Actually, no: the date was too pale for me to make out on my computer. But that does bring up another famous photo.
The "Surgeon's Photograph" at Loch Ness was supposed to be a fake for many years and in many books for the supposed "Fact" that it was dated to April 1: the date was April 19th. What had happened was that Ruprt T. Gould had written about the photo giving the correct date of April 19 in his book on The Loch Ness Monster...and the figure '9' had fallen off the end of the line of type at that point. So that for many decades readers saw that "April 1" and automatically assumed it was a joke. Earlier publications (such as Oudemans' pamphlet) cited the date as April 19.
I am afraid it is a fake. It also very much resembles one of Frank Searle's "Nessie" photos and I think too closely to be a coincidence.
ReplyDeleteBest Wishes, Dale D.
Early April...very early ;-)
ReplyDeleteOne of the more entertaining cryptozoological April Fool spoofs. You did notice that the date of the report was 1 April?
ReplyDeleteActually, no: the date was too pale for me to make out on my computer. But that does bring up another famous photo.
ReplyDeleteThe "Surgeon's Photograph" at Loch Ness was supposed to be a fake for many years and in many books for the supposed "Fact" that it was dated to April 1: the date was April 19th. What had happened was that Ruprt T. Gould had written about the photo giving the correct date of April 19 in his book on The Loch Ness Monster...and the figure '9' had fallen off the end of the line of type at that point. So that for many decades readers saw that "April 1" and automatically assumed it was a joke. Earlier publications (such as Oudemans' pamphlet) cited the date as April 19.
Best Wishes, Dale D.