I am certain that at least two experts in the field of crowd estimation via aerial photography forgot that people can stand under trees.
Apparently they did. And that's not surprising since they also choose to work for CBS and that says a lot about their judgment.
Look carefully at this photo, Biscuit:
http://www.therightscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/crowdblowup.jpg
Let's see how good YOUR judgment is and how honest you can be with yourself. Or whether you are just blinded by partisanship.
That photo shows that the crowd is quite dense on the immediate right side of the reflecting pool from end to end along the entire length of the pool and, likewise, on the immediate left side of the reflecting pool from end to end. Look at the 4th through 8th images at this link:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/44950/ . Look at some of the images of the crowd near the pool in the other links I provided. They show the density of that crowd in those two areas is standing room only. It's what the Park Service calls a high density crowd.
Now the Park Service used to use a figure of 2.5 square feet per person when estimating the number of people in a high density crowd (
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-01-19-crowd_N.htm ). At that density, even just the area that is visible on each side of the reflecting pool before reaching the nearest trees … which my eyeballs says is about 6/10ths of the reflecting pool in total width … would comprise a crowd of 2029 * 167 * 0.6 / 2.5 = 81,000 … or about what CBS claims is the total estimated crowd there that day.
This is proof positive that the CBS estimate is nothing but total, absolute, partisan garbage.
So how big is the total crowd?
Well in the
http://www.therightscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/crowdblowup.jpg image, you can also see people between the trees on the right side of the pool at various points along it's length. These gaps in the tree cover are approximately a width of the pool distant from the pool. And in every one of these gaps, from end to end of the pool, the density of the crowd looks to be about the same as the density of people packed right next to the pool itself. The closeup images in the links I provided clearly show that the density of people between the rows of trees in these areas and under the trees themselves is indeed high. Perhaps not quite as high as right next to the reflecting pool, but still high. Likewise the images show that the density of the crowd under the first set of trees on the left side of the pool is equally high. How many people can we conservatively estimate are in this area?
Together, those two regions (under the trees on the left side and under the trees on the right side out to a distance about equal to the width of the reflecting pool from the reflecting pool) are more than equal in width to the reflecting pool itself. And let's assume (based on the various close up images of the crowd in these areas and to be conservative) that the density in this area is what the Park Service used to call just "average". In that case they assumed 5 square feet per person when calculating crowd estimates. That gives a crowd in just this portion of the image of about 2029 * 167 / 5 = 68,000.
But, you can also see people in gaps between the trees on the right side of the area that we just counted. And these gaps also seem to have about the same apparent crowd density. As you look towards the Lincoln Memorial side of the reflecting pool, you can see people in gaps between the trees on the right side of the pool that are almost twice the width of the reflecting pool from the reflecting pool itself. This makes sense, since people would tend to view those as good spots to see the podium which is nearby. And that portion of the image extends down to about 1/3rd the length of the reflecting pool from the upper end of the reflecting pool. Now let's assume that the crowd in that area is as dense as the one just calculated. This is certainly reasonable if we move the people that are clearly under the right most trees along the rest of the length of the reflecting pool into this area. These assumptions/observations gives a crowd in that area of at least 2029 / 3 * 167 / 5 = 22,000.
Next, on the left side of the image, we see a dense crowd in the large open area on the other side of the trees that are nearest the reflecting pool. That area is about 20-25% wider than the reflecting pool. The density of people in this region looks to be about the same over about 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the length of the area. And in those areas, the density appears to be at least "average" but could be even higher. The other 1/4th to 1/3rd of the region has people in it and if we again move people that were clearly at the event but still not counted into this region, I think we can safely assume the same density for the entire length of the region. Where can we find extra people? Well, the images I've linked show a large crowd gathered on the far side of the fountain near the bottom of the reflecting pool and on the near side of the fountain extending towards the Washington Monument. In fact, much of the lawn up to the Washington Monument had a large crowd on it, obviously watching the event. I suggest this crowd is enough to safely fill in the areas of lesser density in the region to the left of the trees on the left side of the reflecting pool to average density. If we do that, and then assume a density that is only 1/2 of the "average" assumption (to be conservative), we calculate a crowd of at least 2029 * 1.2 * 167 / 10 = 41,000.
So what do we have as an estimate, so far?
81,000 + 68,000 + 22,000 + 41,000 = 212,000.
And note that we still have to yet count the people who were on the side of the reflecting pool nearest the podium, scattered about the Lincoln Memorial itself, and in the trees off to the left of the large open area on the left side of the reflecting pool.
No, Biscuit, I think I can safely say that my first estimate of at least 200,000 people in the crowd at Beck's rally was quite good. And by the way, note that a National Park Service official gave NBC News an unofficial estimate of 300,000 which is probably closer to the real truth.
Finally, just for comparison, here are some images from Martin Luther King's Jobs And Freedom march/rally that was held in the same area of the mall back in 1963. Police said 200,000 was the crowd size. King's staff claimed 300,000.
In the first image, you will notice that there don't appear to be any people … just tents … in the open area to the right of the row of trees on the right side of the reflecting pool (what we've been calling the left side of the pool, looking away from the Washington Monument). In Beck's case, this area is densely full of people.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...ndsp=40&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:39&biw=1526&bih=898
In the next image, you will notice that the crowd wasn't as dense as Beck's next to the reflecting pond once you got some distance away from the Lincoln Memorial. In fact, on the left side of the reflecting pool near the rear, you can see so very sparely occupied areas.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/March_on_Washington_edit.jpg
Now let's see if you are logical and honest, and can draw the right conclusion. Or whether you are just a partisan who dislikes Beck enough to be dishonest with even yourself.
