the Episcopal clergyman, Dr. Donald Oman, exorcise the loch on one occasion. And Loch Ness has a HISTORY of occult influences lochside, from "workings" by alchemist-sorcerer types like John Dee and Alistair Crowley to a purported "witch cult" that "does things" there. And, of course, the famous (infamous?), controversial trickster figure, Tony "Doc" Shiels (the late researcher Mark Chorvinsky was perennially distrustful of ANYTHING involving Doc Shiels_) has been a "felt presence" there often, as well.It is also to be noted that Ted Holiday's notion of Ness monsters being "transitory" and "ghostlike" or "some kind of manifestation" was in some ways verified in the late 1970s and 1980s by the Remote Viewing (RV) programs "Grill Flame" and "Star Gate" operated by U.S. Army Intelligence (INSCOM; Intelligence & Security Command) under co-ordination by the CIA and the Pentagon's DIA. INSCOM RVers used some subjects over and over again as "calibration" targets for their viewing focus. Among such was the Loch Ness Monster. And what did INSCOM decide about the Loch Ness beasties? That they were NOT real biological enties. That they seemed to be transitory manifestations. That they MATERIALIZED...and DE-MATERIALIZED. That they weren't IN the loch at all times (perhaps "summoned" at intervals?). And they very much LOOKED....when IN their apparitional form....quite like the PLESIOSAURS many people take them to be (as remnant "survivals"). Theis fascinating Intel work is reported by researcher Jim Marrs ("Crossfire") and is well covered by Nick Redfern in this book. So, it would seem that maybe...just maybe....Ted Holiday's notion of "ghost" monsters, apparitions, might not be far off the mark (though the rational-materialist "Bill Nye-the-Science-Guy" type will not want to hear such AT ALL!). But look; it isn't just about Loch Ness. There are bigfoot tracks that appear, make trails, and then disappear. There are bigfoot sightings where the creatures are SEEN to vanish...and perhaps re-appear; cases where such beings have been SHOT...and are seen to EXPLODE in a blinding flash of light....leaving nothing behind. I , myself, once saw a fast-moving bright light pursued by a jet interceptor. As the fighter closed on the light...the light disappeared. Just blinked out into nothing. Didn't accelerate and leave the jet behind. No. Just vanished. De-materialized? So maybe these things are more otherworldly than we'd like to think. Nick Redfern does a very good job here of making the case thatsuch possibilities may hold too much water than to be cavalierly dismissive of. Read the book. It will make you wonder.

Nick Redfern's book on the Loch Ness monster phenomenon is a refreshing look at a mystery that has puzzled people, including researchers, for centuries. It is fresh, because it isn't just another Loch Ness book speculating on the idea of a species of living dinosaur somehow hiding in a lake, or just an abnormally large eel or fish. The fact is, after so many books and so much 'scientific' research over so many decades, with nobody getting any closer to solving the mystery, it only makes sense to explore ALL possibilities. And it's looking like the paranormal angle is not only the most plausible, but the most likely. Because insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Just because someone believes or WANTS Nessie to be a surviving, flesh and blood plesiosaur doesn't necessarily mean that's what it is. And Mr. Redfern's book shows that the Loch Ness mystery is far, far stranger than most people would like to believe.As was already mentioned in another review, those readers who are complaining about the paranormal angle being presented clearly failed to read on the front cover: "Exploring the supernatural origins of the Loch Ness monster." And whether or not Aleister Crowley was partly responsible for some or any of the phenomena, definitely has relevance to the book. If someone only wants to read about surviving dinosaur theories, there are a plethora of Loch Ness monster books out there to choose from. But if someone wishes to really explore every possible angle to get closer to the truth, it only makes sense to take off the blinders and open one's mind to all possibilities, especially when the popular, orthodox opinions have led to nowhere.

I'm a fan of Nick Redfern's work and this book doesn't disappoint. As a longtime enthusiast of the unexplained, I was surprised how many Loch Ness Monster related events I hadn't even heard of. This was a fascinating book. If you're a fan of lake monsters, you won't be disappointed.

A lot of interesting accounts and theories about The Loch Ness Monster and other strange things around the Loch.

My daughter is enjoying this book.

This book sucks on a kindle!!!I do not think it was worth the money.I am really into Bigfoot and UFOs and ghosts,but I did not like this book.

The description of the item appears to have been accurate, it was my pleasure

Major disappointment. Not a terrible book, but more just a perfunctory introduction to Nessie and her history. Nothing special, and perhaps helpful for the beginner, but not in depth enough for the many who are already knowledgable on the subject, and who buy, or who might be planning to buy, it. Frustrating, too, in that the author brings up some interesting sightings/cases and photos, but then fails to provide said photos. What photos are included, are unimpressive, small, not very sharp, and can be found in many other Nessie books. The book has all the hallmarks of having been written in a hurry - perhaps not surprising given the author's legendary output. Having heard the author on a plethora of talk shows, I was expecting a much more detailed and provocative book. Instead, it turned out to be "just one more" book on the Loch Ness phenomenon. If this book is typical of the author's other works, I won't be buying another one.

Comes from a different approach, interesting

Great book veryi interesting

Completely unconvincing

Following in the tradition of Holiday's "The Dragon and The Disc", "Goblin Universe" and Shiels' "Monstrum!", we have waited over 25 years for another like minded book, and Nick Redfern is the man to continue this centuries old thread in the tale. If one is going to talk about supernatural Nessies, one must start at the beginning with St. Columba and progress through the tales of water horses, kelpies and other such mingled constructs of overlaid truth.Opinions vary as to the nature of these beasts as perceived by those who once told tales of them to riveted audiences. Nick takes a view which is, shall we say, all encompassing as to their nature and relation to other Highland phenomena of the time and their shape shifting tendencies. You could probably call it a paranormal Grand Unified Theory.The question is how literally should one take these tales? How big was the kernel of truth that was too often obscured by ancient raconteurs? That answer very much depends on who you ask and Nick supplies his own opinions on these pre-industrial demons.Taking those demonic forms into the modern Nessie era is not normally done by the majority of researchers, but Nick takes this oldest of Loch Ness Monster theories and attempts to map it onto the modern phenomenon.But how does one go about proving that the Loch Ness Monster is a supernatural beast? What exactly does that mean? Is it a product of the human mind or another mind? Is it a real sentient entity in its own right or does it even have a substantial form? Nick homes in on his answer as the book progresses.Though having proven beyond his own doubt that plesiosaurs are not the answer, how do you do the opposite for a paranormal cryptid? The evidence is circumstantial. But then again, is that not the way of it with Nessie theories of all shades?From that period and 1933 onwards, Nick narrates the Nessie story to the present day. There are the usual suspects plus a few minor typos on the way. Willox the Warlock did not battle the Loch Ness Kelpie, his ancestor did. Marmaduke Wetherell did not find the hippopotami spoors, he created them. Moreover, Loch Latch is written as Loch Laide.But Nick follows a parallel course as he presents stories from in and around Loch Ness that suggest there is more to this area than just elusive aquatic beasts. With that in mind, we are regaled with stories of ghosts, the Loch Ness Hoodoo, UFOs, out of place cats, Aleister Crowley, exorcisms, Men in Black, witches and other strange people with somewhat magical designs upon the place.Indeed, Nick will answer such questions as why researcher Jon Downes was butt naked at Loch Ness and what Boleskine House has to do with the Disney cartoon, The Jungle Book! But this all culminates in the sinister suggestion that a serpent worshipping cult may have operated at the loch, and may even do so today. The evidence for this is somewhat tenuous, but considering men are inclined to worship almost anything past, present and future, why should that surprise us?After all, we have had the rituals of Donald Omand, Doc Shiels and Kevin Carlyon. Have we missed anything out? To this end, Nick refers us to further clues which I leave to your judgement.Ted Holiday and Doc Shiels, of course, figure highly, as does Tim Dinsdale. Holiday’s untimely demise is viewed with suspicion. Shiels’ activities are not viewed with the same eye as Nick embraces him. His 1977 Nessie photos are generally rejected, but Nick puts up a defence, omitting to address the matter of the audio tapes featuring Shiels and friend Michael McCormick in 1977 which records them discussing how to fake monster photographs. Nick needs to reply to that before we proceed further with Anthony Shiels.We know Tim Dinsdale was a member of the Ghost Club and had his own fair share of spooky stories (as well as an alleged demonic attack). However, Tim’s public opinion very much stayed in the biological domain. Did Tim secretly believe in a supernatural Nessie? Only his family and closest confidants can come clean on this, thirty years after his death.As one that continues to believe in paranormal phenomena in other domains, I accept that strange things happen around Loch Ness. The question for me is how statistically significant they are compared to other geographical regions and what is the relation between increasing distance from the loch and diminishing relevance to the loch?Moreover, having accepted the premise of a supernatural Loch Ness region, how do you use that to make the leap to a supernatural Loch Ness monster? And here’s the rub. Putting aside old tales of talking kelpies and indirect stories of other things around the area, what exactly is it about the modern monster itself that speaks of a paranormal nature?The answer is precious little as Nessies don’t vanish like ghosts. They don’t do unnatural feats like fly off or speak to you. They don’t look as weird as werewolves or mothmen. They don’t give off sulphurous smells like devils or cause any strange synchronicities.Maybe they don’t have to, but there are one or two things with better promise. The shape shifting thing; is that paranormal or normal? Nick points to variations in appearances described by witnesses. Perhaps so, but how much of that is accountable by intra-species variations due to sex, age or seasonality? How much of the variation is just down to the fact that eyewitnesses cannot deliver a 100% accurate description (but still accurate enough to point to a large creature inhabiting the loch)?But all is not lost. As I close, there are some strange things that defy explanation for me. Ted Holiday’s weird experiences after the 1973 exorcism are not so easily dismissed and that strange figure he met near Urquhart Castle may not just be a mad motor biker. There are other tales that also make you think twice. I refer readers to the story related by Tim Richardson, which does not make it into Nick’s book, but points to something perhaps beyond the normal.Is the Loch Ness Monster a demonic form, a psychic projection, a zooform or something else that is currently beyond scientific explanation? I know there are many people who class themselves as paracryptozoologists. It is up to them to continue to make the case for such a thing. I suspect their number is increasing; they just need to increase the arguments in line with that.