Travel

The twisted methods used to discredit eyewitnesses, indicate monsters in loch ness, agreed?

Story, i first heard about #LochNess as a kid. My parents used mocking tones and tricky phrases, to inject me with the prejudice , against fools who believe in the loc nes "monster". But...

Every step of the way is twisted.

1, from the very name "monster" singular the misleading starts. There is "no such thing as monsters"? So a "monster" in loc nes must be hallucinations?

2, monster just means big a "monster newt" is unusually big. A monster truck. So a big eel is a monster but not a "monster". Sonar did see a "large" unusual shaped beast in loc nes. It could not be identified which fish, due to unusual shape, lizard? amphibian? But certainly a "big unusual shaped beast" so different that it is "unidentified " that means very different than any beast we know.

3, the eyewitnesses "described a monster (singular) with features that contradicted each other" they "refute" and discredit each other... only if we assume "monster" singular. Saying plural "Monsters" or beasts exposed this trick. People saw different forms indicating "Several different big eels were seen by witnesses." The loc has a river connected to sea so beasts can swim in and out. So i don't believe in monsters but a loc nes beast is a fact supported "empirical by observation" and sonar. But i myself didn't see but...

But the fact the opponents use "monster" both singular and the same word as "monster no such thing" is just to create prejudice, so that alone , shows their side is wrong, agreed?

The twisted methods used to discredit eyewitnesses, indicate monsters in loch ness, agreed?
Post Opinion