>>8837627

You're comparing a top down view with a on the ground view and saying "I found it!!!"

Post a street view of this location and compare. this board has taken a turn overnight

Q recently warned about these types of post. Absurd speculations WITHOUT FACT

>>8837709

Baker not notable

>>8837627, this is not notable until this location is proven. we do not deal with speculation and guessing. once this location is shown to be the location ADD IT IN, but until it can be show from street views of THIS LOCATION and compared, IT IS NOT NOTABLE YET

>>8837627

>>8837709

This is a view looking NORTH toward the anons location. COMPARE COMPARE COMPARE. Do we think this is the SAME? If so add as NOTABLE. If not, KEEP DIGGING

>>8837755

So because you add a ? that means you can make anything notable. There needs to be a standard for Notables, and that is called research and digging. Not random satellite views of locations.

>>8837773

Baker Not Notable

>>8837627, Speculation without any facts

compare with

>>8837760, Does this check out? Do they look like Q's photo.

We need a standard for notables, and without digging and research, this place falls apart. Be better anon

>>8837848

>I think I found the spot on Google Maps

>>8837760, COMPARE

What I'm getting at is that if you found this loc on maps, then search the street views AROUND THIS LOC AND COMPARE. You posted a satellite view and made this statement without any real digging.

>>8837926

Yes, Easily and I've posted it and linked it to your post multiple times now, so what's once more.

>>8837760, COMPARE

>>8837908

>>8837926

>>8837948

>>8837760

You either aren't understanding on purpose or you're touched. This is a photo used in an article about the Kirschner's, YES. You do not know if this is a STOCK photo used. YOU DO NOT KNOW FOR A FACT this is their farm in the photo. That is why we are here to DIG. A satellite photo vs landscape and stating "I think I found it" is not digging or confirmation of anything

>>8837926

>It's a RURAL AREA. I can't get a Street View with Google Maps from that location. Can you?

>>8838003

>I've seen that, but there is no street view from the actual position. Regardless, this is THE AREA that that photo was taken. I was asking for help in determination. Those buildings were the closest to what looked like what was in Q's photo…(which isn't Q's photo…it is Kirschner's photo).

Oh, now you've already seen that, but before it was too rural to get a street view?? jeeeezuz

>>8838069

And you believe those to be the same? IMO no, but at least your starting to build a case that someone MIGHT agree with

>>8838114

exactly, baker added this cornfield location and satellite photo into notables, my entire point i'm trying to make is that it isn't notable you dumb dick