News sources, however, can pay to get current overflight photos -- and that is precisely why my analysis focused on the (undated) [and doctored, it turns out] photo from Business Insider's report on the "explosion".
All I could do was examine it to see if the appearance looked plausible -- then do detailed tests to determine if there was evidence of fakery. I was able to replicate the "damage" effect using "Photoshop tricks" -- and then to find those same "giveaway clues" in the BI image.
Thank you for following my work, and for your restraint in "keeping me honest". That's all we can do: be honest with -- and thoughtful of -- each other.
Unfortunately, too many FReepers nowadays have the attention spans of toddlers with ADHD, and once I showed that I could see no "blood in the water", bailed out of the discussion for other "news". Worse, many desperately wanted bad news out of Iran, and when I didn't "produce" what they wanted, apparently dismissed my analysis as "biased", and left in disgust. And that includes one long-time FReeper who should know better -- and shall remain unnamed... :-(
~~~~~~~~~
Oh, well, during this exercise, I learned far more than I revealed about ways to use Google Earth for intelligence gathering -- and am now building a KML file database on all reported Iranian nuke sites -- "placemarking" features like tunnel entrances, ventilation shafts, utility entry points, defense structures, etc. So -- when they do get "put out of business", I will know what to look for -- and have a "time zero image base" to work from -- IF post-strike photos become available.
Again, thank you for your courtesy and honesty!
Well, you have joined the ranks of several dedicated FReepers who over the years took upon themselves a task of ultimate service to the forum.
I thank you for your service and now feel confident of the real poop on events at Iranian nuclear sites.