[TEXOKIE]

ADDENDUM TO THE DIG ON #4310

STARBUCK’S?

I was really caught up in the above parts of this dig by discovering in my MAPS program that the address found in that #4310 drop on another document seen under the Rice document turned out to be a Starbuck’s location.

A while ago, I went back to that MAPS image, and thought to toggle it from the Maps function to the Satellite function.

There is a VERY large building at that location, which cannot all be Starbuck’s. My guess is that at least part of it truly is the DC office of Latham and Watkins. The Map function is probably for visitors who what to know where to get their lattes and find the other touristy kinds of places.

But still it is odd that the L&W is not identified. I wonder if the mapping software people would be charging for the advertising of location....or if it is a very prestigious group, they don’t what a bunch of people bothering them and they desire privacy. Or perhaps some other explanation is possible.

FWIW, on the rooftop of that building complex, there is what appears to be a putting green.

END ADDENDUM TO #4310 DIG
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q QQ Q Q Q Q Q

[CJ Wolf]

If you search the coordinates on Instanisgram there are lots of pics of the roof top.

[TXnMA]

There may be another explanation for unexpected locations of "placemarkers". There are several ways original placement of the marker may appear to be correct, but be off by as much as a mile:

1. Not zooming in closely enough before placing the marker.

2. Using any "elevation exaggeration".

3. Using a "tilted" view.

4. Failing to use "North Upward" rotation.

5. Placing the marker on an uncorrected image made by a satellite that passed "off to the side of" (not directly over) the target location.

I'll not go into further technical details, but will just say,

"It's far easier to place a placemarker inaccurately than it is to 'get it right'"!

TXnMA