這是二寶今天的作業，晚上十一點才寫完。初二學生在美國重點學校尖子班的功課難度大概就是如此了。

The Loch Ness Monster

            Many theories have been formed and many pieces of evidence have been collected to explain the unnatural, however, many aspects of each situation have yet to be addressed. The plesiosaur-like aquatic animal with flippers, a head locket or spout, and an elongated neck or muzzle, known as “Nessie,” or “Loch-na-Beistie” (Lyons 1) has baffled even the most intellectual experts studying the paranormal. Because of ancient Pictish carvings depicting an aquatic animal, many reliable eyewitness sightings of a monster, and sonar and pictorial evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that Nessie exists.

            When Romans came to Northern Scotland, they discovered carved stones of a Loch Ness Monster-like aquatic animal. In 1933, a couple reported that they had seen an “enormous animal rolling and plunging on the surface” (Lyons 1). This sighting created the way that people see Nessie today, as a monster. In December of that same year, a man named Marmaduke Wetherell reported discovering footprints of a large, four-toed animal, which were later proven to be a fraud. In the 1950s, Constance Whyte published a book on the Loch Ness Monster, including eyewitness accounts and sketches. In the 1970s, “at the same moment the sonar was registering a large, moving object, the underwater camera was taking pictures of an object that looked, after development and computer enhancement, like the flippers of an aquatic creature (Lyons 2). In 1994, the “Surgeon’s Photo,” a picture of Nessie, was proven to be a fraud, more than 60 years after the photo was originally published.

            The Pictish carvings, discovered by the Romans, depicted many creatures, all but one identifiable, that being a mysterious, elusive aquatic animal known as the Loch Ness Monster. According to Lyons, a PBS article writer, “All the animals depicted on the Pictish stones are lifelike and easily recognizable—all but one…strange beast…” (Lyons 1). The Loch Ness Monster is shown along with other common animals, suggesting that Nessie was as common as other animals carved on the stones. Therefore it is logical to conclude that the monster exists because of its portrayal on the Pictish stones along with familiar animals, categorizing Nessie as “familiar.”

Many eyewitnesses, mostly reliable, have reported sightings of the Loch Ness Monster. These eyewitnesses were “sober, level-headed people: lawyers and priests, scientists and school teachers, policemen and fishermen—even a Nobel Prize winner” (Lyons 2). According to an art teacher named Alastair Boyd, an eyewitness of Nessie, “…I would actually stake my life on their existence…I trust my eyesight…I used to make my living teaching people how to observe, and I know that thing I saw was not a log or an otter or a wave, or anything like that. It was a large animal. It came heaving out of the water, something like a whale. I mean, the part that was actually on the surface when it stopped rolling through was at least 20 feet long. It was totally extraordinary. It’s the most amazing thing I’ve ever seen in my life, and if I could afford to spend the rest of my life looking for another glimpse of it, I would” (Lyons 4). If a man is willing to stake his life on something, most likely he really did encounter such thing, therefore supporting the theory of existence.

Many pictures of various parts of an elusive sea creature have been taken underwater at the same time sonar was registering a large creature. According to the authors of an article on the Loch Ness Monster, “…About 40 minutes later salmon began breaking the water’s surface, apparently trying to escape two objects, clearly discerned by sonar, swimming 12 feet apart…At the same time a submerged camera with synchronized strobe light was recording the first close up, Underwater photographs of what the authors contend is ‘Nessie’—the large aquatic creature that has been the subject of some 1-400 years of recorded sightings at the loch…Once accomplished, however, the results were remarkable: two close up shots of what appeared to be a diamond-shaped flipper, and a distant shot—at the limits of resolution—of two ‘indistinct objects.’ When the exposure densities of the two objects were analyzed to determine their distance from the camera, they were found to be about 12 feet apart, as predicted by the sonar tracks” (“Loch Ness Monster” 5). The sonar got a signal from a large aquatic creature at the same moment salmon were fleeing from a large creature, or even two. This shows that because sonar received a signal from something, a creature would be likely. Furthermore, because salmon were fleeing, it is even more probable that the “creature” was large, fitting the description of the Loch Ness Monster. Therefore it is logical to conclude that the Loch Ness Monster is real because of simultaneous sonar readings and strobe pictures.

Some scientists reject the possibility of a monster due to searches of the loch, but they do not address the possibility of human error. According to the author of “Junior Skeptic,” “Repeated, massive, systematic sonar surveys found nothing unusual” (Loxton 105). This is what many researchers concluded. However, the sonar results may have been caused by human mistake—perhaps a factor in the searches that researchers may have overlooked. Still, many people believe in the Loch Ness Monster due to other evidence supporting existence.

In conclusion, because of ancient Pictish carvings, eyewitness sightings, and sonar and pictorial evidence, to assume that Nessie exists is rational. The Loch Ness Monster among other phenomena will, however, continue to perplex the world for future generations to come.