Nessie High-Tech Hoax

Plesiosaurs werent dinosaurs? damn. I need a good book on fossils and stuff.

There are indeed differences between finding the coelacanth and Nessie. The major one is that they have physical evidence of Coelacanthts, but none of Nessie.
 
The physical evidence (or lack of) is a true point, but plenty of people would say that it was a hoax if it ever turned up. In the end it doesn't matter. It depends on if you want to believe or not.
 
Xevious said:
The physical evidence (or lack of) is a true point, but plenty of people would say that it was a hoax if it ever turned up.
Click to expand...
If there is evidence it will speak for itself.
Xevious said:
In the end it doesn't matter. It depends on if you want to believe or not.
Click to expand...
That doesn't sound very scientific.
 
You are entirely correct Shaman.

However, such is the desperation of some people to believe in Nessie that a while back some were trumpeting that a tooth had been found. Said tooth was actually a cast off partly formed deer antler.
 
People that refuse to believe in possibility are daft, just as people that refuse to believe in falsity are daft. Anything is possible, including the lack of something...Now in this particular case, if the sole pupose of this experiment was to show people that it could be fake, or to try and discredit evidence that hasn't been yet, it is an act in vain that was simply stupid. If these people are skeptics, they could better spend time and money creating a lake wide sonar/infrared/UV surveillance system. In the meantime, if it was for a good laugh, or a view into human nature, it is supportable.
Who are we to judge the actions of others? Only ourselves.
 
Xevious, I can't figure out if you're a totally credulous person who believes in UFOs, Psi phenomena, the whole shebang, and consequently have a vendetta against skeptics, or are in fact some kind of arch-skeptic who is enjoining us skeptics to be carefully skeptical even about our own skepticism! Which is a point of view I have a lot of sympathy for, actually, and I totally agreed with your first post pointing out the uselessness of using some kind of high tech LCM trickery to prove that people can be fooled!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top