New Ogopogo Video
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on November 10th, 2011
An Okanagan man believes he has video that proves the Ogopogo or some other lake monster lives in Okanagan Lake.
VIDEO: Possible Ogopogo video catches the eye of international media
The video of a possible Ogopogo sighting in Okanagan Lake has caught the eye of international media.
Two weeks ago, West Kelowna resident Richard Huls said he captured video of the mythical creature in the lake.
“It proves something is down there. Whether it’s Ogopogo or not, it is a different story but there is something at least down there,” Huls said.
“It was not a wave, just a darker colour. The size and the fact that they were not parallel with the waves made me think it had to be something else,” he said.
And many other people seemed to think the same thing.
Comments flooded our CHBC News Facebook page and the possible sighting of the mythical creature became the most watched video on our website.
It turns out Okanagan residents were not the only ones curious about the Ogopogo.
The video soon spread to Calgary, Vancouver and Global News stations across Canada.
The video now has almost 200,000 views on our YouTube page and on Thursday, it will be featured in the top rated morning show, Good Morning America.
“People are connected to this sort of thing across the United States and across the world because they do not understand it,” said UBC-Okanagan sociology professor Chris Schneider.
“By the very virtue of them not understanding it, it makes them want to try to understand it even more,” Schneider said.
The professor, who says he does not believe in the Ogopogo, says emotion tends to overpower logic in these sorts of situations, especially when something near and dear to the hearts of Okanagan residents has its own statue downtown and even a book collection.
“They tie into identity, place, culture, context about Kelowna,” Schenider said about the lake creature. “It is about British Columbia. It’s about Lake Okanagan. It ties into First Nations.”
Source: Global BC
CHBC News, Julia Wong
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
I’m not seeing it. I’m not sure what I am looking at, is it the two long wakes, or the shadow beneath them? If it is the wakes, I’m not dreadfully impressed. They could be cause by numerous tidal conditions. If it is a shadow under the water, that I think I see, it could be a very large freshwater fish, which is cool in itself.
If someone can explain what I am looking at, I would really appreciate it. The image isn’t the greatest.
I’m not 100% clear on what we’re supposed to be looking at, either. My first thought was the two long dark shapes (wakes?). They do seem to be objects in the water rather than wakes, especially the one at the back, lying at an angle to the waves – that does look to me like an object in the water. The left hand end of it seems to be closer to the surface than the right hand side. But then there are also other dark shadows in the water around, so yes, I’m not sure exactly what I’m supposed to be focussed on, or how many creatures I’m meant to be seeing.
Two things that strike me: firstly, if the long serpentine shape is what we’re meant to be looking at, compared with the houses in the foreground it looks absolutely massive – implausibly massive, two or three houses long. And also, as the woman observes, it’s awfully still. I’d be interested to know if it moved at all while he was filming it (and if so, why didn’t he film that?) and if it was still lying in that spot when he left the site. Because if that’s the case, I’d be more inclined to think it (they?) are just stationary objects in the water rather than animals. There’s nothing about them in terms of shape or movement that particularly seems animal-like to me.
Of course, I may be completely misinterpreting what I’m meant to be looking at – but it’s not what you’d call clear, in any case.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH
[claws frantically at eyes]
WHY oh WHY is it that people think that stuff like THIS!!!!!!^^^^ could possibly “prove” anything except that water ripples, and I’m not even sure this could prove that?
I know what the Patterson/Gimlin film subject is. It is a bipedal animal, the only question being whether the suit is its birthday suit. Much analysis can (and has) been done; all of it points to authenticity. I could understand Patterson thinking he’d come back with proof.
What do we, um, do with, um, this?
PEOPLE. PEOPLE. PEOPLE. (Calm? I’m ALWAYS CALM GRRRRRRRRR….)
Try, at the very least, to view your “proof” through the eyes of an (understandably) skeptical public before making it public.
Too much to ask?
There is no motion in the lines. They’re not going anywhere. They do not move. Probably cross/rip currents; there is a good chance there is a shelf or tree fall or wreck of some kind under that spot. You can see the ripples of the current around what the shooter mistakes for an animal, but they don’t seem to “bounce off” whatever would be there if it was an animal.
Along with what everyone else said here….sheesh. AND, why did they only film a few seconds here??? I mean if they thought they had a living critter, why stop…maybe it would show its head, move, submerge, something.
As it is, we have a few seconds of video of….absolutely nothing except some dark lines on the water. STationary, yes, but so what…could be an underwater rock formation for all the vid observer knows.
It maddens me too…if you think you have something, for the love, at least film until it’s gone, disappears or does something…
That’s what drives me nuts about water cryptids…people see something strange to THEM and then just assume they’ve got the proof with say 15 seconds of footage or a single photo, etc. And then when your average person looks at it, it’s either a ripple, a blob at too far range, a commotion or just shadows. IF they had filmed longer we might have been able to figure out what it was or at least what it wasn’t.
I give…
maybe my monitor doesnt have the best picture quality because Im not seeing what is suppose to be seen here. I can see 3 things two of then look like long dark line and one of them above the lines is a roundish patch but none of them seem to be moving .I guess this might be like one of the magic eye pictures where you have to look at it just right to see whats to be seen and I might not be looking at this correctly.
It is ingenuous to call this an ‘Ogopogo Video’ in the Heading, though the video itself is titled ‘Possible Ogopogo sighting’.
If I made a video of a tree turning fall colors at Loch Ness, I would not advertise it as a Nessie video. This is a video of several parallel, wind-generated waves, very common on narrow lakes, especially near shore.
I have no problem with a cryptid living in the Lake, but let’s exercise a little bit of restraint before passing off such a non-event as an ‘Ogopogo video’.
Over 500 feet is a little long for a cryptid, isn’t it?
If it is the shadows underneath that we are suppose to be looking at, there were a total of 4 of those. If there was suppose to be something causing the 2 main shadows to be the wake of something HOLDING THE CAMERA STILL WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE! I’m sorry for that, but while in the middle of filming something you think is that important you don’t keep “focusing” and don’t at least attempt some still frames. I don’t doubt the camera person saw something, but unless they can come up with something better I’m ignoring this one, except for this post…
ETxArtist: if we are looking for a dinosaur cryptid then 500, though bigger than most we are looking for, is possible.
Looks like seaweed to me (lol).
For the love of Pete, can we find someone able to hold a video camera still while filming??
I gave it one more look…just on the off chance I missed something…I didn’t…
It feels very staged to me. Anyone else remember the UFO videos from a year or so back supposedly filmed in South America or Mexico or somewhere? With the random chatter that helped make it seem real? This looks like the same thing. Horrible video quality showing nothing more than something that could be anything. I’m a believer in most mysteries, but a harsh skeptic when it comes to videos like this.
I’m guessing fully staged by the people behind the camera, either special effects added later, or something different in the water. The very bad 2001 internet video quality makes it very easy to add in whatever you want and have it look like it could be something that is actually there.
To me it looks like wakes – nothing more.
It is possible that the makers of the video were seeing other anomalies such as dark masses underneath the surface.
But unfortunately, nothing truly anomalous appears in the video.
Looks like either a ridge under the water or a couple of really big trees being hit with wind-driven waves. Nothing there looked remotely alive.
not sure if its my mood yet looked pretty cool to me
Those are wind rows bisecting with boat wakes. It is a common phenomenon I have seen on Okanagan lake hundreds of times in 24 years of investigation. Common sense should also kick in because if you contrast the objects with the foreground buildings on the shore, they are at least 100 feet long which is well outside the range of an Ogopogo. Most witnesses put the size as 30-40 feet.
This video was mentioned on my local news with a snicker …They didnt even snicker when talking about the last bigfoot sighting in the area .
Whatever this video shows, for the life of me, I’ll never understand why most “sighting” videos last for mere seconds. Aren’t we well past the memory limitations of digital cameras and cell phones being able to record only a few seconds worth of video? By close to a decade or so? Whether it’s Ogopogo, Bigfoot, UFO’s, or the Ghost of Abraham Lincoln, it usually seems like a case of these people saying, “Well, that’s long enough. No need to keep filming to see if the object moves or to see if I can get to a better vantage point!” Weird.
Depending on the depth of the water at that point, it could be two submerged logs, just under the surface. If that is the case, the wind could create wakes as the water passes over them. I’m not saying that’s what this is, it’s just a possible explanation. Personally, I’m not sure what I’m looking at. I do believe that there are large, unknown creatures in this lake. That, I am sure of. Whether it’s giant eels, Cadborasaurus’ or some other creatures, we many never know, but something definitely lives there.
Cryptidcrazy said “it could be two submerged logs, just under the surface” and I agree. The waves generated by the onshore wind are being deflected by the barely submerged objects. If you stabilize any part of the film you will se no movement of the “objects” relative to the shore, only the waves move.
As for eels – I don’t think Anguilla sp. eels occur naturally in river systems on the West Coast of the USA. W
They keep on searching on the surface instead of underwater. We’re back in the times of Dinsdale. We’re saying that waves are lake monsters. If I were a skeptic, I would be laughing. Give me a clear movement, a head-neck sighting…not waves.
A horse is a horse, a tree is a tree…now don’t tell me that a horse is a tree, or that a wave is a lake monster. Don’t make up shadows underwater, because the video is not in good quality, apart from the fact the the person must be a nervous man.
Those waves are normally seen in Lake Okanagan.