posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 10:34 AM
I appreciate your desire to scrutinize, but I feel you have too readily drawn a conclusion which is, in this case, off the mark.
In Intelligence matters we must take heed of history, too many blunders have resulting from wrongly dismissing or misjudging evidence. All too often
it is tempting to discard that which does not make sense through our own eyes, but we must remember that the enemy may do things for different
reasons, favor different solutions and poses different science. When it comes time to call judgment, it can only be a subjective opinion. Not
objective. But we must try our utmost as professionals to be objective in reviewing the evidence. Too often people draw conclusions which match
preconceived notions, bias and agendas. This happens at all levels.
Your analysis of the photo, concluding that it’s photoshopped, may be backed up by rationale but it is not proven.
1. The lighter area is suggestive of an extensively blended surface consistent with the drawing (bottom). Similar light effects can be seen on
aircraft with similarly blended surfaces, such as the Mig 29 and Mirage 2000.
2. The tail end is indeed different from the drawing, but this proves nothing, except that the artist is not 100% accurate. Drawings are useful, but
photos better, get it the right way around.
The provenance of this photo has been discussed and I’ve said all I will. I came to this site to get stuff like this to a wider audience; it is
frankly being under reported in the aviation press and in my opinion in the military also.