Comments on: Ogopogo Photo

By: mothman123

mothman123 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:44:50 +0000

I agree with lukedog on this one and i realy beileve in lake monsters and this photograph is not convincing

By: Zilla

Zilla — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:38:19 +0000

They look out of position. Rocks perhaps.

By: Dr. Strings

Dr. Strings — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:01:09 +0000

Looks like a hoax to me. The image looks superimposed, and more detailed and colored a bit differently in the upper photo. Also odd that the only thing in focus is the alleged monster. Another thing; anyone find it odd that the guy pictured in the photo, who appears to be very close to the photographer, has absolutely no interest in the monster right behind him in the lake? Wouldn’t he notice it, rather than just sit there and drink his coffee or read his paper? Wouldn’t the guy taking the picture say, “Hey buddy! Look, it’s the Ogopogo monster! Right behind you!” I mean, come on! LOL!

By: Ghost314

Ghost314 — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:46:27 +0000

It could not possibly be an altered image, or something mundane like driftwood. Uh…why not?

I see several objects, not a single serpentine creature. I vote for a family of Sasquatch frolicing in the water. It is BC after all.

By: korollocke

korollocke — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:41:17 +0000

So alcalde your saying I need to wait for something to “surface”? I still want a real Ogopogo or like or simular critter. This altered pic doesn’t do it for me.

By: korollocke

korollocke — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:35:52 +0000

It changed color?????? How did that happen? Just another false hope,fudge…..

By: alcalde

alcalde — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:17:57 +0000

Changed my mind too. I just looked at both photos for the first time at full-screen size. Doesn’t the first photo seem like the “anomaly” has had detail added to it? The bottom one is less cropped on the bottom (so the first pic can’t be the original) but the first seems to have a shiny snake-like texture to the anomaly and a mark of color at the “head” area that simply isn’t present in the second photo. Unless neither is the original, what seems more like driftwood in the second version seems to have been intentionally made more snake-like in the first one.

By: alcalde

alcalde — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:12:34 +0000

Isaiah, I believe the second photo *is* the first photo, just uncropped/scaled.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:44:05 +0000

Sorry, guys. No highjacking of these comments for your extended discussions about skepticism/scofticism/sciencism here.

Talk about the photo, if you wish.

By: Isaiah

Isaiah — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:30:46 +0000

K, It’s high time to change my theory. This is definitely altered. The new image proves it, unless that’s just a wax sculpture of an old man, as it didn’t move, nor, did the scenery change. I vote “Hoax” on this one.

~Isaiah