Grrr... This really pisses me off. I hate it when scientists twist the facts to suit their own misguided theories. Take the case of Italian geologist Luigi Piccardi who claims that the legend of Nessie could be the result of seismic activity below the lake's waters. He points out that seismic activity which results in huge splashes and commotion in the lake Loch Ness as proof.
What B.S. I am surprised any of these people are called "scientists" when they repeatedly ignore evidence which is contrary to their personal beliefs. Most Nessie sightings do not involve splashes or anything of the sort. They involve actual sightings of the thing. This so called "scientist" completely ignores evidence such as the 1933 sighting by Mr. and Mrs. John Mackay who reported "An enormous animal rolling and plunging" and another sighting which occured two weeks later by Mr. and Mrs. George Spicer who saw "A large long-necked creature actually lurching across the new road." He ignores the 1960 Dinsdale film and sonar scans showing something "Large, alive, and moving" on and below lake Loch's surface. He ignores pictures taken by Dr. Robert Rine who rigged an underwater strobe-camera to be triggered only by sonar returns from "large moving objects" which in 1972 captured a shot of what looks like a giant flipper moving right past the camera and in 1975 produced two pictures which seemed to be showing the full body of the thing and alo it's head.
But what pisses me off even more is that most newspapers do not research any of this and post this opinion (because that's what it is - an opinion, and one that's not based on any reasonable fact) as absolute fact not questioning the word of today's pseudo-scientific priesthood.
 |
