Suppose the son and his father in that ''blue lobster'' story above, didn't take their story to the news. Or the news didn't find out about it. Whichever the case. If that father and son had pics of the lobster, shared them on FB, etc...would that be considered ''evidence?'' If only the father and son physically observed the lobster in person and they only have photos and their word backing up their claim, would those pics be considered hearsay? If the story trickles down to us here on SF, would we think it was some type of strange hoax masterminded by the father and son to garner attention? Like the tic tac video - the pilots could have kept the footage to themselves, but no one would have believed them. Suddenly, we take the case more seriously because the Pentagon conducted a thorough investigation, which is the right process but I'm just asking the question ...when does something ''count'' as evidence?