Comments on: Hayley Stevens and Nessie

By: dconstrukt

dconstrukt — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:26:56 +0000

@ springheeledjack i hear ya… but unfortunately the burden of proof isn’t with us… who aren’t believing these crappy photos… the burden of proof is on the person posting these photos and the people who believe it.

these people have to prove and convince people this is real, not the other way around

By: springheeledjack

springheeledjack — Sun, 12 Aug 2012 06:17:13 +0000

That’s exactly what we’ve been talking about for some time, and a lot of the reason I get on here and post–skeptical is a term that has been “claimed” by the debunkers and the scoftics, when in fact they’re no better than the true believers who never question anything.

I’m all for accepting the photo of a log in the water…when it’s a log in the water, but just because someone pops up and says it’s a log doesn’t make it so. Back it up with something logical and practical–something that makes sense and I’ll be right there with you. Tossing off every still photo as a log just because you can’t come up with some evidence to back it up, well it just makes me dismiss you out of hand and your theories.

By: shmargin

shmargin — Sun, 12 Aug 2012 03:38:11 +0000

With no proof whatsoever, but experience sitting and staring at images to edit or remove things, this image just feels shopped to me. Something about the water around the nessie. And the shape has a two dimensional feel when I look at it, just doesn’t look right.

Or I’m crazy and its a seal or a Loch Ness monster.

By: silverity

silverity — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:12:59 +0000

Hayley is right, scepticism has become lazy and I say that as a Nessie believer. Remember the biggest expose (Surgeon’s Photo) was researched by a Nessie believer (Alastair Boyd).

It has become too easy to say “hoax”, “photoshop”, “tyre”, etc. Talk is cheap.

By: bobhelferstay

bobhelferstay — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:35:37 +0000

There’s nothing on that photo. It’s open to interpretation. All I see is something in the water. There’s no way of telling what it is. Photos like that may as well be thrown out, because they can not be used as evidence. For a photo to be taken seriously, (especially in the digital age), it has to be completely clear, and have details of what the animal, or object is. Like if you take a picture of a tiger. Everyone has to look at it, and say “that’s a picture of a tiger.” If it’s an unidentified animal, people need to be able to look at it, see without a doubt that this is a picture of some kind of animal, but not know what kind of animal. All I see in that photo is a lump in the water that could be anything.