"That's what makes it more convincing imo" As Sarkus pointed out in relation to youtube video evidence: "Which strictly still is evidence... just not necessarily evidence that I consider to rationally point to the existence of the supposed "monster" (other than the "weird" mundane, such as the sloth). Bear in mind that evidence is evidence, and it should not be confused with the interpretation of that evidence. I.e. the youtube videos are evidence - even if evidence merely of someone's CGI work." Mr. Magical Realist, just because you are easily convinced by "youtube 'evidence' ", does not mean that anyone or everyone else should accept, let alone,adopt those same convictions. By the way, pictures are "photoshopped", it takes more advanced Video Editing/Creation software to manipulate video.