- 8,199
- 1,934
- Thread starter
- #41
I mean, here's the thing.... Even if we go with the lowball 609 or so meters for the mountain, it wouldn't cut the result by even half from my understanding.
If someone could do the math of what that'd be...that'd be great.
And as far as getting a better scan for the cloud goes... the scan itself isn't terrible (Although it isn't that good either but trying to get something better in 2020 isn't happening), it deliberately looks fuzzy like that because it was being projected through a hologram. That's why that looks particularly fuzzy when compared to the other panels.
And as far as getting a better scan for the cloud goes... the scan itself isn't terrible (Although it isn't that good either but trying to get something better in 2020 isn't happening), it deliberately looks fuzzy like that because it was being projected through a hologram. That's why that looks particularly fuzzy when compared to the other panels.