Fabricating Evidence - A Lesson in Ethics
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 27. 10. 2021
- A modern-day case study in ethics and "expert advocacy" in the legal system.
The đđŁ đđ€đđŁđ© đ„đĄđđźđĄđđšđ© offers viewers a deep dive into Josh Porter's decades of experience in the construction industry. âą On Point
In the đđŁ đ©đđ đ đ€đ đ„đĄđđźđĄđđšđ© we take you out of the studio to where the real action happens, the job site. âą On the Job
The đđŁđ đ€đŁ đđŁđ đ„đĄđđźđĄđđšđ© contains interviews with industry professionals discussing everything related to condominiums, construction, and engineering. âą One on One
Building Integrity Supports Crossroads Hope Academy. To Donate to Crossroads Hope Academy, please use the following link: www.crossroadspg.org/donate
To see more videos about Crossroads and the amazing work they are doing, please watch the following playlist: âą Crossroads Hope Academy
Do you agree with my conclusions at the end of the video about the "4th engineer"? What are your thoughts?
I had to wonder if at least in part the actions of #4 were due to incompetence rather than outright malfeasance.
Proposed thought process:
"I have these images, and they clearly don't line up. But they were produced by some unknown but obviously reputable engineer, because this is government data, and the government never lies. So what can I do to use it?
"I could stretch and skew the new image to overlay the older larger image. But then I would be distorting the image, and that is fabricating data. Besides, I can't make the whole thing match. Even if I use Photoshop to skew, rotate, and distort to get the image edges to match, I can see that nothing really matches internally.
"So I can't change the image sizes, since that would be distorting data, which is wrong. But I feel I can rotate the image without scaling to get the best visual match. But no one match will work for the whole housing area.
"So I will pick several areas of interest and rotate and move the new image to do a 'best match' to the old image and then measure from there."
Of course, how he did that and didn't notice that the house outlines in the area didn't match is rather beyond me.
And how he picked those 'shore lines" that were 15 feet back into the middle of the lawn areas also makes no sense, other than questioning the integrity of the person drawing the lines.
On top of that, using 0.01' "accuracies" on data that is only good to a foot only goes to show that the "engineer" never took basic engineering math, or likes to deliberately lie to his clients. Or maybe both.
@@lwilton Yea I would hope this is a case of a PE handing it off to an intern.
I was involved with aerial reconnaissance for 20 years, and you are spot on. Orthorectification is not subjective. This is a clear case of either not knowing what they are doing, or they created their "truth" to advocate for a particular outcome.
One thing that really struck me was that at no time was this referenced to any legal survey of the land or the developer's surveys, designed and as-built distances from the property line(s) to water's edge, variations in the elevation of the ponds, properties and such. I'd imagine that the developer would have done this to cover their butts in case of something like this and to ensure that they met or exceeded any building / water pond regulations or guidelines.
I have to wonder how much of the supposed erosion was just due to the lake level changing over time.
"molested the art of science". Seems like a phrase that deserves remembering. :-)
It is on daily display right now with COVID.
A quote-worthy line
This is like engineering CSI, totally fascinating!
Thank you. I was very concerned this would be too dry.
@@BuildingIntegrity Too dry? Never! Bring on more of these. I worked, briefly, as a nonprofessional (marketer) for an AutoCAD-based geospatial mapping company. I understand the basics of AutoCAD and similar software, but my boss, who was a gifted engineer, could never find a way to get my head around orthorectification. When you explained it here, after years of darkness, the lights came on. Thank you. Learning can indeed be enjoyable.
Well Done, from Tasmania!
@@BuildingIntegrity there was LOTS of juice in the skullduggery that you were showing lol
The other suspicious behavior was not sending the AutoCAD files with the first supeana response. Did they hope no one would notice?
John, glad you noticed that. It's not "proof" of anything... but it was a failure to comply with the subpoena and, I agree with you that it was suspicious.
@@ReachOutToWilliam data was extrapolated from evidence, but the data created (measurements and percentages) was created by manipulation of the pictures, rather than legitimate scientific assessment, so yes, the 4th engineer attempted to use the "Art of misdirection and suggestion" to lead a jury to a certain conclusion, which Science did not support.
And the fact that the Autocad had so much damming evidence in it, showing the distortion of the facts, points highly to it being intentionally left out.
Maybe you are the 4th engineer? Lol
As an aspiring data analyst and someone who loves engineering and construction...I really hope you do more of these. This was fascinating!
You are very good at explaining this. When you submitted your report in this case, I am curious who read your report, the judge? Both sets of lawyers? Did you have to verbally explain your report to either side? I know it will be a while, probably years, but I am guessing the "Surfside Condo" folks are already "shopping" for expert witnesses on both sides. It will be great to listen to your take on the their "experts". I was fascinated by all the work you did presenting information on the surfside condo collapse. Thank you for making these, they are by far the most intelligent things I watch on CZcams.
Wow! Thank you Lance. As far as I know, a judge never saw my report. It was presented to the plaintiff's and presumably sent to the 4th engineer to rebut and within days, they dropped the case altogether. Which is very rare.
@@BuildingIntegrity But that was nice for you and your client though. Quickly get rid of the pesky lawsuit, and saved them money from prolonged litigation if it really went all the way to a jury trial, the legal fees would have added up to a lot of money.
Iâm not in your field but I AM a highly detailed person. Loved you explanations.
Youâre a professional and a gentleman!
Just like a poker game. You called their hand and they had no choice but to fold! Well done Josh!
It's nice to see a fair and honest professional. Building Integrity is certainly a reputable company. I enjoy watching your videos. You take your time and carefully examine the facts before jumping to a conclusion. I have learned a lot since watching your videos. Continued success to you.
Thank you Jack!
My greatest âwinâ was stating that the omission of the truth is the equivalent of a lie before the Judge. Defense attorney disagreed, Judge agreed with me.
Aka, "lies of omission." The concept is not new.
In the UK, witnesses swear to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".
@@usvalve Yep, we americans took that line from you guys!
Some truths are different depending on the individual looking at the evidence. And even though the real truth is eventually often uncovered, itâs often their short term âalternativeâ truth which is their goal.
In America between 2016 and 2019, there was a group of people that tried to sell the âtruthâ of Donald Trump as a deep asset to Russia.
That truth was later debunked, but during those years almost every media firm was selling that as the âtruthâ. Just a small example of modern truth.
Oh yeah! Once you mentioned the pixel scales and differences I started questioning the data. So now developers are going to have to establish physical markers along the banks, and then survey them in just to protect themselves from this type of thing!
I love this kind of stuff, TY Mr. Building Integrity
Thank you for watching!
Yessssss!
Nice work . I could listen to your logic all day. You make it easy to understand for the laymen like me .
Thanks for the video!
Thanks for watching Paul!
This was really fascinating as somebody with no connections to this field of expertise. Cheers!
To give the engineer the benefit of the doubt, I am going to guess they knew the images didn't line up exactly. As you can see, if you line up the images from any particular point, the further you get from that point the greater the deviations. I am assuming for each location, they realigned the 2019 image to a reference point in the middle of the area of concern to "maximize" the matching of the photos in said area (instead of using software to prospective correct them as you mentioned, because it would likely be impossible at this point without certain data).
As you show in the peninsula example though, the photo deviations still become greater than the amount being measured by the time you get to each area of interest from whatever center point of alignment they used.
I would expect such a flawed analysis from a layman, not an engineer.
It does beg the question that either the engineer knowingly produced flawed evidence or s/he is so incompetent that they should not have a license.
As a math/science grad, the use of sig figs beyond the accuracy of your least accurate data source used for calculations drove me crazy. That doesn't even include his/her lack of producing a measurement error figure for your methodology.
If you look at the numbers they come up with, after dropping the added digits and accounting for measuring error, there is nothing meaningful in these measurements.
That is not how it works. You have to adjust the entire image and rectify all landmarks and features.
@Dragon's Red is correct: Distortions from map projections, including perspective skew, typically increase with distance from a reference point. By using different matches, one for each region of interest, one can minimize the impact of an overall distortion.
Alas, given the "drama digits", the obviously too coarse polygonal tracing, and weird slope sampling point selection, I strongly suspect that we need not explain by malice what can equally well be explained by ⊠lack of competence.
Re: "layman, not an engineer", I agree. This result is the sort of work I'd expect from giving a student a homework assignment: "From these three images, determine how much the shore line changed in each time period". Except that the teacher gave the homework assignment before teaching the class how to do it properly so that the teacher can use the resultant errors as a learning tool for the rest of the class.
For a student who didn't know any better I would say "Not the worst approach, but explain to me how you got such precise numbers."
The only parts that make me suspicious are 1) the initial failure to turn over the auto-cad files and 2) The obvious image resolution vs measurement significant digits. Significant digits is taught in high school, though I've seen plenty of people who should damn well know better make the same sort of mistake. Inexcusable for a professional engineer.
Totally agree.
One hopes that the 4th engineer isn't designing buildings.
Missed your videos! It is so refreshing to experience honesty and integrity!
I have absolutely no reason to research these things, but I found your videos by chance and I've been binge-watching them. You're such a good communicator! Thank you.
Appreciate you taking the time to produce this video. I am an engineer and this helps with the knowledge base.
this is a masterpiece across so many different disciplines- philosophy, legal, ethics, construction- I was totally engrossed
The amount I learn in a half hour watching your videos is amazing!
The trial is have a jury tell you what the "truth" is when the parties refuse to agree on the truth. As for insurance experts; as an insurance professional, all I want from my experts (I do construction surety claims) is the truth. If we owe, I want to know sooner than later to avoid unnecessary legal fees from a lost cause, because in my experience juries almost always get it right when given the whole picture.
Yes and I am very careful not to imply that all insurance companies are bad or all engineers that work for insurance companies are bad... only that the incentive to lie is definitely there. Engineers and professionals must acknowledge that and resist the urge to advocate for their client.
A delightful video! Thank you so much, very informative. Getting someone to fudge things can come back to bite you. When I was inspecting assisted living facilities, I happened across an elderly woman who clearly needed to be upgraded to skilled nursing, which the original facility did not provide. I cited them for housing someone for whom they were unable to provide appropriate care. The facility appealed and showed up with Dr. Quackenbush who declared that the woman was being well cared for in the present setting. The hearing officer tossed out my citation. Less than a month later, the woman presented at the emergency room with multiple stage IV pressure ulcers (bedsores), some of which were gangrenous. She was dead a few days later. Curiously (or perhaps not), her family sued the home, the administrator, and Dr. Quackenbush. I had the pleasure of testifying.
That is sad for the woman... but it also must have been satisfying for you to at least see justice served in the end.
God save us all from Dr. Quackenbush
You should also explain that a Professional Engineer (as in this case) does have a license and a board to answer to. They may well have had their license pulled if this had gone to court. You may want do do a video (if you have not already) explaining the differences between an Engineer (by training/experience) and a Professional Engineer (licensed by the state).
They wouldnât lose their license because a more âobjectiveâ analysis would still yield roughly similar results. Yes they did it kind of quick and dirty but erosion is a real thing, not something someone made up for a lawsuit.
In many states, using the title Engineer in your professional life is a violation of state law unless you hold a Professional Engineer license.
@@lagautmd my title is Software Engineer and I donât have any license
@@lagautmd and those states would be wrong...unless you stated Professional Engineer. Overreach by many licensing boards.
@@ReachOutToWilliam his license could be pulled if his memo was actually fraudulent, but itâs not, itâs just not as good as it could be
Your combination of curiosity, organized thinking, and clear communication keep me coming back for more!
This just gives new meaning to the term âDodgyâ!
Excellent explanation. We got law, engineering, satellite imagery, all in one bundle.
I have worked with academics and engineers who believe odd numbers with two decimal places must be more meaningful or more true than saying "the bank is a nearly two feet narrower than it used to be" and then explaining why the degree of accuracy has to be so loose. Even comparing plan and sectional drawings (design or as-built records) with current photos on the ground the best you could hope for is to create a consensus about the degree of change. Then you have to select a datum from which to measure - top of designed bank or distance from property, and know how much earth was sacrificial or planned to change through settlement over time. Then you could begin to quantify loss. Relying on satellite imagery to claim a 1/100th of a foot resolution is madness, even if the development had been built by NASA and had GPS markers installed in the undergrowth specifically for such future correlation and measurement. My conclusion is the 4th engineer was tasked with proving a number to support what the client wanted to claim. Whatever that number was, that in turn would need to be offset against the real value of the works and I look forward to the next (6th?) engineer stating that the loss from erosion was within design tolerances. The lake is now bigger - who pays the developer for that? Great video, thanx.
Iâm really glad you were there to be a REAL engineer, analyzing primary data to find the truth. Not only were you able to do this by using your professional expertise, but you were able to communicate it so clearly that all involved could see it clearly regardless of technical training. You taught them what they needed to know in order to see the truth for themselves. That teaching aspect is not something every engineer has in equal measure, but you are a natural teacher as well as a clear and logical presenter. You converted that court proceeding from âtrying to convince based on the word of someone with an agendaâ to âshowing the truth clearly and letting it speak for itself.â It must have been so very satisfying.
I am a scientist who has always searched for truth too, though my area of expertise is different (cell biology and biochemistry). In designing experiments and interpreting data, there are three primary questions or steps:
1. What is the real question that must be answered? (Often this is much harder than it first looks. The question cannot be a vague generality, it must be precise and answerable with a doable experiment or analysis of existing data.)
2. What assay/measurement method is being used to get the data and is it sensitive and reliable enough? (Often addressing this has required extensive preliminary assay development work, because without an appropriate assay, there will be no meaningful data.) If new data are needed, go on to #3.
3. Experimental plan/ new data: Are there controls to rule out alternative explanations and thus reveal either the answer or the next step toward the answer?
Your analysis actually followed these steps too. You identified the real question as âAre these measurements accurate and do they support the claim?â You then moved on to the assay validation step, and there you uncovered deliberate falsification in order to generate a fake result. No further work was needed to get the answer, so you could skip getting new data in Step 3.
That engineer committed a crime: deliberate large-scale fraud. Itâs also an egregious violation of the central purpose, the heart of engineering. They also probably misled the HOA and got paid for it. I hope there was some exposure and accountability, but the system often doesnât work that way. I suspect this excellent, clear video is not only intended to teach but also to publicize the wrong that was done in that case.
Orthorectification A new power word for the vocabulary. I was aware of the concept but not its applications. Knowledge. Thank you.
I want you on my side when buying property !!! Or dispute on property lines. Excellent Excellent video !!!! Five stars !!!
This case study is a great example of why it is SUPER important to include comprehensive metadata with any kind of maps or output files you can create in software like ArcGIS
Without knowing what projection methods, vectorizing techniques, etc. were used to create a data layer you wonât be able to use or interpret it properly
Very interesting video!
I love your analysis.
It would have been nice if you had gone to this housing tract in person and taken pictures of the land. It does look like there is some changes in the shoreline from 2006 to 2019 but it is hard to tell if there is a real erosion problem of if it is just a change in the color of the vegetation.
Thanks for watching! I did go there personally. I also reviewed photos from the other three engineers and lake maintenance contractors spanning from around 2011 to 2020. It was a big study with lots of aspects to it. I chose to just focus on the "4th engineer's analysis for this video.
The interesting part of so many of these cases where evidence has been manipulated, is that if it had been done correctly, they probably would have gotten something. Maybe not all that they were trying to get but something. Now they get nothing and have a lot of legal fees to pay and hopefully that engineer gets some kind of punishment. That engineer better be glad that his "evidence" hadn't been presented in court. Courts don't like that kind of thing and his punishment by the "legal" system could have been quite sever up and to including jail time.
Kudos for keeping scientific honesty and integrity alive. Great content!
Well done! Opinion shopping for "alternative truth" has long been a problem overseas; Sad to see how prevalent it is becoming in the US in every field of endeavor - from engineering to business to medicine to politics to you-name-it. "The love of money is the root of all evil...."
He presented 'alternative facts' :)
Very well thought process laid out regarding the evidence. When you started the video I wondered about what the HOA would try to sue. My first thought were gators in the many lakes. đ
There is a distinct difference between âProfessional Opinionâ and evidence. Given the same set of circumstances (evidence) you and I with similar experience and credentials may reach different conclusions. The idea of manipulating the data to fit your case is unethical and should not be tolerated within the professional engineering community. The idea that this work was performed by someone who just didnât know any better then issued under the PEâs stamp is just as bad.
@@ReachOutToWilliam The credibility of the steps taken to offer an expert opinion is relevant. Identifying steps that are wildly out of standard practice is a core part of impeaching the expert opinion and quite appropriate.
Great video. Can't believe someone would prepare an expert report with so many problems.
Another fantastic video. Keep up your amazing work!
Your videos are the only thing that brings truth to the public sphere on the internet. This is a beautiful thing!
High marks! Thank you.... although I am sure there are other content creators emphasizing integrity... you just have to discover them! Have a great weekend.
I have very little interest in engineering or law, yet somehow this randomly-played video at 4am was actually super interesting! Great channel!
Always enjoy your educational video's. I learn from everyone. Thanks
Great storytelling. I always enjoy listening and watching you. So candid, so honest. And I bet that the developer was so relieved that you literally caught the 4th engineer fudging lines and data to fit his own narrative. I so enjoy your videos. Thanks BUILDING INTEGRITY, and especially Josh đ
Expertise talks. BS walks! Love your professional approach in looking for evidence. Great video, thank you for sharing!
I definitely enjoy your videos. Your explanations are so easy to follow and understand. Thank you fie standing for truth & ethics.
Wow, excellent work! Learned a lot from this video.
This was awesome. Thanks for sharing the story. And congratulations on the victory.
Very well done, interesting video. Thank you for this.
I discovered your videos related to surfside last year. Your videos are so fascinating and educational. If I had seen these in high-school, I imagine I'd have taken a different career path at university.
It is good that they were caught...how many are never caught..ethics are real. Thank you for honesty.
Excellent Josh, thank you so much.
In mech eng, we have a golden rule of 10 for measurement (metrology): you need an instrument capable of measuring 10x more than the precision you report. In other words, if your vernierâs smallest increment is 0.001 inch, you should only report of to 0.01 inch of the dimension you are measuring. Of course Iâve âcasuallyâ written down to the resolution of my instrument for internal testing but never for something like QA.
In that regard, reporting to the hundredth of a foot when your pixel accuracy is 1 foot per pixel is laughable.
So interesting!!! I learn so much from your videos!
Wait a minute, what about the actual Plat, as-builts, and lot surveys done by actual licensed surveyors? (I'll bet it didn't fit the "narrative")
@@kirkhamandy A picture tells more than a thousand words. Aerial images look so nice that the story would persuade the laymen in the court. I.e. the lawyers and judge.
@@kirkhamandy Engineer #4 was hired to produce the results the HOA wanted and make HOA members happy. He had achieved those two goals and got his payment :)
@@ivankuzin8388 Correct.
I'm guessing that is exactly what the first three report did, which is why they were not appreciated by the HOA.
Excellent analysis and conclusions! Maybe I missed it, but you didn't say much at all about any of the first three engineering studies. My guess is that they could also have been beneficial to the defense side. Certainly they would be part of the discovery. This suit was doomed from the beginning. The plaintiffs probably thought they would settle out of court and walk away with a chunk of money. Again, nice job! Someone once said that "the truth never needs to be fabricated."
There was a TON more to this case. Yes the other 3 engineer's reports actually served to undermine several aspects of the plaintiff's claim, but the focus of this video was strictly regarding the pseudo-science performed by the "4th engineer".
I enjoyed your presentation on this case. Incompetent or dishonest? I suppose the various legal people can wrestle that aspect. Well done on your part.
Interesting study. Congratulations on the win.
Josh, there has been a lot of social media talk on the repairs to the Millennium Tower in San Francisco. It would be interesting to see your weigh in on it.
Way to go!! Love your videos!!
That was really interesting, what a fascinating job you have.
Awesome! I've followed you Champlain Towers collapse analysis and was impressed. This is the first I've watched outside that. It is very interesting!!!
Thank you Greg!
Thank you for a very clear explanation of how to create fraudulent arguments.
Also, since the court system is not about the truth but to convince someone or a group of people, then how do you define the truth?
What is the truth? But we moving away from engineering, or do we?
US schools currently teach that "the Truth" (always with a capital T) is "just your opinion", and "everyone has their own truth, which is why there is no such thing as Truth". Since everyone learns that from childhood, there is little attempt to find an actual truth. Which may be one reason the US no longer produces scientists of any note, or has any manufacturing.
@@lwilton Thank you for your response. Maybe, that is also why this country as more people in jail than even China and Russia combined. Even as time goes by, more and more jailed people are being released on fraudulent charges.
The problem with the scientists may also be linked to religions power in America. Too bad for the country on the long term. For the manufacturing, it is just all about money. Period. People on top only care about making money and keeping it for themself. But, He! what do I know.
I love your videos, you are a good teacher.
@@lwilton, itâs âinterestingâ watching you use a false statement as âevidenceâ to support your false assertions about âtruthâ, even as you dishonestly resort to conflating the literal and metaphorical meanings of the word.
4 hrs ago that was quick Josh âŠ
before I watch your vlog ⊠talk about ethics âŠ..
I presume you have seen the doc regarding PE clading/siding used on many many buildings across Australia.
PE a fuel source like gasoline sandwiched between aluminum sheets which has been placed on high rise buildings and other bldgs as well as many examples of poor oversight in the building boom over recent decades.
With so many examples of condo buildings needing owner evacuations and with little resolution on the blame gameâŠ. Extreme fire spread is a Real and Present danger and this documentary points to many examples in other countries like the Dubai bldg. and Grennfeld Tower UK.
It speaks to the siding manufactirers in Japan who later went to Australia to raise awareness about the fire hazard/risks.
One building in particular is claiming when another building next door was constructed that may have caused a cavern to open underneath the condo causing said bldg to tip and be evacuated which reminded me of the complaints raised prior to the collapse
at Surfside, FL when the high rise next door was being constructed.
Anyway, the Doc is âŠ
FYI
ABC news in depth Australia
name video fr 1 yeat ago
The dangerous legacy of failed regulation in the building indistryâŠ2017
41:46 total time
You guys are letting the Chinese build highrises, which is insane.
I'm grateful for all involved that you uncovered this abuse of trust. What sort of reprimand could that engineer face for his abuse?
Excellent deductions! You caught em!
Josh, that was incredible! I like the way you deconstructed their case, piece by piece. I hope the 4th engineer is suitably humiliated and learned a lesson. Any other cases that see your name on the expert witness list needs to make sure their homework is done. Or they can run like hell away from the courtroom when you appear. Thanks.
Thank you for another interesing video. Not my field of work but appreciate your thinking and the conclusion feels correct, especially as they withdrew the claim
Another excellent case study!
Very interesting video. Thanks very much. Very good presentation. Cheers.
Thank you!
Awesome story Josh. My takeaway is that details matter.
My great-grandfather was a blacksmith. I pretend to be a wordsmith. Which means I value words over many things. This then means I won't waste words, and there's one word that sums ups the settlement and case. "CAUGHT" Great detective work- bravo!
Very interesting report. Good video!
Excellent job! Brilliant investigation. Thx. Subscribed for more vids.
Thank you Valorie!
Josh I love all your dissection of the facts fascinating thank you , an old fart in wembley
I learned a lot and find your detective ability impressive. Truth matters!
Tellin you right now Judges and Attorneys all know this goâs on.
I love your presentation and analysis. I would think it would have been "fun" to actually present this to a jury and see the look of the faces of the Fourth Engineering Firm. You have a knack for explaining complex principles to lay persons. Just an example to show that there are "lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Great video!
You are an excellent teacher, thank you once again for such an incredible lesson. I pray I never need something like this in one of my developments but if I do, you have taught me another valuable lesson.
In 2006 surveyors were using GPS for As Builts. Even if GPS wasn't used, an as built is incredibly accurate or at least in my area. Projects/homes haven't been able to be completed and sold here in Anchorage, Alaska since the 80s without one so why wasn't that used?
Good job, Josh!
thank you for this video! it is really illuminating to see corruption in any and every industry. i know this is all semantics, but technically it is the owners within the association who are able to be on the board at/after turnover, the residents living there may just be renting the units. iâve managed HOAs in California and continue to work in the industry and there is a big distinction on who has power within the association between owners/tenants/rental property managers. there are laws that govern this but it also may be more specific based on each HOAâs governing documents!
"the curvature of the Earth" Ohh you are funny Mr Porter. /s
The sound level on this video was great and as on the other videos, excellent presentation.
Nicely done, thanks for interesting insights to into ortho correction of imagery.
I've long been highly suspect of 'implied levels of accuracy'.
Have too often seen 'research scientists' take a single grain of sand and build Waikiki Beach, all the while attesting that their level of extrapolation to be valid (as they purse additional funding for their research........)
Totally agree on the ethics and truth... My question is would there not be a land survey of all the perimeters? Why are we dealing with satellite imagery at all?
I love when the Wolf gets bitten by the TRUTH. Thank you for shutting that one down.
Well done!
Very educational : thank you
Don't these properties have property monument to measure from? What happen to good surveying?
Thank you. Let the truth prevail!
A resolution of 6inches is super impressive. Doesn't make their analysis better, but I am impressed. I've done some GIS but I think the finest resolution I tended to work at was 10m. I was doing land use based stuff though.
"Molested the art of science": For courtrooms, t-shirts, and reality in general everywhere.
Job well done! I thoroughly enjoyed your dissection of their lie, er, "questionable ethical actions." This really shows how easily a lie can become accepted fact if not challenged, and how much more effort it takes to defend the truth.
Excellent.
Nice work.
Thank you so much for sharing this information there is so much wisdom in what you say and is a great reminder to keep emotions out of these types of situations. What is your setup for video?. Do you have an Ipad connected to a monitor? So you can do on-screen markups?
Bad. a$$âŠtotally enjoyed the presentation !!!
Thanks!
Thank you for the statement about truth the word has been warped lately
Job well done!!!
Could they not have verified the image registrations by checking that the houses were in the same place in each of them?
There is a lot they could have done... but the premise they were trying to prove was incorrect from the beginning, so they HAD to make up the results they were looking for.
Good story, clear result. Ground Truth! Thanks. I've seen a very large company wrestle with the fact that the convenient "Google Earth" considers the local earth as flat but proper survey data (in Real Estate Department) only works for a round earth. Not as dramatic as your story but fun to watch. :-) Proper ortho rectification is not easy but you clearly determined that these results were fake.
"Google Earth considers the local earth as flat" Checkmate round earther's.