In a certain aspectual manner, such can be used as a valid argument based on sensory limitations alone, yet there are still tanagble interactions that a belief or claim alone cannot possibly meet, of what can be considered as an interaction in a conventional sense, and that which lacks interaction, conversely remains strictly conceptual in nature.
Such a statement tends to be hopelessly locked within the realms of thought, notably lacking the required interaction by which a person establishes what is factual and what remains mental in the first place.
By saying something is entirely a mental picture alone, would actually fall short by which we distinguish and determine things like this.