Replies

--- You were "answered" in part by some one as follows -- "Data from Oryx, a military analysis site...."

One observes that Oryx is 1) a Netherlands-based web site run by to amateurs, 2) was the primary first citation by "speedyintexas" for months as his enthusiasts cheered and detractors noted. One also notes that this Freeper is not posting the daily Oryx anymore for some reason.

One observes that Oryx's "contact" page shows no snail-mail address, but only a Gmail and Twitter contact.

Source: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/p/contact.html

Their Facebook link goes to their North Korea blog. And they -- -- operate a YouTube channel, "Oryx Blog. Authoring: The Armed Forces of North Korea, on the path of Songun." 13 Videos and ~60K views since 2014.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFqUJaJJWQusy1hvBQXrV3w/videos

Wiki says: "Oryx, or Oryxspioenkop, is a Dutch open-source intelligence (OSINT) defence analysis website, and warfare research group. It is run by Stijn Mitzer and Joost Oliemans."

And "On 19 June 2023, Oryx announced that the blog would be ended on 1 October 2023. In the statement posted on Twitter, Oryx explained that the blog had been created a decade earlier "out of boredom", and that the project – which had been conducted "in our free time" and without any pay – had turned into an "all-consuming project" that had not resulted in any jobs and which "just doesn't make me happy anymore".[21] In a follow-up statement, Oryx clarified that the list covering losses in Russia's invasion of Ukraine would continue to be updated until the end of the war by long-time contributor Jakub Janovsky and the OSINT group WarSpotting."

One learns they post in "English (primary), Turkish, Japanese and Afrikaans."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oryx_(website)

As to "WarSpotting," one reads on their site: "Can your data be trusted? No it can't. Photos can be forged or misattributed. On top of that amount of photos available online nowhere near reflects actual losses. Even so, it might still be closer to reality than any claims being made by any official across the board." Source: https://ukr.warspotting.net/about/

One notes additionally that their address refers to the UK. And yet they publish in two languages: English and Ukrainian. So the above quote is rendered also: "Вашим даним можна довіряти? Ні, не можна. Фото можуть бути підроблені або розпізнані помилково. До того ж сукупність фото, що доступні онлайн, не відображають реальних втрат повною мірою. Але навіть не зважаючи на ці недоліки, наші дані можуть бути ближчими до реальності, ніж ті чи інші офіційні заяви."

Source: https://ukr.warspotting.net/uk/about/

From them, one finds podcasts as well: "Analyst sheds light on Ukraine and challenges in OSINT"

Source: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/analyst-sheds-light-on-ukraine-and-challenges-in-osint/

So the overall game is pass-through. As was commented to you: "Well, let's look at what the actual New York Times article says, rather than through the TASS filter...." What the ACTUAL NY Times article says quotes Oryx in the Netherlands. "Well, let's look at what the actual New York Times article says, rather than through the TASS filter,,,," So believe Oryx because the NY Times passes through the information.

But recall the comment from an Oryx-related fellow as cited above -- "Can your data be trusted? No it can't."

Then think of the Pelosi advice about the so-called "Wrap up smear." Fact-checked in years of articles and "taken out of context" and all, it is "you have the press write about it. And then you say, everybody is writing about this charge."

So because it's in the NY Times.... From Oryx in the Netherlands. And furthered by Ukrainian, as well as other languages, It comes to this, in the words of these "experts."

"Can your data be trusted? No it can't. Photos can be forged or misattributed. On top of that amount of photos available online nowhere near reflects actual losses. Even so, it might still be closer to reality than any claims being made by any official across the board."

Might be. Could be. Claims and claims being made.

I validate your "I always question inflated casualty figures from both sides." Wise.