[OSM-talk] Intriguing artifacts in GeoEye data

[John F. Eldredge]

So, you are saying that the post-earthquake photographs show the buildings 50 meters from where the pre-earthquake photographs show them, but there is no difference in the location or appearance of the terrain?  Unless the buildings in question are on wheels, and might have rolled to their new location, it seems unlikely that a landslide strong enough to displace buildings by 50 meters would leave no visible traces other than displaced buildings.

------Original Message------
From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
To: Marcus Wolschon
To: John Eldredge
Cc: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Intriguing artifacts in GeoEye data
Sent: Jan 18, 2010 3:01 PM

This IS a picture ! Not drawn !
It coincides with a aftershock location 
Gert

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Marcus Wolschon [mailto:marcus.wolschon at googlemail.com] 
Verzonden: maandag 18 januari 2010 21:56
Aan: john at jfeldredge.com
CC: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen; talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org; OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Intriguing artifacts in GeoEye data

Sounds like buildings drawn precisely from high-res but poorly
georeferences aerial photos.
Looking at a sat-image you don´t know if not all of that photo is 50
or 200 meters off unless you
are on the ground to compare.

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:51 PM, John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com> wrote:
> If only man-made artifacts are displaced, but not the terrain, that must be a mapping error.  An actual earthquake land-shift would have displaced the terrain, and moved buildings and other artifacts along with the land.


-- 
John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria