Another round of detailed Papoose Dry Lake (S-4) imagery - Release 3

a reply to: Yazman

Thanks Yaz, I appreciate your assessment and taking the time to look at them

originally posted by: JBurns

And they can't be artifacts, they were taken by multiple sensor platforms with multiple imaging systems over several years.

I'm sure we've got some people with formal training or experience in photography on the board. I'd be interested to know what they think. To a layman like me, this fact makes it sound even more likely there would be artifacts. Processing together all that data from multiple sources, obviously something could go wrong.

a reply to: face23785

You are right face that is what GE does. Mine are from NASA directly and are single images from single platforms, I just have about 50 of em total and there are anomalies in most depending on the angle the sensor was at when it was pointed in that direction

Nadir (straight down) produces the least useful view while about 70 degrees seems to produce the most useful views

Photos from a plane are problematic because of how much vibration and small movements it makes

The imagery experts are indeed welcome though. I suspect they'll gloss over my images because not have made up their minds about Papoose and will not want to admit the anomalies don't have an easy explanation

All they have to do is show me where the artifact -if it is artifact- repeats in the entire massive area. Why only in the location Bob pointed out?

a reply to: JBurns

Do you have any more to share that you haven't posted yet?

a reply to: Yazman

Quite a bit

I am working with a fairly big name in UFOlogy and some OSINT/former NRO contractor image guys to authenticate and secure the major releases. Don't worry Yaz, I will get them up quickly. The timing is strategic and very important

Something I learned years ago is the next best thing to a confession is a provable lie I will stake my reputation on saying there is something there and I can already prove that.