posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 12:59 AM
a reply to: lunarrover
Your dishonesty is astounding. You post low resolution images making ridiculous claims about them, get high resolution sources in return that you
dismiss and then deliberately misrepresent the content of them in attempt to divert attention from the failings of your own 'evidence'. It's almost
as if you've deliberately manipulated an image I posted to try and make it look terrible to hide how bad your own source image is.
It seems to me as though you took a tiny corner of one of the images:
reduced the dpi to 72, and then massively increased the image size so that it would look really poor. Here's the two of them side by side:
But deliberately manipulating images to obscure detail is wrong isn't it, because that's what you are accusing everyone else is doing so surely you
wouldn't have done that?
For your information, the QGIS package plugin that makes the 3D models from which I saved a png file reduces the quality of the output relative to the
source image and they are still better than the one you posted in your OP. You can download the 1Gb 7m resolution original image yourself, along with
all the other source images I've posted. Here's where you can get them all the raw images I've been posting:
Download the images, present us with proof they are faked. Prove there is a pipeline there.
edit on 2/2/2019 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: typos etc