Bookmark this page:
- Update-on-DC-aerial-image-censorship
- 03-03-2008
   Re: Update on DC aerial image censorship
| Russell Patters... | 03-03-2008 |
  Re: Update on DC aerial image censorship
| Spamm Trappe | 03-03-2008 |
 Re: Update on DC aerial image censorship
| C J Campbell | 03-03-2008 |
| Re: Update on DC aerial image censorship
| David Lesher | 03-03-2008 |
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Vice President Cheney has "had his house removed from
Google Earth." Thus said Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show,"
according to my wife. So I invoked Google Earth and
lo, all of the grounds of the Naval Observatory -- where
his house is -- is displayed at a much lower resolution
by means of much larger pixels; at least 10X larger,
my eyeballs tell me.
But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.
But if you want to see Cheney's lawn at full resolution,
just use MapQuest in aerial image mode. All three of the
DC locations are at full resolution. However -- this is
really odd -- the Treasury building (next door to the White
House) has been obliterated by a seemingly misplaced image
which is a copy of one immediately to the southwest.
--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org
Google Earth." Thus said Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show,"
according to my wife. So I invoked Google Earth and
lo, all of the grounds of the Naval Observatory -- where
his house is -- is displayed at a much lower resolution
by means of much larger pixels; at least 10X larger,
my eyeballs tell me.
But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.
But if you want to see Cheney's lawn at full resolution,
just use MapQuest in aerial image mode. All three of the
DC locations are at full resolution. However -- this is
really odd -- the Treasury building (next door to the White
House) has been obliterated by a seemingly misplaced image
which is a copy of one immediately to the southwest.
--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org
What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial photo
galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
but I find things like this just really, really strange.
>> But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>> their roofs.
>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>> their roofs.
>What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial photo
>galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
>House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
>anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
>but I find things like this just really, really strange.
>galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
>House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
>anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
>but I find things like this just really, really strange.
Yet something like the following location is not changed at all.
Which one is more dangerous to US interests?
47°33'25.24"N, 122°38'26.49"W
(Copy and paste it to the search window)
On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 13:09:01 -0500, Russell Patterson wrote:
??? "... dangerous to US interests" ???
ITYM: 47 38' 37"N , 122 7' 43"W
>>> But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
>>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>>> their roofs.
>>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>>> their roofs.
>>What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial photo
>>galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
>>House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
>>anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
>>but I find things like this just really, really strange.
>>galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
>>House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
>>anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
>>but I find things like this just really, really strange.
> Yet something like the following location is not changed at all.
> Which one is more dangerous to US interests?
> 47?33'25.24"N, 122?38'26.49"W
> (Copy and paste it to the search window)
> Which one is more dangerous to US interests?
> 47?33'25.24"N, 122?38'26.49"W
> (Copy and paste it to the search window)
??? "... dangerous to US interests" ???
ITYM: 47 38' 37"N , 122 7' 43"W
>
But
>
>> that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>> their roofs.
>> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
>> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
>> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
>> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
>> their roofs.
>
> What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial
> photo galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out
> the White House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a
> secret? Is there anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I
> honestly don't care, but I find things like this just really, really
> strange.
> What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial
> photo galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out
> the White House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a
> secret? Is there anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I
> honestly don't care, but I find things like this just really, really
> strange.
Ostensibly it is to keep you from seeing certain security measures. The
White House image now looks sharp, but it has been 'cleaned' by the
Secret Service. Google has been known to cooperate with some other
governments in removing certain objects from Google Maps.
I doubt things will change under a new administration. What the Secret
Service says, goes, no matter how idiotic a President might think it
is. FDR used to go out of his way to antagonize his agents, making them
run after his wheelchair, and JFK made a point of never carrying cash,
mooching off his agents, but that is about as much as a President is
allowed to protest. Probably by the time the Secret Service is done
briefing a new President on all the people who want to kill him (or
her, if it is Hillary) the poor individual is probably as paranoid as
they come.
Not a job a normal person would want, for sure.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
- Garmin Map Update
- Garmin GPS
- 2011-05-29
- Favorites trashed on map update
- Tomtom GPS
- 2011-11-24
- Trouble with map update? -- RESOLVED
- Garmin GPS
- 2011-11-08
- Image pan-sharpening software HighView FREE for non-commercial use
- Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
- 2011-09-30
- download map update - 1 yr avail ?
- Garmin GPS
- 2011-08-09
- Nuvi map update question
- Garmin GPS
- 2011-04-18
- 255W- latest US Update
- Garmin GPS
- 2010-09-08
> and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
> in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
> it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
> strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
> their roofs.