Quote:

---

The reason is that you simply cannot trust the stuff we read in magazines, and hear on blogs etc. We call it RUMINT (rumor intelligence) Its a joke among the intell community, because its not REAL intelligence.

---

So I gather from her statement that unless you hear it from the intell community it can't be trusted...

---

In the US intelligence community we break down the various intelligence entities by what we call "INT's" short for "intelligences"

For example:
Imagery intelligence is called "IMINT"
Human intelligence is called "HUMINT"
Signals intelligence is called "SIGINT"
Electronic intelligence is called "ELINT"

And so forth....

We have a running joke in the intell community about rumor intelligence or "RUMINT" meaning that its not credible intelligence. I never said anything that if it didn't come from the intell community its not credible. If its not from a factual source, in our case, a SAR official it is RUMINT. Rumint is just slang for probable bad information. Often news sources, blog and other media sources can be inaccurate when relaying details and more often than not they quote each other which doesn't help in sifting through fact from fiction.

Everyone here knows I am a large advocate for working on this imagery in an analytical manner, and using facts to logically approaching this search, but right now we have to work with the tools provided for us. We have a SAR liaison that is in contact with the Boychuk search. It is the holidays and for most people this is a 4 day weekend. It is not unreasonable to ask people to wait a few days and see what information the liaison can provide for us.

The best course of action right now is to wait on the holidays to pass, and let our liaison get an official briefing from the Boychuk search players. So, right now as we have no hard facts we have to believe he can be anywhere on the imagery. When we receive more credible intelligence we can begin the process of analysis and narrow down the search area, but that is going to be a few more days.

So ,again, I recommend that everyone grab some coffee (or redbull), dig in, read out some imagery.

--------------------
In God we trust...all others we monitor.

You will make all kinds of mistakes; but as long as you are generous and true, and also fierce, you cannot hurt the world or even seriously distress her. She was made to be wooed and won by youth. -Churchill

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Greetings!

I'm new to this thread, and to this search effort. I'm Colorado-based Private Pilot with no SAR experience, and no experience in evaluating imagery - just a desire to help.

I'm getting a sense in this thread that there's a great deal of diversity in the experience and skills of the participants. As I understand it, our role in this process is to focus on the evaluation of the imagery, and generate high-quality leads for the SAR team on the ground.

I'm comfortable using the features of Google Earth - but I'm a complete novice in the evaluation of overhead imagery. The basic tutorial I'm looking for would address:

o How long - as a rule of thumb - should it take to thoroughly evaluate one image set?

o Aside from the outline of the aircraft, what other telltale features should we be looking for?

o I've discovered on my own that scanning the image - then spinning it 90 degrees and scanning it again, until I've looked at it from 360 degrees - is useful. Are the other practical techniques for evaluating these image sets?

o I understand how to turn the overlay on and off, and that these image sets may not perfectly line up. You can also use the slider bar at the bottom of the "Places" box to vary the transparency of the overlay, and that can be helpful to compare the overlay with the previous imagery.

o Is there an easy way to retrieve an adjacent image set?

Basically - I think I'm looking for a handful of practical techniques and considerations to help to quickly and thoroughly evaluate the image sets. There seems to be several folk on this project with training and experience who could help by posting some pointers for us newbies.

I believe this is really at the heart of making this project a credible effort - the quality of the evaluation and leads we can provide by developing and sharing techniques for good analysis.

cheers,
jreves

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Blue Penguin

Please Edit your PM options


My Home>Main Configuration section> Personal information, email, password, etc.> Edit > Accept private messages from other users?> Yes No.

regards

danescombe

---

I agree to the suppression of all my posts and all Blue21 posts to me since #1082857 - 12/28/07 08:22 PM, if this is well the question you wanted to ask privately to me.

Best Regards

---

Pengi, did you ever notice, over the past year especially, that the Amendments of the US constitution aren't anymore what they used to be? Especially the 1st Amendment seems to be in peril....

--------------------
Take risks not to escape life, but to prevent life from escaping.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Pengi, did you ever notice, over the past year especially, that the Amendments of the US constitution aren't anymore what they used to be? Especially the 1st Amendment seems to be in peril....

---

This was auto-censure in this case. Nobody ask me nothing (and my PM status is still as I want it...).

If we begin to quarrel about some old press excerpts which are verified neither the some nor the others, we badly left for the continuation...

Regards

Post Extras: