Lustig Andrei wrote:
Loch Ness Monster hunter has new photo, he says
I say... "not good enough".
The other day I saw a story about a lady who claimed she saw a wild cougar in New Hampshire. She even had a video of the thing. It was definitely feline but it was hidden behind some leaves and trees and there was no really clear view.
This lady is only trying to prove that she saw a wild cougar, not a mysterious monster in a lake. And she had video sufficient to identify the genus if not the species, and *still* it wasn't good enough.
Then we have this guy in Scotland who takes a low quality snapshot of a lump in a lake and claims he's got proof of Nessie.
I think some people need to rethink what their idea of "proof" is. And CGI being what it is today, I'm not even sure a good high-quality photo is going to go very far.
I've seen a lot of things in the water that look pretty weird, until you get right up close and find out it's just a big chunk of garbage floating around.