I’m not crazy and I’ve never heard of it as a conspiracy theory but personally I’m not 100% convinced about Labrador, Canada. The only pictures I can find of the place are either pictures of scenery that could be anywhere, extremely generic, or low-resolution aerial shots of settlements, nothing that concretely convinces me it exists. I know it’s remote and sparsely populated, but there are more remote, less populated places that I can get normal pictures showing daily life a lot more easily.
That’s pretty typical of the pictures I can find; nothing that shows any culture or lifestyle that couldn’t be mocked up in a moment.
Compare, for example, an image search for Tristan da Cunha (a far more remote, less populated, and less visitable place than Labrador) with one for Labrador, Canada. Most of the images you get back from the Labrador search featuring buildings will actually be of Newfoundland because of search engine algorithms these days so discard those. The Tristan da Cunha pictures show people and life, even if they’re mainly of tourists, but the Labrador pictures are all like that one at best.
It would be impossible to find a picture that both shows daily life, and also has proof in the picture that it’s actually from Labrador. But this is true for any sparsely populated place. And especially in cold climates, daily life just doesn’t happen outside a lot anyway.
A sign saying Labrador to me is less proof to me than a body of pictures documenting the culture; and I don’t necessarily mean artistic or traditional culture, it could be streets, houses, road-signs, shops, infrastructure, etc. that have features that rule out it being anywhere else, that’s what’s lacking. If Tristan da Chunha is a bad example, you could try Greenland (only double the population of Labrador but sparser), which is even colder.
I’m not crazy and I’ve never heard of it as a conspiracy theory but personally I’m not 100% convinced about Labrador, Canada. The only pictures I can find of the place are either pictures of scenery that could be anywhere, extremely generic, or low-resolution aerial shots of settlements, nothing that concretely convinces me it exists. I know it’s remote and sparsely populated, but there are more remote, less populated places that I can get normal pictures showing daily life a lot more easily.
That’s pretty typical of the pictures I can find; nothing that shows any culture or lifestyle that couldn’t be mocked up in a moment.
Compare, for example, an image search for Tristan da Cunha (a far more remote, less populated, and less visitable place than Labrador) with one for Labrador, Canada. Most of the images you get back from the Labrador search featuring buildings will actually be of Newfoundland because of search engine algorithms these days so discard those. The Tristan da Cunha pictures show people and life, even if they’re mainly of tourists, but the Labrador pictures are all like that one at best.
It would be impossible to find a picture that both shows daily life, and also has proof in the picture that it’s actually from Labrador. But this is true for any sparsely populated place. And especially in cold climates, daily life just doesn’t happen outside a lot anyway.
A sign saying Labrador to me is less proof to me than a body of pictures documenting the culture; and I don’t necessarily mean artistic or traditional culture, it could be streets, houses, road-signs, shops, infrastructure, etc. that have features that rule out it being anywhere else, that’s what’s lacking. If Tristan da Chunha is a bad example, you could try Greenland (only double the population of Labrador but sparser), which is even colder.