Home Page Science Frontiers
ONLINE

No. 41: Sep-Oct 1985

Issue Contents





Other pages



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 

Latest episode: loch ness

The continuing saga of the purportedly retouched photo of the flipper of the Loch Ness monster chalked up another episode in the Summer issue of the Skeptical Inquirer. First, there is a response by Robert Rines to the debunking article by Razdan and Kielar in the preceding Winter issue, in which the charge is made that retouching had taken place. This is followed by a reply by Razdan and Kielar. To top it all off, there is a nasty letter printed later on about the Academy of Applied Science, of which Rines is a member. With all the charges and countercharges, it is impossible to tell whether or not the flipper photograph was "subjectively" enhanced or not.

(Rines, Robert; "Loch Ness Reanalysis: Rines Responds," Skeptical Inquirer, 9:382, 1985. Razdan, Rikki. Also: Kielar, Alan; "Loch Ness Reanalysis: Authors Reply," Skeptical Inquirer, 9:387, 1985.)

Comment. The whole business is now as murky as Loch Ness itself. The use of obfuscation and character assassination is common in the anomaly business.

From Science Frontiers #41, SEP-OCT 1985. 1985-2000 William R. Corliss