???? I simply don't see the logic in that. The casualty estimates were just that estimates. They varied considerably based on the assumptions that went into them. By their very nature they were questionable but not for the reason you state. Indeed the assumptions are clearly stated and pretty clearly disprove your theory. Indeed I suspect that had the bombs not been dropped as more data became available the numbers would have been revised extensively and possibly enough to have postponed the invasions in any case the numbers developed would likely have underestimated the actual losses.