Talk:3173: Satellite Imagery - Revision history

92.23.2.208 at 22:09, 9 January 2026

2026-01-09T22:09:50Z

Qwertyuiopfromdefly: commented

2026-01-09T05:23:00Z

commented

82.132.237.174 at 13:20, 29 November 2025

2025-11-29T13:20:27Z

78.144.255.82 at 22:16, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T22:16:28Z

X at 21:18, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T21:18:04Z

181.214.218.38: Countries without Rivers

2025-11-28T19:15:25Z

Countries without Rivers

82.132.244.49 at 16:45, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T16:45:42Z

82.132.244.49 at 16:43, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T16:43:07Z

Elektrizikekswerk at 10:18, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T10:18:46Z

Elektrizikekswerk at 10:14, 28 November 2025

2025-11-28T10:14:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:09, 9 January 2026
Line 35:		Line 35:

	this should be added to catergory:google maps, i couldnt figure out how to do it [[User:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|Qwertyuiopfromdefly]] ([[User talk:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|talk]]) 05:23, 9 January 2026 (UTC)		this should be added to catergory:google maps, i couldnt figure out how to do it [[User:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|Qwertyuiopfromdefly]] ([[User talk:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|talk]]) 05:23, 9 January 2026 (UTC)
		+	:Just like any other category. (You've been around since November, you're no stranger to editing pages...) [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.208\|92.23.2.208]] 22:09, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:23, 9 January 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	:So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).		:So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).
	:Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49\|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)		:Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49\|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	this should be added to catergory:google maps, i couldnt figure out how to do it [[User:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|Qwertyuiopfromdefly]] ([[User talk:Qwertyuiopfromdefly\|talk]]) 05:23, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 ::: By the way, found [https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2090631,-108.5598074,11521m/data=!3m1!1e3 this bit of New Mexico] (amongst others) where infrastructure features on the ground ''start'' to look like someone's been messing with the images in photoshop.. ;) Not ''quite'' so good [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6821245,-101.0644065,5291m/data=!3m1!1e3 here in Nebraska]. I quite like [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0672985,94.4144872,5339m/data=!3m1!1e3 these solar-array fields] near Jiuquan (more eye-catching than the space-centre I was heading for), especially the solar-tower (probably molten-salt storage) focussing arrays.
 ::: The most promising areas seemed to be in Turkmenistan and nearby Uzbekistan, where the hue and texture is getting to the right kind of quality. Just no obvious water features, at least at a compatible scale. If I get anything more definite to help the above speculation, I'll certainly try to remember to let you all know! [[Special:Contributions/78.144.255.82|78.144.255.82]] 22:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
 The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
@@ Line 30: / Line 33: @@
 :So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).
 :Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 : According to ChatGPT it's most likely somewhere in Namibia (assuming it's showing a real place at all). The explanation is quite long (and plausible, imo), this is its concusion: "Based purely on visual features — terrain color, river shape, road type, isolation, and the dark depression — the image most plausibly resembles: An area in Namibia shaped by an ephemeral river system (especially in the Kuiseb–Ugab–Huab region, or nearby gravel plains)" Other, less likely options it mentioned were: Nevada/Arizona, Australia and (Saudi) Arabia [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:14, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
 :: I see why they're doubtful: {{w|List of countries without rivers}} . [[Special:Contributions/181.214.218.38|181.214.218.38]] 19:15, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
 The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:18, 28 November 2025
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).		:So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).
	:Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49\|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)		:Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49\|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
		+	:That dark spot in the top right is probably a cloud me thinks. [[User:X\|X]] ([[User talk:X\|talk]]) 21:18, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 :Feel free to add/expand the other possibilities. My take, though, is:
 :*Contractors mentioned. Excludes tertiary information-gathering (opensource analysis), and ''probably'' primary intel (IMINT, possibly real-time, direct from NRO-sponsored 'asset' or equivalent national effort, at the top level of strategic importance; private corporate entities operating their own ground-imaging satellites for commercial reasons)... Rules in lower-level IntAls doing basic regional groundwork, rules out "citizen science" and probably the original explanation of a conspiracy-theory collective working with whatever crumbs of available info they can seize upon.
-:*The possible "one of [their own] people" doesn't narrow who 'us' is, but implies a more sprawling hierarchy (passing along the images) in their organisation(/collective set of ''mostly'  collaborative organisations) than most corporate setups, or NGOs (e.g. 'tree counters'/'desert measurers' for UN climate change-assessors), and certainly not a close-knit group of enthusiasts (a 'conspracy clique' or academic department where the blame options are limited ("Damnit Steve!").
+:*The possible "one of [their own] people" doesn't narrow who 'us' is, but implies a more sprawling hierarchy (passing along the images) in their organisation(/collective set of ''mostly'' collaborative organisations) than most corporate setups, or NGOs (e.g. 'tree counters'/'desert measurers' for UN climate change-assessors), and certainly not a close-knit group of enthusiasts (a 'conspracy clique' or academic department where the blame options are limited ("Damnit Steve!").
 :*"Foreign actors" (assuming they don't mean the likes of Ryan Gosling/Ryan Reynolds, or Gerard Butler/Gérard Depardieu) sets up a direct 'us/them' contrast with the prior choice. Heavily implies these guys we see qualify as "domestic actors" working at a multinational level. If they were corporate, you'd expect business rivals mentioned (foreign and/or domestic). If mere 'interested citizens', they might blame "the[ir] government"/its TLAs for thwarting their investigations. You might even expect a ''particular'' foreign government/agency in most circumstances, especially that of the territory being observed or the obvious main external competitor in regional dominance. But here it's a general 'one or other foreign' parties with a shared stake in that part of the world. Also rules out 'us' being an internationalised collective, with the talents of multiple nations contributing (academically, in business, UN NGO, something like Bellingcat or some world-wide web of conspiracy-theorism). Or even a "Five Eyes" intelligence collaboration.
 :*Then there's the expectation that they ''should and ought to'' have some idea who has posession of this site. Investigative journalism might be open to discovering something new (to their particular dossier of knowledge), but it suggests that there's an expectation of access to comprehensive (shared-)intelligence covering everywhere and everything, no matter how vague the rumour or papertrail. That's more a major Intelligence Agency mindset, than any of the other options.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:43, 28 November 2025
Line 18:		Line 18:

	The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532\|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)		The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532\|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
		+	:Feel free to add/expand the other possibilities. My take, though, is:
		+	:*Contractors mentioned. Excludes tertiary information-gathering (opensource analysis), and ''probably'' primary intel (IMINT, possibly real-time, direct from NRO-sponsored 'asset' or equivalent national effort, at the top level of strategic importance; private corporate entities operating their own ground-imaging satellites for commercial reasons)... Rules in lower-level IntAls doing basic regional groundwork, rules out "citizen science" and probably the original explanation of a conspiracy-theory collective working with whatever crumbs of available info they can seize upon.
		+	:*The possible "one of [their own] people" doesn't narrow who 'us' is, but implies a more sprawling hierarchy (passing along the images) in their organisation(/collective set of ''mostly' collaborative organisations) than most corporate setups, or NGOs (e.g. 'tree counters'/'desert measurers' for UN climate change-assessors), and certainly not a close-knit group of enthusiasts (a 'conspracy clique' or academic department where the blame options are limited ("Damnit Steve!").
		+	:*"Foreign actors" (assuming they don't mean the likes of Ryan Gosling/Ryan Reynolds, or Gerard Butler/Gérard Depardieu) sets up a direct 'us/them' contrast with the prior choice. Heavily implies these guys we see qualify as "domestic actors" working at a multinational level. If they were corporate, you'd expect business rivals mentioned (foreign and/or domestic). If mere 'interested citizens', they might blame "the[ir] government"/its TLAs for thwarting their investigations. You might even expect a ''particular'' foreign government/agency in most circumstances, especially that of the territory being observed or the obvious main external competitor in regional dominance. But here it's a general 'one or other foreign' parties with a shared stake in that part of the world. Also rules out 'us' being an internationalised collective, with the talents of multiple nations contributing (academically, in business, UN NGO, something like Bellingcat or some world-wide web of conspiracy-theorism). Or even a "Five Eyes" intelligence collaboration.
		+	:*Then there's the expectation that they ''should and ought to'' have some idea who has posession of this site. Investigative journalism might be open to discovering something new (to their particular dossier of knowledge), but it suggests that there's an expectation of access to comprehensive (shared-)intelligence covering everywhere and everything, no matter how vague the rumour or papertrail. That's more a major Intelligence Agency mindset, than any of the other options.
		+	:The confluence of these clues (assuming Randall wasn't being deliberately careless/contrary to his internal imagination, which seems unlikely given the not-too-confusing conclusion, and unlike him in general) leads to something along the lines of some Pentagon/Langley/Fort Meade-type team with a responsibility for grinding out general background info in some theatre such as Syria or parts of Africa, where multiple (competing-but-'not-competing') non-local nations and unsanctioned militias may well have set up bases of operations, as well as local civilians residing there. Which agrees with my guess that this (if the grabbed image is chosen specifically to match the written-in scenario) is supposed to be an area with currently flowing (as of the image) ephemerally-wet wadi, rather than featuring a Utah creek or an Australian-outback (that kind of thing being looked at by locally-interested business interests, rather than by military-type folks/etc, unless there's some more prominent concern about foreign-sponsored off-grid militias than is publically acknowledgable).
		+	:So it's admitedly a bit of a Sherlock Scan, holistically putting the clues together, rather than as obvious as a bold name-plate attached to the wall above the projection-screen that ''explicitly'' namechecks the agency/department they're working in. But multiple small and explainable steps that lead to (a high probability of) one particular scenario, rather than a leapt-to presumption without justification. Takes more words than I'd like, to pad out into a full explanation of the more symbolic thought processes, but seems to have survived a self-skeptical analysis and reconsideration of the various alternatives mentioned (and others not yet mentioned).
		+	:Except, perhaps, for sloppy (but coincidentally self-consistent) writing on Randall's part. Except that that doesn't sound like him at all! But I'm of course happy to see alternative interpretations mentioned here/above if you can mesh suitable reinterpretaions together via credible replacement insights. I've no monopoly on knowing the mind of the author, by any means. And apologies to anyone who found this to be too long a reply! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.49\|82.132.244.49]] 16:43, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 '''WHERE IS THIS?''' Can anyone figure out from the map where this is? [[Special:Contributions/154.47.27.37|154.47.27.37]] 22:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
-: According to ChatGPT it's most likely somewhere in Namibia (assuming it's showing a real place at all). The explanation is quite long (and plausible, imo), this is its concusion: "Based purely on visual features — terrain color, river shape, road type, isolation, and the dark depression — the image most plausibly resembles: An area in Namibia shaped by an ephemeral river system (especially in the Kuiseb–Ugab–Huab region, or nearby gravel plains)" [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:14, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
+: According to ChatGPT it's most likely somewhere in Namibia (assuming it's showing a real place at all). The explanation is quite long (and plausible, imo), this is its concusion: "Based purely on visual features — terrain color, river shape, road type, isolation, and the dark depression — the image most plausibly resembles: An area in Namibia shaped by an ephemeral river system (especially in the Kuiseb–Ugab–Huab region, or nearby gravel plains)" Other, less likely options it mentioned were: Nevada/Arizona, Australia and (Saudi) Arabia [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:14, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
 The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:14, 28 November 2025
Line 15:		Line 15:

	'''WHERE IS THIS?''' Can anyone figure out from the map where this is? [[Special:Contributions/154.47.27.37\|154.47.27.37]] 22:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)		'''WHERE IS THIS?''' Can anyone figure out from the map where this is? [[Special:Contributions/154.47.27.37\|154.47.27.37]] 22:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
		+	: According to ChatGPT it's most likely somewhere in Namibia (assuming it's showing a real place at all). The explanation is quite long (and plausible, imo), this is its concusion: "Based purely on visual features — terrain color, river shape, road type, isolation, and the dark depression — the image most plausibly resembles: An area in Namibia shaped by an ephemeral river system (especially in the Kuiseb–Ugab–Huab region, or nearby gravel plains)" [[User:Elektrizikekswerk\|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk\|talk]]) 10:14, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

	The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532\|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)		The explanation jumps to conclusions that are not stated in the comic. Satellite images are used by various professions, intelligence officers are only one of them. Other professions are stock analysts, environmental investigators, or data journalists. The comic itself only speaks of remote sensing. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532\|2001:638:807:507:D4BF:ABF3:E094:D532]] 09:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)