Hayley Stevens and Nessie

Posted by: Nick Redfern on August 11th, 2012

Well, the saga of the latest Loch Ness Monster photo continues at a steady pace. Here’s the latest commentary: from Hayley Stevens, who notes in part the following, valuable point:

“It’s an interesting photo and poses many questions, and it would be good to find an answer to those questions. It’s fine to hypothesise about the photo and to discuss and suggest ideas regarding its origin and to make comparisons to previous lake monster photos and their causes. However many skeptics are quick to reach conclusions about these sorts of stories without having evidence to back themselves up – this is behaviour that goes against the very thing that skepticism is about – assessing claims for their supporting evidence. Stating that ‘it is a hoax’ or that ‘tourist numbers must be down’ or that ‘it is a log in the water’ are claims, and when you make a claim like this you need to have evidence to back it up.”

Nick Redfern About Nick Redfern
Punk music fan, Tennents Super and Carlsberg Special Brew beer fan, horror film fan, chocolate fan, like to wear black clothes, like to stay up late. Work as a writer.

5 Responses to “Hayley Stevens and Nessie”

  1. bobhelferstay responds:

    There’s nothing on that photo. It’s open to interpretation. All I see is something in the water. There’s no way of telling what it is. Photos like that may as well be thrown out, because they can not be used as evidence. For a photo to be taken seriously, (especially in the digital age), it has to be completely clear, and have details of what the animal, or object is. Like if you take a picture of a tiger. Everyone has to look at it, and say “that’s a picture of a tiger.” If it’s an unidentified animal, people need to be able to look at it, see without a doubt that this is a picture of some kind of animal, but not know what kind of animal. All I see in that photo is a lump in the water that could be anything.

  2. silverity responds:

    Hayley is right, scepticism has become lazy and I say that as a Nessie believer. Remember the biggest expose (Surgeon’s Photo) was researched by a Nessie believer (Alastair Boyd).

    It has become too easy to say “hoax”, “photoshop”, “tyre”, etc. Talk is cheap.

  3. shmargin responds:

    With no proof whatsoever, but experience sitting and staring at images to edit or remove things, this image just feels shopped to me. Something about the water around the nessie. And the shape has a two dimensional feel when I look at it, just doesn’t look right.

    Or I’m crazy and its a seal or a Loch Ness monster.

  4. springheeledjack responds:

    That’s exactly what we’ve been talking about for some time, and a lot of the reason I get on here and post–skeptical is a term that has been “claimed” by the debunkers and the scoftics, when in fact they’re no better than the true believers who never question anything.

    I’m all for accepting the photo of a log in the water…when it’s a log in the water, but just because someone pops up and says it’s a log doesn’t make it so. Back it up with something logical and practical–something that makes sense and I’ll be right there with you. Tossing off every still photo as a log just because you can’t come up with some evidence to back it up, well it just makes me dismiss you out of hand and your theories.

  5. dconstrukt responds:

    @ springheeledjack i hear ya… but unfortunately the burden of proof isn’t with us… who aren’t believing these crappy photos… the burden of proof is on the person posting these photos and the people who believe it.

    these people have to prove and convince people this is real, not the other way around

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.