New Sighting of the Loch Ness Monster

The Loch Ness Monster, or Nessie to her friends, has been around for at least 1500 years, and now she has popped up again - with a pal. A nessie hunter has film footage of two beasties in the loch at the same time.
Doubters and sceptics beware - Nessie is back! And this time with a friend.
Just when you thought it was safe to go into the water! (I wouldn't advise it - it's freezing at this time of year!)

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/loch-ness-monster-hunter-claims-nessie-may-be-two-individual-beasties-based-on-new-footage/ar-AA18skUG?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=ad9db4d499684388a05a774e89814b84&ei=15

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

Fascination, I will take a look. But, with virtually everyone always carrying a camera, it seems odd that there haven't been hundreds of videos of Nessie.

helensusanswift · 26-30, F

@samueltyler2 Just hundreds of sightings through the years, and dozens of photographs.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@helensusanswift yes, but every image was of terrible quality. For the past 20 years, cell phones have had decent cameras, in past 5 excellent ones. Do you think Nessie is camera shy? I wont completely write her off, but await better proof.

helensusanswift · 26-30, F

@samueltyler2 Ah, to those who doubt, comes doubt, and to those who believe, comes reality. That image I shared on here was of good quality. But if you prefer to be a cynic about everything, that is up to you.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@helensusanswift it is always best to doubt, for that leads to further study and potential discovery. That doesn't make me a cynic, it makes me a scientist, and led to a successful.career in academic medicine.

helensusanswift · 26-30, F

@samueltyler2 A cynical scientist.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@helensusanswift no, not cynical, one who follows the data. The best of scientists always question what they know and use the null hypothesis to prove or disprove it.

helensusanswift · 26-30, F

@samueltyler2 The data was presented to you, and you discarded it without a thought. That is not science; that is cynicism. Or worse.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@helensusanswift how can you say i discounted it without a thought? Did you somehow see what i was thinking?

helensusanswift · 26-30, F

@samueltyler2 Did you see the clip? Two unknown creatures moving in different directions at the same time? So not wind or current or boat or human agency - clear photograph taken by a recognised authority.
No, immediately says you. You have already made up your mind.