Well, actually, yes. I mean we can pretty much all sgree that the photo is too blurry to idetify anything other than ground, sky, Pentagon, yellow box thing, and white stuff. But it's still open to interpretation. Having the numbers out there, and allowing others to see, and check them, is needed to firmly establish what it may or may not be.

The main issue at hand was that DavidC was making the claim that the plane was too long to fit behind the box. It was therefore his responsibility to show, with numbers, that that was the case. Once the numbers were out there, we could check them, then accept or reject them based on the rules of mathmatics. He was unable/unwilling to do this, so Laguna opted to do it for him. I'm sure DavidC will find some fault with the calculations and claim it all to be a lie, or state that Laguna is confusing the issue by making it too complex for the average person to understand, butthe truth is, if we know the sixe of the box, and it's distance from the camera, everything else is simple trigonometry.

Personally, I'd like to see an example of the aircraft DavidC claims is in the photo that has a vertical stabilizer that tall. Since A Globalhawk has NO vertical stabilizer above the fuselage, it would seem to rule it out. Of all of the other planes listed as possibilities, none of them have one that matches the image on the screen.

__________________
I'm not evil.
An evil person would do the things I think up.