10m satellite imagery from 2018-2019: https://data.linz.govt.nz/layer/103539-nz-10m-satellite-imag...

0.75m aerial imagery from 2005-2011: https://data.linz.govt.nz/layer/51934-southland-075m-rural-a...

I'm not sure what you think you're seeing in that picture, but it sounds like you've been listening to too many conspiracy nuts. Not many people live in or go to Stewart Island, so the demand for satellite/aerial imagery is pretty low. It's hardly surprising it's not as recent or accurate as, say, this 7.5cm imagery of Auckland: https://data.linz.govt.nz/layer/95497-auckland-0075m-urban-a...

You'll notice on that recent link that there's a caveat that wasn't included on the older link.

"This is a visual product only. The data has been downsampled from 12-bits to 8-bits, and the original values of the images have been modified for visualisation purposes."

If you zoom into the cities, buildings are nothing more than white blotches. Not really relevant supporting references.

As an aside, people should be able to make casual observations about patterns without the folks who don't see the patterns comparing them to the mentally ill.

Visual-only means no lidar or radar (most satellites just have cameras, so most of the satellite imagery is like that).

The resolution of that one is 10 metres per pixel, so of course buildings are blotches. 12 bit to 8 bit doesn't affect the resolution or hide anything significant, it just makes the brightness a bit more quantised, and the brightness will have already been adjusted to equalise between adjacent sections photographed at different times anyway (that's the "modified" bit). They also have the 12-bit data available.

I never mentioned any mental illness (I doubt most conspiracy theorists have one), and it's nothing to do with patterns, it's "apocalypse projects" that is conspiracy nonsense.

The point of the quote was to show that the image has been manipulated, it is not what came from the camera, and therefore isn't a useful reference in your post. It's useful for some things, but not this thing.

The mental illness you seem to have not realized you referred to is when you said "you've been listening to too many conspiracy nuts."

Now saying "conspiracy nonsense" is way more inline with reality. It's very much just idle thinking on my part with brief injections of conspiracy editorial provided by any of the articles found by doing a search for "billionaire apocalypse homes".

The raw unmanipulated imagery is not very useful, as it will be a messy patchwork. The colours are probably interpolated from a Bayer filter mosaic or something too. They are providing the much more useful aligned, equalised imagery that people actually want. LINZ would quite likely give you the raw imagery if you asked for it for some project - they're quite keen for people to make use of their data (hence the CC license), and I have a little.

"Conspiracy nut" is a noun, slang for "conspiracy theorist". If I had said they or you were "nuts", the adjective, then yes, that would mean "crazy" and imply comparison to mental illness; I didn't say that. I also said "it sounds like you've been listening to ...", so not a comparison to your mental state anyway.

This naturally happens on land which is steep and causes clouds to form as winds blow ocean air over them.

Since clouds form so regularly, mapping providers have a lot of difficulty getting a shot of the whole area in daylight with no clouds, so they end up using algorithms to stitch together the best image they can get from cloud-free parts.

In areas with snow, the problem is even worse, because an algorithm to separate snow and cloud is even harder.

Absolutely, and is a relevant explanation for many of these instances around the world.

However there are plenty of instances near disputed areas where resolution is lost, images are outdated etc, and it starts to become a pattern separate from what you're describing.

I mean just as the most obvious example of manipulation, look at the lack of 3D imaging in parts of Washington D.C.

It's not indicative of ill-will, and is obviously in support of operational security, but it's still clearly a decision made with non-scientific reasons.

The local council (QLDC) has online available high-resolution imagery of the entire of Thiel's Glendhu Bay property.