Later analysis cast doubt on the early claims. The speed and size estimates are now thought to have been too high because of miscalculated camera angle and film cuts. Overlaying frames shows a pale blob that matches where a helmsman would sit on a boat, and the object does not actually submerge but blends into reflections. Dinsdale's wider field of view binoculars also differed from his telephoto lens. A 1993 digital enhancement for a Discovery documentary saw a shape that critics considered a reflection of the shore.
Most researchers do not think Dinsdale was a hoaxer. He has been criticised for confirmation bias and for accepting dubious sources.
Comments