Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 23,344
There are any number of reasons why it wouldn't have been "picked up", the number one reason being that news agencies can't just publish other people's videos or photos without their permission. Maybe the person who shot the original image contacted the press? Maybe the other person didn't. Your assumption that you know everything, and therefore know what should have happened is getting downright comical.To address your points, the photo of the back of the vehicle was taken by a random member of the public who was at their car at the time. It is widely shown everywhere. Therefore, there is no reason the video of the front of the car should not also have been taken up by the media. It has not, which clearly suggests they are unable to authenticate it. The press agency syndicates will rarely accept a video or photo that has clearly been edited or photoshopped (the one recently in the SUN newspaper claiming to be a youthful Kate Middleton bouncing along spritely at a farm shop, a notable exception to the rule).
There are no references in those images that can tell you what the actual direction of gravitational acceleration is relative to the floor or camera. You can only measure the orientation of the structure relative to the camera, and with no way to determine the precise orientation of the camera compared to gravitational level, you cannot honestly claim that the floor is sloping different directions in the images. You've literally demonstrated your lack of knowledge about geometry, but you think you can counter it by simply asserting your understanding. So prove it. Explain how you know the orientation of the camera lenses related to gravity. Otherwise, you can't claim to know which way the floor is sloping.I do not need to do any geometry on it because I understand how perspective works in art.
They haven't issued the finished report yet. The only reason they've gone out of their way to specify that it was a diesel car is because of all the nuts from the Daily Mail readership playing armchair detective making inquiries about it being an EV.A possible reason for faking the video could be to stop the anti-EV brigade from claiming it was an EV fire by pointing to a Range Rover that was outside the time frame to have been a mild EV. If it is genuine, why have the press covered it up and not published it, nor BF&RS's named it on their webpage as being the model make and year? So you see it is not a 'conspiracy theory': they really have not named the model, make and year of the vehicle involved as a matter of fact.
Again, the first image shows a Range Rover that was available with a diesel engine. Why would they need to fake another image of the same type of vehicle, but with a "floating hood", "mismatched paint lines" and "floor sloping the wrong way", plus, probably, a Badge Man and some alien reptile overlords in the background for.good measure?