Now if you had a hundred identical and independant sightings of the supposed Loch Ness Monster in that same physical conformation, you might have a point.
As it is, you have one obviously faked photo. for one thing, the supposed monster rides much too high in the water to be physically possible.
I'll go easy on you, find a dozen similar reports showing supposed lake monsters of those exact proportions and I'll admit you are not going at the thing arse-end-forewards and forcing your base data to conform to the results you want. Otherwise you are pursuing a faulty and fallacious methodology that is all too common among Lake Monster theorists. This is the identical method used by cheap journalists.
It's not that I have no sense of humor, but I have a point to make and in fact you and Max have made my point for me.
Now if you had a hundred identical and independant sightings of the supposed Loch Ness Monster in that same physical conformation, you might have a point.
ReplyDeleteAs it is, you have one obviously faked photo. for one thing, the supposed monster rides much too high in the water to be physically possible.
I'll go easy on you, find a dozen similar reports showing supposed lake monsters of those exact proportions and I'll admit you are not going at the thing arse-end-forewards and forcing your base data to conform to the results you want. Otherwise you are pursuing a faulty and fallacious methodology that is all too common among Lake Monster theorists. This is the identical method used by cheap journalists.
It's not that I have no sense of humor, but I have a point to make and in fact you and Max have made my point for me.
Haha this had made my day.
ReplyDelete