tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post35274111522671464..comments2024-01-05T05:02:20.353+00:00Comments on CRYPTOZOOLOGY ONLINE: Still on the Track: LINDSAY SELBY: Seeing Double?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-78593160931685093372010-02-03T04:01:59.249+00:002010-02-03T04:01:59.249+00:00It's funny how at times our eyes can fail us a...It's funny how at times our eyes can fail us and play tricks with us. I once thought I was looking at a UFO as it hovered over head. It changed color in front of me. It went from red to blue to green. It turned out to be a faultering light on a light pole.Aubreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631044010755502678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-61658654503014736752010-02-02T18:57:45.814+00:002010-02-02T18:57:45.814+00:00I agree that these stories sound rather unlikely t...I agree that these stories sound rather unlikely to be reliable.<br /><br />Said Nick: <i>‘I noticed what looked like a rounded dark tree stump that appeared to be around 1-2 metres protruding out of the water, which was very close to the banks opposite the castle."</i><br /><br />He was driving a car, so his view was probably something like this link to Google Maps (sorry it's ugly but we are not allowed targets here)<br />http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.339215,-4.431524&spn=0,359.972577&z=15&layer=c&cbll=57.339531,-4.431701&panoid=-2VUPil75kNeuAjFIwBwPg&cbp=12,153.23,,0,9.79<br /><br /><br />The far shore is over one mile away, and I doubt that a motorist could see anything 1 to 2 metres high near the other side. If he did have superhuman vision, he may have seen an angler standing in the shallows over there - a popular camping area. And his chances of seeing an otter are about equal to those of spotting a rabbit on the banks.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01982472466101488997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-88595737464646834872010-02-02T12:55:21.131+00:002010-02-02T12:55:21.131+00:00Witnesses are describing what they at first took f...Witnesses are describing what they at first took for a waterlogged tree stump bobbing up and down in the water.<br /><br />Assume it was that. Why is it so imporobable that they would not see the same tree stump again later on?<br /><br />Assume somebody mistook an otter for the monster. Why should it be improbable the witnesses might mistake the otter for the monster again should they happen upon it again?<br /><br />Now assume that some trigger-happy witness sees a tree stump AND an otter on the same day, and says they are both the "Monster". Should that be looked upon as any sort of a mystery? No, it means that the witness is excitable enough to make multiple misidentifications.<br /><br />Suppose it is a REALLY unknown animal. Should there be any problem with the same witness happening to chance upon it twice in the same day? There is really no way of predicting how likely it is to see or not see an unknown quantity. You could just call it dumb luck.<br /><br />Think Zen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com