Triangle 'near' Bermuda

[King of the Americas]

I love Google Earth...

Check this out:

22 degrees 55' 35.34" N
62 degrees 56' 34.42" W

From an altitude of 5,000 ft.

[bickerer]

I don't see anything at 5000 ft, but at 200 miles up, I think I see cause for an investigation :)
I, too, love Google Earth.....

[King of the Americas]

I don't see anything at 5000 ft, but at 200 miles up, I think I see cause for an investigation :)
I, too, love Google Earth.....

My google altimeter said 5003 ft.

But can you make out the triangle. I'm referring to?

Can someone post it here? I am http:hyperlink deficient.

[I Ratant]

It's outside the formal "triangle".

[MG1962]

It's outside the formal "triangle".

So this would be the bermuda 'shorts' triangle

Seriously though - anyone got thoughts on it. The North South line seems to extend to the south and show the hallmarks of a fault line, but the other two lines - I am open to suggestions

[arthwollipot]

So this would be the bermuda 'shorts' triangle

Seriously though - anyone got thoughts on it. The North South line seems to extend to the south and show the hallmarks of a fault line, but the other two lines - I am open to suggestionsIt could be a conspiracy.

[King of the Americas]

It's outside the formal "triangle".

Agreed.

Well outside, in fact.

I just rather enjoy looking at the world looking, for stuff just like this.

The western edge seems to be made up of two parallel lines...

There are other such intersecting lines, in other waters.

Just a second...

---

ETA

Is that a 90 degree angle?

[King of the Americas]

It could be a conspiracy.

A very very very old one...

That has been covered by water for a long long long time.

For now, I'd call it a mysterious underwater triangle.

:0

Atlantis!!!

[Sean84]

Pythagoras: Atlantean Messiah?

Discuss...

[King of the Americas]

Pythagoras: Atlantean Messiah?

Discuss...

Let's not.

The Atlantis thing was a joke.

[Sean84]

So was the Pythagoras thing; though it was actually in response to the mention of conspiracies and right triangles which reminded me of the map of Atlantis nonsense from some time ago. Sorry if my sarcasm was unclear...

Next time I'll throw in a couple these guys :D

Back on topic: Does anyone actually think this triangle is significant in any way, shape, or form?

[Toke]

Back on topic: Does anyone actually think this triangle is significant in any way, shape, or form?

My best guess is some grafics/software glich or merge file in google earth.

[icerat]

It looks similar to the "Atlantis" gridlines hoohah of a few months back. Probably an artifact of some ship doing a triangle while sounding

[King of the Americas]

So was the Pythagoras thing; though it was actually in response to the mention of conspiracies and right triangles which reminded me of the map of Atlantis nonsense from some time ago. Sorry if my sarcasm was unclear...

Next time I'll throw in a couple these guys :D

Back on topic: Does anyone actually think this triangle is significant in any way, shape, or form?

I was unaware of any recent Atlantean postings, or a map. Thank you for the clarification.

When I found this 'right triangle', I didn't see the whole thing. I was looking, much more close up, when I stumbled its western edge, a set of parallel lines. When I zoomed out, I saw the lower corners. The northern portion does not appear.

Check these out:

26 degrees 48' 57.08" N
70 degrees 11' 48.11" W

[I Ratant]

My first guess at that triangle is someone at Google Earth playing with Photoshop, as straight lines that long don't appear in nature.
And the ocean is pretty deep there, for anything man-made to have been submerged ... when Atlantis sank... :)

[Marduk]

I love Google Earth...

Check this out:

22 degrees 55' 35.34" N
62 degrees 56' 34.42" W

From an altitude of 5,000 ft.

the longest line of the triangle is more than 150 miles long, so its a line caused by the mapping technique as someone has already said.
nothing to sea here
;)

[King of the Americas]

the longest line of the triangle is more than 150 miles long, so its a line caused by the mapping technique as someone has already said.
nothing to sea here
;)

"...mapping technique..."...?

Please elaborate...?

150 miles isn't that long... Why couldn't it be a REALLY old wall?

[King of the Americas]

My first guess at that triangle is someone at Google Earth playing with Photoshop, as straight lines that long don't appear in nature.
And the ocean is pretty deep there, for anything man-made to have been submerged ... when Atlantis sank... :)

Google Earth people would do that???

I disagree, straight lines DO occur in nature.

However, I DON'T know how these lines were formed.

[hokie]

Straight lines? Well maybe the map shows a straight line, but surface features are arcs on the surface of the earth.

This is likely to be due to an artifact of the imaging process. The mappings are done by ships. The ships drag a sensor array. If a ship maps out a triangular or rectangular area, then that is the piece of the map that has to be attached to other maps. In photographs this is seen as the join between two photographs. Think of photo-mosaics of the Titanic for instance. The Google sea images are not based on light. Still the images have to be connected together to produce what appears to be a continuous image. The stitching of images is not always simple and leaves evidence of the original mosaic of images just as photo-mosaics do.

[Marduk]

"...mapping technique..."...?

Please elaborate...?

http://news.aol.com/article/google-earth-grid/353546
"It's true that many amazing discoveries have been made in Google Earth, including a pristine forest in Mozambique that is home to previously unknown species and the remains of an ancient Roman villa," the company said in a statement. "In this case, however, what users are seeing is an artifact of the data collection process. Bathymetric (or sea floor terrain) data is often collected from boats using sonar to take measurements of the sea floor. The lines reflect the path of the boat as it gathers the data."
150 miles isn't that long... Why couldn't it be a REALLY old wall?

Because there is no one on this planet who could have made it, as that part of the sea floor has never been on the surface, what are you thinking ?
mermaids !!!
besides which, there is a scientific explanation that fits all the facts already
:D

[King of the Americas]

Straight lines? Well maybe the map shows a straight line, but surface features are arcs on the surface of the earth.

This is likely to be due to an artifact of the imaging process. The mappings are done by ships. The ships drag a sensor array. If a ship maps out a triangular or rectangular area, then that is the piece of the map that has to be attached to other maps. In photographs this is seen as the join between two photographs. Think of photo-mosaics of the Titanic for instance. The Google sea images are not based on light. Still the images have to be connected together to produce what appears to be a continuous image. The stitching of images is not always simple and leaves evidence of the original mosaic of images just as photo-mosaics do.

Interesting...thanks for the info.

It is strange how these left over sonar artifacts, are very contained to certain areas, while there remains broad stretches of un-anomalous terrain...why would these areas need to be mosaiced together?

The link provided above that features a "square" of similar intersecting lines is more intriguing than the triangle I found...

[Toke]

Interesting...thanks for the info.

It is strange how these left over sonar artifacts, are very contained to certain areas, while there remains broad stretches of un-anomalous terrain...why would these areas need to be mosaiced together?

The link provided above that features a "square" of similar intersecting lines is more intriguing than the triangle I found...

Perhaps different areas were mapped by different companies/navies in different decades and with different techniques.
That would give regional differences in the grafics/map merging.

(Some BA maps of west africa are based on soundings from 18-something)

[King of the Americas]

Perhaps different areas were mapped by different companies/navies in different decades and with different techniques.
That would give regional differences in the grafics/map merging.

(Some BA maps of west africa are based on soundings from 18-something)

Then if these areas were re-mapped, these anomalies should disappear, right?

I only have the free version of Google Earth. does anyone have the version that is updated every 72 hours?

[Toke]

Then if these areas were re-mapped, these anomalies should disappear, right?

I only have the free version of Google Earth. does anyone have the version that is updated every 72 hours?

Updating every 72 hours?

Google earth may get updates from satelites, but the airial photos and oceanografic surveys are not redone every 72 hours.

[King of the Americas]

Updating every 72 hours?

Google earth may get updates from satelites, but the airial photos and oceanografic surveys are not redone every 72 hours.

Is there another google earth-type of program, that would could compare results?

[Toke]

I have no idea.

[King of the Americas]

I have no idea.

http://www.flashearth.com/

SLOOOOOOW loading...and their ocean floor images are sincerely lacking...

[Psi Baba]

Is there another google earth-type of program, that would could compare results?
Try Bing.com

[King of the Americas]

Try Bing.com

Check out the lines that AREN'T radar traces, OR mosaic stitching together of two pics.

My triangle is in this image too:

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/2minsurface/1350/45N090W.jpg

[Sean84]

You've confirmed the existence of trenches. Cool image though.

Hmm... I just found a Jesus-face in the mid-Atlantic. Triangles are child's play.

:D

[Marduk]

Then if these areas were re-mapped, these anomalies should disappear, right?

It doesn't work like that, there is no centre that overseas all ocean mapping projects so each peripheral will use just one data set from one source, the vast majority of these near shore anomalies are obtained by search and rescue vessels out looking for lost ships, The ones that caused a stir a little while ago when some bright spark announced to the media that he had found Atlantis were caused by American govt ships looking for a nice deep place to dump nuclear waste.


;)

[arthwollipot]

Updating every 72 hours?

Google earth may get updates from satelites, but the airial photos and oceanografic surveys are not redone every 72 hours.The Google Earth image of my house is three years old.

[Toke]

The Google Earth image of my house is three years old.

Yes, I once throught it could be used to see who were in, in nextport.
Rather naive.

[King of the Americas]

You've confirmed the existence of trenches. Cool image though.

Hmm... I just found a Jesus-face in the mid-Atlantic. Triangles are child's play.

:D

Yes, but is your "Jesus face" HUNDREDS of miles long and aligned with other land marks?

[King of the Americas]

It doesn't work like that, there is no centre that overseas all ocean mapping projects so each peripheral will use just one data set from one source, the vast majority of these near shore anomalies are obtained by search and rescue vessels out looking for lost ships, The ones that caused a stir a little while ago when some bright spark announced to the media that he had found Atlantis were caused by American govt ships looking for a nice deep place to dump nuclear waste.


;)

These lines or trenches aren't 'near shore', nor near any potential nuclear waste dumping grounds...

[King of the Americas]

Aquatic super highways? One lines up perfectly with Bermuda and the straight that passes Key West.


ETA:

Isn't it 'difficult' to plot a perfectly straight course over oceanic currents? Wouldn't you suffer some drift, even with really good charts? Wind speed and direction would also be a variable... Or is that totally wrong with modern engines and navigation?

[Toke]

Isn't it 'difficult' to plot a perfectly straight course over oceanic currents? Wouldn't you suffer some drift, even with really good charts? Wind speed and direction would also be a variable... Or is that totally wrong with modern engines and navigation?

Depends on perfect, when I look at the electronic seachart the ship tend to be on or within 50-100m of the courseline.
The autopilot get data from the gyrocompas, log and the GPS and does a good job at compensating for drift.

[Toke]

Aquatic super highways? One lines up perfectly with Bermuda and the straight that passes Key West
Could be an mapping error or a geological fault, they happen ashore so why not at sea?

[King of the Americas]

Could be an mapping error or a geological fault, they happen ashore so why not at sea?

Open Google Earth and follow the coastline southeast...

ETA:

Different maps, same features, it appears they are slowly disappearing. On newer maps the lines are less appearant.

[King of the Americas]

Depends on perfect, when I look at the electronic seachart the ship tend to be on or within 50-100m of the courseline.
The autopilot get data from the gyrocompas, log and the GPS and does a good job at compensating for drift.

Could passing ships 'carve' an oceanic trench by using the same path, in water thousands of feet deep??

Can navel subs carve the ocean bottom is such ways?

[Toke]

Could passing ships 'carve' an oceanic trench by using the same path, in water thousands of feet deep??

Can navel subs carve the ocean bottom is such ways?

You are completely off, as in NO.

I throught your navigation question refered to survey ships, not relationship between sealanes and lines on google earth.

It is perfectly possible that geological faults end up as rivers or straits.
Just look at the great belt between denmark and sweden. The danish side is several kilometers of limestone deposit, the sweedish rock.

[King of the Americas]

You are completely off, as in NO.

I throught your navigation question refered to survey ships, not relationship between sealanes and lines on google earth.

It is perfectly possible that geological faults end up as rivers or straits.
Just look at the great belt between denmark and sweden. The danish side is several kilometers of limestone deposit, the sweedish rock.

These lines don't look geological, AT ALL.

Check out the image I last linked, and the lines to the south east...

[Toke]

These lines don't look geological, AT ALL.

Check out the image I last linked, and the lines to the south east...

I once visited Nexø, a town on the southern tip of Bornholm.

The beach and seabed is paved with large sandstone tiles for miles. They look rather degraded and must have lain there for millenia.

It could be proof of the giants that lived on earth before man, or it could be a sandstone deposit that happened to crack up in a square pattern.

I recommend you crosscheck with papermaps or original surveys to see what is software and what is geological reality.
Then you can start making teories.

[King of the Americas]

I once visited Nexø, a town on the southern tip of Bornholm.

The beach and seabed is paved with large sandstone tiles for miles. They look rather degraded and must have lain there for millenia.

It could be proof of the giants that lived on earth before man, or it could be a sandstone deposit that happened to crack up in a square pattern.

I recommend you crosscheck with papermaps or original surveys to see what is software and what is geological reality.
Then you can start making teories.

No theories yet, I've only just discovered these things. I am quite a ways off from drawing final conclusions...

It's investigation time!

[I Ratant]

You'll be better on some woo forum where such silliness is welcomed with open arms.

[Skeptic Ginger]

There are lots of triangular surface features of the ocean floor in that area. And they don't appear to be software glitches. They appear to be fault lines. The idea such lines are unnatural if they are straight and long is a bit of an odd statement, I Ratant. The San Andreas fault is long and straight as are lots of fault lines.

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/2minsurface/1350/45N090W.jpg


The same lines show up in this map as well:

http://topex.ucsd.edu/marine_topo/gif_topo_track/topo8.gif

[I Ratant]

I'll stick with artifacts of the mapping process for the undersea images.
The San Andreas Fault which surfaces about a 1/2 mile behind where I live isn't what I consider straight. There's quite a few zigs and zags

[Dr. Galen]

This is just a clever ploy from Dos Equis:

He has written proof that the Bermuda triangle is actually a parallelogram.

[Toke]

Some lines are grafic faults some are geological flaws.
I have still not figured out why it is so important.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Some lines are grafic faults some are geological flaws.
I have still not figured out why it is so important.
What are the lines that are consistent between the two images I linked to in post 46 above?


As for the San Andreas, it's long and straight in may stretches.

http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/geol326/images/sanandreas.gif

[Toke]

What are the lines that are consistent between the two images I linked to in post 46 above?


I would say geological faults/flaws.
I am well aware that geology involves alot of cracks and folds and that some of them are on the seabed.

And so what?
A geologist might find it exiting, king of the americas is not one.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I would say geological faults/flaws.
I am well aware that geology involves alot of cracks and folds and that some of them are on the seabed.

And so what?
A geologist might find it exiting, king of the americas is not one.Hey, I'm just pointing out these are natural phenomena. Don't include me in the supernatural claims. OTOH, I do believe the triangle thingy in the OP was just a joke about a natural phenom. I wasn't aware anyone thought it had any supernatural significance.

The discussion I am having is against the claims the artifact is not really there. I think it is and it is a common geological feature. But I am not a geologist and I defer to other's expertise. Provided they have expertise in geology, that is.

[Sean84]

Yes, but is your "Jesus face" HUNDREDS of miles long and aligned with other land marks?

The Jesus-face is actually more green goblinish now that I look again, but it is larger than your triangle. I was trying to make the point that it's easy to find what you're looking for when it's all you can see. As for being aligned with landmarks he appears to be looking directly at Cockburn Town (from the first image in post #4) is that significant?

A few quick questions:
1. How is this triangle aligned with other landmarks?
2. What is the significance of this?
3. Have the reptoids infiltrated my brain?

[King of the Americas]

The Jesus-face is actually more green goblinish now that I look again, but it is larger than your triangle. I was trying to make the point that it's easy to find what you're looking for when it's all you can see. As for being aligned with landmarks he appears to be looking directly at Cockburn Town (from the first image in post #4) is that significant?

A few quick questions:
1. How is this triangle aligned with other landmarks?
2. What is the significance of this?
3. Have the reptoids infiltrated my brain?

First, when I found the triangle, I was just looking...not for anything specific, but rather something that didn't 'fit' wit the rest of the scape.

The triangle's sides are made up of 'lines'. If you take a broader view these lines continue on. They don't just end abruptly, or 'turn'.

While I am NOT a geologist, sonar survey specialist, and nor do I have any knowledge of oceanography, I CAN identify 'straight' lines...that may or may NOT be outside of geological anomalies.

Can anyone show me above water fault lines that intersect one another, at a right angles, or any other angle?

[Toke]

I just found a link (http://www.cracked.com/article_16671_p2.html) to help in your investigation.
It has a map with helpful lines on it.

[King of the Americas]

I just found a link (http://www.cracked.com/article_16671_p2.html) to help in your investigation.
It has a map with helpful lines on it.

"Sarcasm"...when played in the correct key, is a beautiful thing.

THIS did not hit it...

[Toke]

Thank you.:blush:

[King of the Americas]

Thank you.:blush:

I've a boot for your bow, smart arse.

[Toke]

I've a boot for your bow, smart arse.

What is wrong with Cracked.com:confused:

They do a great job at alternate teories:D


On a more serius note, I have seen lots of unexplainable phenomonens, only to discover that nobody in the relevant field were puzzled. If you find a geologist he/she could surely give an excelent explanation. It is quite difficult to find relevant material on google on subject you are not familiar with.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I just found a link (http://www.cracked.com/article_16671_p2.html) to help in your investigation.
It has a map with helpful lines on it.Please tell me that poor horse is photoshopped. But the link doesn't answer the question, what kind of natural features are the lines?

[Skeptic Ginger]

What is wrong with Cracked.com:confused:

They do a great job at alternate teories:D


On a more serius note, I have seen lots of unexplainable phenomonens, only to discover that nobody in the relevant field were puzzled. If you find a geologist he/she could surely give an excelent explanation. It is quite difficult to find relevant material on google on subject you are not familiar with.Well I'm pretty sure they are just fault lines of some kind. But I defer to someone else's expertise.

[Toke]

Please tell me that poor horse is photoshopped. But the link doesn't answer the question, what kind of natural features are the lines?

I think it is.
There are some links to teories on the bermuda triangle.:)

[Sean84]

A few quick questions:
1. How is this triangle aligned with other landmarks?
2. What is the significance of this?

First, when I found the triangle, I was just looking...not for anything specific, but rather something that didn't 'fit' wit the rest of the scape.

The triangle's sides are made up of 'lines'. If you take a broader view these lines continue on. They don't just end abruptly, or 'turn'.

While I am NOT a geologist, sonar survey specialist, and nor do I have any knowledge of oceanography, I CAN identify 'straight' lines...that may or may NOT be outside of geological anomalies.

Can anyone show me above water fault lines that intersect one another, at a right angles, or any other angle?

You were looking for something that doesn't fit, that seems to verify what I said earlier.
Can you answer the questions I posed?

[jhunter1163]

Don't be so hasty to reject the idea of a natural formation. Nature is pretty darn creative. Look at the Bimini Road or the Giants' Causeway.

[King of the Americas]

Well I'm pretty sure they are just fault lines of some kind. But I defer to someone else's expertise.

These lines appear just beyond the ripples caused by Atlantic ridge, and criss-cross each other.

Can 'anyone' show me an example of above ground, straight lines that go on for a hundred miles, that intersect each other, AS a 'natural formation'...?

I did find something similar, but nowhere near as vast, on the West coast of South America, south from the Nasca lines. The lines there were set into a grid pattern, and look like irrigation fields, except they were several miles long. But certainly not a hundred miles long, and they could have only been man-made.

[realpaladin]

Nature is pretty nifty in geometry:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1358/1418714896_a4f43e565c_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3249/2465290354_daa4503f53.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/2851361270_9d66b0f6ff.jpg

And don't say size is a meaningful. because then I tell you just to watch the skies and the great space images.

[King of the Americas]

The Jesus-face is actually more green goblinish now that I look again, but it is larger than your triangle. I was trying to make the point that it's easy to find what you're looking for when it's all you can see. As for being aligned with landmarks he appears to be looking directly at Cockburn Town (from the first image in post #4) is that significant?

A few quick questions:
1. How is this triangle aligned with other landmarks?
2. What is the significance of this?
3. Have the reptoids infiltrated my brain?

My bad, I thought I'd already said, one line makes a bee-line from Bermuda to the straight near Key West. (1.) Further south, several lines all converge, at an island now called bridge town.

The significance...these, I suggest, are UN-natural in form and don't match the rest of the scape. If you were looking for a jungle invaded/abandon man-made structure, you might do the same thing. I think un-natural among the natural, is significant...(2.)

Reptiods, in YOUR brain? I couldn't say, without running some tests... Do you 'feel' as though something has infiltrated your brain? (3.)

[King of the Americas]

Nature is pretty nifty in geometry:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1358/1418714896_a4f43e565c_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3249/2465290354_daa4503f53.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/2851361270_9d66b0f6ff.jpg

And don't say size is a meaningful. because then I tell you just to watch the skies and the great space images.

Where are there straight lines that go on for a hundred miles in nature?

The Canals of Mars, perhaps?

[King of the Americas]

Don't be so hasty to reject the idea of a natural formation. Nature is pretty darn creative. Look at the Bimini Road or the Giants' Causeway.

Neither of which are this vast...

[realpaladin]

Where are there straight lines that go on for a hundred miles in nature?

The Canals of Mars, perhaps?

Millions of miles, lots of them; comet tails when viewed from distance (as are these lines of yours).

But you seem to think because you think they look un-natural they must be un-natural.

But make clear to me why they are un-natural?

I suggest reading this thread on straight lines in nature as well
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=6615

And this:
http://www.bautforum.com/astronomy/15025-what-linear-feature-dione.html


And look at this:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3564/3350722403_09e1503fa9_b.jpg

And this:

http://www.df.lth.se/~bengt/Moon_straight_wall_cropped.jpg (http://www.df.lth.se/%7Ebengt/Moon_straight_wall_cropped.jpg)

And this:

http://web.whittier.edu/fairchild/san_andreas.html

And this:

http://www.solarviews.com/raw/jup/europa.gif

[King of the Americas]

Millions of miles, lots of them; comet tails when viewed from distance (as are these lines of yours).

But you seem to think because you think they look un-natural they must be un-natural.

But make clear to me why they are un-natural?

I suggest reading this thread on straight lines in nature as well
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=6615

And this:
http://www.bautforum.com/astronomy/15025-what-linear-feature-dione.html


And look at this:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3564/3350722403_09e1503fa9_b.jpg

And this:

http://www.df.lth.se/~bengt/Moon_straight_wall_cropped.jpg (http://www.df.lth.se/%7Ebengt/Moon_straight_wall_cropped.jpg)

And this:

http://web.whittier.edu/fairchild/san_andreas.html

And this:

http://www.solarviews.com/raw/jup/europa.gif

The last example you posed was the most impressive, the others are incomparable.

So, I guess I need to re-calibrate my request.

Where "on Earth' are there other lines like this?

[Toke]

The last I heard of abandoned jungle civilazations were Eldorado in the Amazonas.

It is surposed to be real, and destroyed by european diseases without any european ever laying eyes on it.
Perhaps googeling Amazonas will be more productive than the seabed?

[King of the Americas]

The last I heard of abandoned jungle civilazations were Eldorado in the Amazonas.

It is surposed to be real, and destroyed by european diseases without any european ever laying eyes on it.
Perhaps googeling Amazonas will be more productive than the seabed?

I'll get to it eventually... It's a big world.

[King of the Americas]

Geological Answer, keep a weather eye out:

http://www.topix.com/forum/science/geology/TBEJV7S5R4VBP042J

[realpaladin]

The world is, in our human scale, a freaky big place, so Nature has lots of opportunity to do fancy tricks without us noticing them for a while.

The reason I also posted the images (and the wall on the moon is a lot longer than your lines, so it is pretty comparable) is that the Universe is a ridiculously larger place than our li'll planet and we are bound to find cool and weird and wonderful stuff there as well.

I spent a little over 5 minutes googling for straight lines in nature and came with these.

Spending more time will probably yield lots.

Also, address the issue of scale when you are searching; a completely smooth blade is extremely ragged under an electro-microscope.

So try to get extreme close-ups of your lines as well.

[King of the Americas]

:O

Use all three images, and Google Earth to measure this 'line' starting in between Great Abaco Island and Nassau, that goes north east over Bermuda and on further some 2500 miles...

[realpaladin]

:O

Use all three images, and Google Earth to measure this 'line' starting in between Great Abaco Island and Nassau, that goes north east over Bermuda and on further some 2500 miles...

That would put it, for me, outside the realm of any artificial creation.

[King of the Americas]

The world is, in our human scale, a freaky big place, so Nature has lots of opportunity to do fancy tricks without us noticing them for a while.

The reason I also posted the images (and the wall on the moon is a lot longer than your lines, so it is pretty comparable) is that the Universe is a ridiculously larger place than our li'll planet and we are bound to find cool and weird and wonderful stuff there as well.

I spent a little over 5 minutes googling for straight lines in nature and came with these.

Spending more time will probably yield lots.

Also, address the issue of scale when you are searching; a completely smooth blade is extremely ragged under an electro-microscope.

So try to get extreme close-ups of your lines as well.

EXACTLY...use the images to do a close up view of these lines with GE...

I found the results...disturbing, almost.

...

Asteroidal impact crater debris...ejection fields...

These lines don't look like that.

[realpaladin]

EXACTLY...use the images to do a close up view of these lines with GE...

I found the results...disturbing, almost.

...

Asteroidal impact crater debris...ejection fields...

These lines don't look like that.

Using Occam's Razor, for me, the answer is geological process.

I see lines and cool Nature stuff all around, know that Pareidolia exist. So what can I say?

[EHocking]

Where are there straight lines that go on for a hundred miles in nature?

The Canals of Mars, perhaps?The "canals" of Mars never existed. They were an optical illusion, proved by the Mariner flights of 1971.

An apt example, considering the subject of this thread.

[King of the Americas]

The "canals" of Mars never existed. They were an optical illusion, proved by the Mariner flights of 1971.

An apt example, considering the subject of this thread.

Except that we aren't talking about images captured by a primitive telescope of another planet over 35 million miles away. These are multiply orbital images, taken with modern equipment...

The key, I think, is that these 'lines' bypass slightly and or hit land masses, above and below sea level.

Lines from one port to another...?

[Marduk]

http://news.cnet.com/omg-did-google-earth-find-atlantis/
didn't you see this K ?

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think it is.
There are some links to teories on the bermuda triangle.:)I am well versed on the Bermuda Triangle nonsense, thank you.

[Toke]

I am well versed on the Bermuda Triangle nonsense, thank you.

Easy, it was not intended for you, but for KotA´s investigations.
Just explaining to you why I gave the link to him.:)

[King of the Americas]

http://news.cnet.com/omg-did-google-earth-find-atlantis/
didn't you see this K ?

Yes.

These lines are 'tiny' in comparison to those I pointed out, AND they aren't 'only' on Google Earth, but appear in two other images also...

[Marduk]

the lines from my link are the size of wales
how is that tiny ?
surely the longer the lines are the less likely they are artificial
I'm not surprised they appear on other images than google earth, google earth sources its images from other sources
;)

[Skeptic Ginger]

I really can't believe anyone is questioning that these are natural surface features. Just look at the Pacific Ocean floor on Google and you'll see more examples. They are plate features common on the sea floor. It's interesting that there are more intersecting lines in the Atlantic, but that's the extent of the differences. The Pacific Ocean lines extend thousands of miles and appear almost as straight. Interesting in that ocean is the regularity of the lines between different latitudes.


I had a bit more time. I found a term for the lines, fracture zone, and looked it up on Wiki: (emphasis mine)

A fracture zone is a linear oceanic feature--often hundreds, even thousands of kilometers long--resulting from the action of offset mid-ocean ridge axis segments. They are a consequence of plate tectonics. Lithospheric plates on either side of an active transform fault move in opposite directions; here, strike-slip activity occurs. Fracture zones extend past the transform faults, away from the ridge axis; seismically inactive (because both plate segments are moving in the same direction), they display evidence of past transform fault activity, primarily in the different ages of the crust on opposite sides of the zone.

Now the only question is why do they cross like they do in the Atlantic?

I'm sure we can find something on that if we look.

[Skeptical Greg]

the lines from my link are the size of wales
how is that tiny ?
surely the longer the lines are the less likely they are artificial
........................
Less likely than a city the size of Wales, that has left no other clues to it's existence besides a street grid ?

[Marduk]

I believe I just said that
;)

[Skeptical Greg]

My bad.. I read it wrong...

[Marduk]

still, it was worth saying twice,

;)

[EHocking]

Yes.

These lines are 'tiny' in comparison to those I pointed out, AND they aren't 'only' on Google Earth, but appear in two other images also...well, since your real source of this amazing information appears to actually be regurgitations of this site: http://www.satellitediscoveries.com/discoveries/line_network/proof.html

Their dismissal of these lines as probably not being caused by the data gathering process is disengenuous since they do not quote Google Earth/Maps source data.

You merely appear to be parrotting their assertions.

Just because these lines don't coincide with a very poor quality gif reproduction of one ship track map collection (http://topex.ucsd.edu/marine_topo/gif_topo_track/tracks8.gif) (satellitediscoveries' assumption), does not mean it may not match the actual source data of the GoogleEarth map in question.

Have you attempted to find the source map for this GoogleEarth image?

[tuc0]

Is there another google earth-type of program, that would could compare results?


I'm still on the first page, so someone may have already posted this, but try World Wind.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/

[King of the Americas]

well, since your real source of this amazing information appears to actually be regurgitations of this site: http://www.satellitediscoveries.com/discoveries/line_network/proof.html

Their dismissal of these lines as probably not being caused by the data gathering process is disengenuous since they do not quote Google Earth/Maps source data.

You merely appear to be parrotting their assertions.

Just because these lines don't coincide with a very poor quality gif reproduction of one ship track map collection (http://topex.ucsd.edu/marine_topo/gif_topo_track/tracks8.gif) (satellitediscoveries' assumption), does not mean it may not match the actual source data of the GoogleEarth map in question.

Have you attempted to find the source map for this GoogleEarth image?

I have not.

I have found the same lines, in the same location, in three different formats...from 3 different sources. They are there.

I think the goal now is to decipher how they got there...

Natural or unnatural means...?

"Man-made" being an 'unnatural thing', I am told. :)

I have a couple of lines out to qualified professionals. Hopefully we can get some geological insight.

[I Ratant]

...
I have a couple of lines out to qualified professionals. Hopefully we can get some geological insight.
.
Be sure to mention your aliens living on the far side of the moon.
The "qualified professionals" will make sure to get back to you on this... :covereyes

[realpaladin]

I have not.

I have found the same lines, in the same location, in three different formats...from 3 different sources. They are there.

I think the goal now is to decipher how they got there...

Natural or unnatural means...?

"Man-made" being an 'unnatural thing', I am told. :)

I have a couple of lines out to qualified professionals. Hopefully we can get some geological insight.

worldwind?

[King of the Americas]

worldwind?

Here's NOAA's pics:

http://map.ngdc.noaa.gov/website/mgg/deck41/viewer.htm

[realpaladin]

Here's NOAA's pics:

http://map.ngdc.noaa.gov/website/mgg/deck41/viewer.htm


http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/geology/deck41.html

Hmmm, that gives credulity to the artifact theory.

[EHocking]

I have not.

I have found the same lines, in the same location, in three different formats...from 3 different sources. They are there.

I think the goal now is to decipher how they got there...

Natural or unnatural means...?

"Man-made" being an 'unnatural thing', I am told. :)

I have a couple of lines out to qualified professionals. Hopefully we can get some geological insight.I suggest (yet again) that you read the Google Earth site and get some information on how the images are built.

Here, is an example the area you are looking at.
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1201179#Post1201179

Note, that in the satellite imagery, your straight lines and triangles disappear. When surface scans are overlaid, the lines appear. As noted in the site I quoted previously, as more and more data is added to the model with further overlays, these lines disappear.

They are data gathering/imagery artifacts....

Here's the area north of your "triangle"
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=38.788066,-67.479531&z=7&t=h&hl=en-GB

Sets of parallel straight lines, demonstrating imagery artifacts even better than your image.

[King of the Americas]

I suggest (yet again) that you read the Google Earth site and get some information on how the images are built.

Here, is an example the area you are looking at.
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1201179#Post1201179

Note, that in the satellite imagery, your straight lines and triangles disappear. When surface scans are overlaid, the lines appear. As noted in the site I quoted previously, as more and more data is added to the model with further overlays, these lines disappear.

They are data gathering/imagery artifacts....

Here's the area north of your "triangle"
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=38.788066,-67.479531&z=7&t=h&hl=en-GB

Sets of parallel straight lines, demonstrating imagery artifacts even better than your image.

First, your lines don't look like my lines. Second, you are saying that these are "imagery artifacts"...as in they aren't really there, on the ocean floor...

And that ALL the 'different maps', suffer the same 'illusion' in showing the same 'misprints'...

Here, is where I wish I were rich enough to own a submarine.

I'd like to SEE the ocean floor in in these areas, to see what is or isn't there.

[arthwollipot]

I'd like to SEE the ocean floor in in these areas, to see what is or isn't there.Got scuba?

[Sean84]

King, do you have a theory or hypothesis as to what these lines are or how they were formed? Maybe I skipped it while reading this thread, if so, just tell me to reread it.

[EHocking]

First, your lines don't look like my lines. Quite true, I give these as further examples of imagery artifacts in Google Earth.Second, you are saying that these are "imagery artifacts"...as in they aren't really there, on the ocean floor...It is a valid position to start from.
If you recall, the "Atlantis" imagery was shown to be just that - artifacts. And those artifacts DO resemble (in appearance) those in your example.
See this short hread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=135935), and my post (#10) explaining it.
And that ALL the 'different maps', suffer the same 'illusion' in showing the same 'misprints'...They are not "misprints", they are probably artifacts.

Did you read the links to Google Earth FAQ etc that I posted explaining this? Either you didn't read them or didn't understand them, otherwise you would not be repeating this question when I've already answered it.
Here, is where I wish I were rich enough to own a submarine.

I'd like to SEE the ocean floor in in these areas, to see what is or isn't there.Now you're getting closer.
You do realise that the images are artificially generated from remotely sensed data and are not photographs of the seabed, don't you?

These data, from different sources, systems and gathering equipment have then been manipulated, filtered, artificially coloured, flavoured, bent, spindles and torn... er... anyway, the images are not showing you RAW data, they have been manipulated A LOT. Artifacts will occur.

Now. I'm not saying "artifacts" is the correct explanation. They may well be geological structures.

Since you started this in the Paranormal and not the Science section of the forum, I'm presuming that you are leaning towards a different explanation?

[leafman91]

It doesn't really matter how straight the line is because

a) It is visible from so high up (judging from the pictures)
b) Because it is viewed from so high up, it's actually likely to be less of a line than a rectangular mess. If it was a straight line going on for miles, as seen from a few feet in front of my face, then I might be calling it man made or unnatural, but from a couple of thousand feet up, a straight line isn't particularly that special.

To be quite honest, the line isn't even that straight.

[King of the Americas]

King, do you have a theory or hypothesis as to what these lines are or how they were formed? Maybe I skipped it while reading this thread, if so, just tell me to reread it.

Nope...at this time I can't even conclude that they 'exist'...even though I've presented several examples, in different forms.

I'm still waiting to hear an actual geologist chime in.

[King of the Americas]

It doesn't really matter how straight the line is because

a) It is visible from so high up (judging from the pictures)
b) Because it is viewed from so high up, it's actually likely to be less of a line than a rectangular mess. If it was a straight line going on for miles, as seen from a few feet in front of my face, then I might be calling it man made or unnatural, but from a couple of thousand feet up, a straight line isn't particularly that special.

To be quite honest, the line isn't even that straight.

First, this isn't 'one' line. There's lots of them, some that radiate out, and others that intersect each other.

How visible the the Great Wall of China from this level?

[King of the Americas]

Quite true, I give these as further examples of imagery artifacts in Google Earth.It is a valid position to start from.
If you recall, the "Atlantis" imagery was shown to be just that - artifacts. And those artifacts DO resemble (in appearance) those in your example.
See this short hread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=135935), and my post (#10) explaining it.
They are not "misprints", they are probably artifacts.

Did you read the links to Google Earth FAQ etc that I posted explaining this? Either you didn't read them or didn't understand them, otherwise you would not be repeating this question when I've already answered it.
Now you're getting closer.
You do realise that the images are artificially generated from remotely sensed data and are not photographs of the seabed, don't you?

These data, from different sources, systems and gathering equipment have then been manipulated, filtered, artificially coloured, flavoured, bent, spindles and torn... er... anyway, the images are not showing you RAW data, they have been manipulated A LOT. Artifacts will occur.

Now. I'm not saying "artifacts" is the correct explanation. They may well be geological structures.

Since you started this in the Paranormal and not the Science section of the forum, I'm presuming that you are leaning towards a different explanation?

I DID read the material you linked. Objects have mass, and thus gravity. Underwater, these objects draw the water to them, making it possible to map the floor using sea levels.

These lines look to be trenches, and nothing in the material you linked suggested that the images that appear 'don't exist'.

ETA:

As to why I placed this here...no reason, I wouldn't protest moving it.

[Ashles]

I DID read the material you linked. Objects have mass, and thus gravity. Underwater, these objects draw the water to them, making it possible to map the floor using sea levels.

What? :confused:

[King of the Americas]

What? :confused:

Read the material...

[arthwollipot]

a) It is visible from so high up (judging from the pictures)No.

How visible the the Great Wall of China from this level?And no.

To repeat what EHocking said, these are not photographs. The lines aren't "visible" at all. They are reconstructed images based on remote sensing data. That's why I said:

I'd like to SEE the ocean floor in in these areas, to see what is or isn't there.Got scuba?

[hokie]

A few years back I read about an early ocean mapping technique that discussed observing the path of a satellite as an indicator of the surface below the satellite. The satellite was looking at the ocean. This showed that the oceans are drawn to the continents by their gravitation attraction. There is a '130 foot hill' of water leading up to the North American continent if I recall correctly. The top of the oceans do not form exactly the smooth spherical shape because of differences in gravity. The existence of 'bumps' of water in the ocean imply the existence of seamounts and other features. This is coupled with sonar of the ocean bottoms. That gets tricky because certain bottom sediments do not reflect sonar as well as others. Unlike a land map no one is on the bottom of the ocean with a theodolite validating the maps.

[EHocking]

Geological Answer, keep a weather eye out:

http://www.topix.com/forum/science/geology/TBEJV7S5R4VBP042JKotA got his answer 2 days ago - transverse faults.

His response?
"Fault lines"...? Really...?
Please take a moment to review the series further south. One set of lines seem to 'radiate' out from one point, er 'port'.
Can you point to an above sea level example of intersecting fault lines?
Some have argued that the lines are non-existent, that they are an artifact of the mapping process.

Here, ya go.

Displacement. Movement of faults can produce offset (http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/DisplayImage.cfm?ID=65) of beds on either side of the fault surface. In this photograph, there is obvious offset caused by intersecting normal faults (http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/DisplayImage.cfm?ID=65).

(with photograph (http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/files/OGL98058.jpg)of an example of same).

[Ashles]

Read the material...
I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Objects draw water to them... what do you mean?

[EHocking]

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Objects draw water to them... what do you mean?It will be in response to the page I linked to,

"Satellite bathymetry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathymetry) uses satellites to bounce radar off of the ocean surface. Gravity differences caused by undersea features allow it to see highs and lows mirrored on the oceans surface. For instance, undersea mountains have a lot of mass, they "weigh a lot". This extra mass causes water to be attracted to them and causes a mound on the sea surface. These high areas would not be perceptible to the eye, but the precise measurements of satellites can detect them."

Although satellite bathymetry returns data that is too coarse to produce the detail that is being discussed by KotA. Here's and interesting article on satellite vs sonar bathymetric data gathering (http://www.hydro-international.com/issues/articles/id871-Bathymetry_From_Space.html).

[Foolmewunz]

King,
Have you actually sent questions off to any geologists or oceanographers? Or are you just "waiting" as in "hoping one will pass through the thread"?
I believe we have a couple of geologists on the Forums - isn't Soapy Sam one? (And he works ocean rigs.) Why don't you PM him. Or Kitten - I think she was working ocean surveys with the folks from Woods Hole.

[King of the Americas]

King,
Have you actually sent questions off to any geologists or oceanographers? Or are you just "waiting" as in "hoping one will pass through the thread"?
I believe we have a couple of geologists on the Forums - isn't Soapy Sam one? (And he works ocean rigs.) Why don't you PM him. Or Kitten - I think she was working ocean surveys with the folks from Woods Hole.

I sent a couple of e-mails to associate professors, and I started the thread previously referenced. Therein, one geologist suggested it was a fault line. I haven't heard back from my follow-up yet.

Neither "Soapy Sam" nor "Kitten" have an active account...

[Skeptic Ginger]

I have a few feelers out for some scientific input. So far I'm still waiting.

[Foolmewunz]

I sent a couple of e-mails to associate professors, and I started the thread previously referenced. Therein, one geologist suggested it was a fault line. I haven't heard back from my follow-up yet.

Neither "Soapy Sam" nor "Kitten" have an active account...

So I'm trying to put this in perspective. You've no doubt uncovered a great find - Google Earth Proof of Extraterrestrial Visitors in the depths of the Atlantic Ocean, but you can't find Users in the Member List just by scrolling upwards and doing a couple of clicks?

Soapy Sam
http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=741
Join Date
23rd October 2002
Total Posts
16,585
Soapy hasn't been on line for a couple of weeks - he may be heading off to a rig, or might be on a holiday.

Kitten
http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=1402
Join Date
5th September 2003
Total Posts
1,373
Kitten was on line at 6 p.m. Tuesday night US time.

[Larch_Noble]

It's outside the formal "triangle".

Vaguely creepy, as I used to believe in the 'Bermuda Triangle' mysticism myself.

So small. :P

[Sean84]

I sent a couple of e-mails to associate professors, and I started the thread previously referenced. Therein, one geologist suggested it was a fault line. I haven't heard back from my follow-up yet.

Neither "Soapy Sam" nor "Kitten" have an active account...

Since this geologist is apparently a professional whose opinion you took some stock in, why is his answer unsatisfactory and in need of a second opinion?

I ask because it seems you won't be satisfied with a mundane "naturally created" answer. Despite your answer to my previous question I still feel like you're trying to find an explanation that justifies a preconceived notion (something paranormal).

[Correa Neto]

And this geologist is still expecting KotA's evidence for mushroom-shaped oceanic islands prone to sinking...

Not to mention that he is tired of pointing out that straight lines and 90-degrees junctions are far from being unlikely in nature.

[Ersby]

And this geologist is still expecting KotA's evidence for mushroom-shaped oceanic islands prone to sinking...


Sorry for not going through the whole thread to dig out the context of KoA's claim, but I've heard of these. The story goes (the one I heard was Chinese in origin) they appear on the horizon and anyone who goes to investigate was never seen again.

Then, in the age of video cameras being everywhere, they were seen, and filmed and it turned out to be a mirage. One of these...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fata_Morgana_(mirage)

but they did look like mushrooms.

[King of the Americas]

So I'm trying to put this in perspective. You've no doubt uncovered a great find - Google Earth Proof of Extraterrestrial Visitors in the depths of the Atlantic Ocean, but you can't find Users in the Member List just by scrolling upwards and doing a couple of clicks?

Soapy Sam
http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=741
Join Date
23rd October 2002
Total Posts
16,585
Soapy hasn't been on line for a couple of weeks - he may be heading off to a rig, or might be on a holiday.

Kitten
http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=1402
Join Date
5th September 2003
Total Posts
1,373
Kitten was on line at 6 p.m. Tuesday night US time.

Granted...I've only used the PM feature here a couple of times, but I 'tried' to send both of those posters the same message, asking that they check this thread out. I got back a message failed, because they couldn't locate the accounts.

Regardless, invite them to take a look see.

[Correa Neto]

Uh... No, that was not he case. The claim was that under the surface of the sea, atolls and other islands surrounded by coral reefs would look like mushrooms. Eventually they would collapse and sink Atlantis-style.

I showed him that no known oceanic island has such a morphology and that the origin of atolls was known since Darwin. He said he was going to find some link to back his claim. I am still waiting. I may be wrong, but it seems just like one of those cases where the individual does not want to acknoweledge that his/hers point/beliefs are flawed.

I suspect its the same case of this thread. The will to believe in some submerged civilization is just too strong and/or valuable for him to acknowledge that the features are natural and/or data processing artifacts. I hope to be proven wrong.

[King of the Americas]

Since this geologist is apparently a professional whose opinion you took some stock in, why is his answer unsatisfactory and in need of a second opinion?

I ask because it seems you won't be satisfied with a mundane "naturally created" answer. Despite your answer to my previous question I still feel like you're trying to find an explanation that justifies a preconceived notion (something paranormal).

Something 'abnormal', is what I think this is, firstly.

Second, you wonder why I'd seek a second opinion???

Are you kidding? I'll seek a hundred opinions...the more the merrier!

ONE geologist says "fault line", so I end the discussion!? THAT's nuts.

[King of the Americas]

Uh... No, that was not he case. The claim was that under the surface of the sea, atolls and other islands surrounded by coral reefs would look like mushrooms. Eventually they would collapse and sink Atlantis-style.

I showed him that no known oceanic island has such a morphology and that the origin of atolls was known since Darwin. He said he was going to find some link to back his claim. I am still waiting. I may be wrong, but it seems just like one of those cases where the individual does not want to acknoweledge that his/hers point/beliefs are flawed.

I suspect its the same case of this thread. The will to believe in some submerged civilization is just too strong and/or valuable for him to acknowledge that the features are natural and/or data processing artifacts. I hope to be proven wrong.

Then let's do that right now.

I found no evidence for the case I made. I 'heard' it from a History Channel broadcast, and that this how it is how Bermuda is also shaped, AND due to sink. I brought the assertion here, for confirmation. As happens ALL THE TIME, I was set straight.

I was wrong.

I'd like to further add, that this wasn't the first time, AND it likely won't be the last time.

I come here because I find that more often than not, someone here has better information than I have on a matter. And, most of my questions can be fielded.

I'm not here to be wrong, and continue to be wrong, even after being proven so. When I'm wrong, I 'usually' turn around and say so.

[realpaladin]

Then let's do that right now.

I found no evidence for the case I made. I 'heard' it from a History Channel broadcast, and that this how it is how Bermuda is also shaped, AND due to sink. I brought the assertion here, for confirmation. As happens ALL THE TIME, I was set straight.

I was wrong.

I'd like to further add, that this wasn't the first time, AND it likely won't be the last time.

I come here because I find that more often than not, someone here has better information than I have on a matter. And, most of my questions can be fielded.

I'm not here to be wrong, and continue to be wrong, even after being proven so. When I'm wrong, I 'usually' turn around and say so.

Hear! Hear! Spoken like a true man! I like you! :)

[Correa Neto]

Then let's do that right now.

I found no evidence for the case I made. I 'heard' it from a History Channel broadcast, and that this how it is how Bermuda is also shaped, AND due to sink. I brought the assertion here, for confirmation. As happens ALL THE TIME, I was set straight.

I was wrong.

I'd like to further add, that this wasn't the first time, AND it likely won't be the last time.

I come here because I find that more often than not, someone here has better information than I have on a matter. And, most of my questions can be fielded.

I'm not here to be wrong, and continue to be wrong, even after being proven so. When I'm wrong, I 'usually' turn around and say so.
Where's that big clapping hands smiley?
Not this one->:clap: I mean that big one...

Can't find it, so, accept a hat tipping-> :th:

Moving ahead... From what you saw in this thread so far, do you acknowledge that:
1. There are huge natural linear features at the oceanic (as well as continental) crust
2. Data processing artifacts can create weird effects
3. It doesn't matter if n maps show the feature- all it takes to show the data processing error is the maps having being made with the same data set and the processing
4. There's no evidence to back any claims about that area having ever been expose above the sea surface, no geologic process could do it with that ocean-floor morphology
5. To create such feature, you would need very big machines... Currently we don't have equipment to do such work under the sea and there are no eviences of any such technology in our past.

So, don't you think that explaining those features as artificial is a bit uhm... Baseles?

[King of the Americas]

Where's that big clapping hands smiley?
Not this one->:clap: I mean that big one...

Can't find it, so, accept a hat tipping-> :th:

Moving ahead... From what you saw in this thread so far, do you acknowledge that:
1. There are huge natural linear features at the oceanic (as well as continental) crust
2. Data processing artifacts can create weird effects
3. It doesn't matter if n maps show the feature- all it takes to show the data processing error is the maps having being made with the same data set and the processing
4. There's no evidence to back any claims about that area having ever been expose above the sea surface, no geologic process could do it with that ocean-floor morphology
5. To create such feature, you would need very big machines... Currently we don't have equipment to do such work under the sea and there are no eviences of any such technology in our past.

So, don't you think that explaining those features as artificial is a bit uhm... Baseles?

1. Yes, there are.
2. Yes, they can.
3. Agreed, data + processing = map. It shouldn't matter who does the data collecting.
4. Wait. The oceans have NOT 'always' been where they are, at their present depth.
5. Big projects don't require big machines, just big stacks of cash.

I don't recall "explaining these features AS artificial"...I have said previously that I couldn't confirm they even exist, much less make claims as to their origin.

[leafman91]

First, this isn't 'one' line. There's lots of them, some that radiate out, and others that intersect each other.

How visible the the Great Wall of China from this level?

:confused:

[leafman91]

5. Big projects don't require big machines, just big stacks of cash.

At this point I fell the need to mention one phrase:

Secret sector NWO crap

Ignoring that one phrase, there is no possible way on Earth one would acquire or even store such a large stack of cash needed to permanently carve the ocean floor, without getting serious media attention, given that we are ignoring that one phrase.

For a start, the geologic of it all would be seriously warped.

[Correa Neto]

4. Wait. The oceans have NOT 'always' been where they are, at their present depth.
True, but here enter the subjects named scale and nature of the tectonic movements...

I'll try to provide a simple explanation (as any simplifications, it will have flaws). Average ocean levels along the geologic time oscilates roughly +200m; this figure is far from being anywhere close what would take to expose that area above sea level.

This put, you have to take in to account the nature of tectonic movments. Ocean floors (composed by oceanic crust) are created at mid-oceanic ridges and gradually move away from them. It means plates move horizontally and vertical movements are relatively small. Big vertical movements are mostly confined to orogenic belts; wider areas are subject to epirogenesis and isostasy. Now, orogenic belts can raise slices of oceanic crust above sea level and build islad arcs such Japan and the Caribbeans. However, these are linear features and easy to recognize in terms of lithologic assemblages and structures- that's not the case of that area. Subduction zones affect oceanic crust, not continental crust and are also linear features, associated with orogenic belts; once again, this can be ruled out. Isostasy and epeirogenesis can't raise or depress terrains as much as it would be required.

You might want to take a look at ODP site (http://www-odp.tamu.edu/) to check if there are oceanic drillholes nearby. I can guarantee you that a drillcore with evidence of subaereal exposition of oceanic crust in such a place would most likely result in a major Nature article.

To sum up, sorry, that area nas never been above sea level or anywhere close to it.

5. Big projects don't require big machines, just big stacks of cash.

I don't recall "explaining these features AS artificial"...I have said previously that I couldn't confirm they even exist, much less make claims as to their origin.
Nope. To create those features (if they are not processing artifacts), you would need to have big machines, similar to those currently used at open-pit mines and they would have to be able to operate underwater. We don't have them now and I bet it would take some technological breakthroughs to build them.

By the way, what would you do with the material removed from the trenches?

[Stankeye]

I don't recall "explaining these features AS artificial"...I have said previously that I couldn't confirm they even exist, much less make claims as to their origin.

Given the resolution that these satellites gather this data, these objects are huge.

I found another right angle in the mouth of the Cook inlet in Alaska. I was looking there as we do work for the oil and gas industry and that is an area I am familiar with. We have side scan sonar done for locating pipelines and finding any rocks or obstructions near them for when we work on them.

It's a pretty cool graphical representation of whats down there when you get a high resolution image done. The pipeline and it's shadow, rocks and theirs. You also get a lot of clutter and garbage as well depending on a lot of different factors.

Ultimately if these straight lines that make geometric shapes are really there..they are very large, larger than the great wall of China would be if you plopped it down there and did satellite bathymetry on it.

That's my input to JREF for this year. ;)

[King of the Americas]

Dr. Dunbar of Baylor University in Texas says:

"This is a good question! These are very strange linear features. There are three natural types of long linear features on the seafloor. There are (1) fracture zones, which are fossil transform faults that formed at the mid-ocean spreading ridges and are moved off the ridges in time as a result of seafloor spreading, (2) active and fossil spreading ridges, where new ocean crust is currently or once was forming, and (3) hot spot tracks, which are linear chains of submarine volcanoes believed to form over deep upwelling currents of hot rock in the interior of Earth. The lines you have pointed out do not appear to be any on these recognized features and do not appear on other maps of the seafloor. I suspect that they are in fact artifacts of the data that was used to make the image and are not real features of the seafloor.

Data on seafloor topography comes in part from ships that measure the water depth using acoustic sounding devices as they cross the oceans. If a slightly different speed of sound is used or the instrument is not calibrated properly, a given ship track may produce water depths that are systematically deeper or shallower than they should been. If this error is not found and corrected, the resulting map will contain an apparent linear ridge or valley along the line of that ship track. Some of the linear features you point out look suspiciously like ship tracks. For example, one of the linear features you point out is a nearly perfect straight line that emerges from the straight of Florida and goes directly to Bahamas Islands. This is hard to explain geologically, but is a perfectly reasonable ship track. Florida is home to several ocean-going research institutions. Another of the linear features crosses the Florida-Bahamas line and appears to extend from Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts to San Juan Puerto Rica. That would be a logical ship track of a vessel from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. So, my guess is that all of the anomalous linear features you are looking at are artifacts from the ship tracks used to make the map."

Regards,

Dr. Dunbar

[Skeptic Ginger]

Dr. Dunbar of Baylor University in Texas says:

"This is a good question! These are very strange linear features. There are three natural types of long linear features on the seafloor. There are (1) fracture zones, which are fossil transform faults that formed at the mid-ocean spreading ridges and are moved off the ridges in time as a result of seafloor spreading, (2) active and fossil spreading ridges, where new ocean crust is currently or once was forming, and (3) hot spot tracks, which are linear chains of submarine volcanoes believed to form over deep upwelling currents of hot rock in the interior of Earth. The lines you have pointed out do not appear to be any on these recognized features and do not appear on other maps of the seafloor. I suspect that they are in fact artifacts of the data that was used to make the image and are not real features of the seafloor.

Data on seafloor topography comes in part from ships that measure the water depth using acoustic sounding devices as they cross the oceans. If a slightly different speed of sound is used or the instrument is not calibrated properly, a given ship track may produce water depths that are systematically deeper or shallower than they should been. If this error is not found and corrected, the resulting map will contain an apparent linear ridge or valley along the line of that ship track. Some of the linear features you point out look suspiciously like ship tracks. For example, one of the linear features you point out is a nearly perfect straight line that emerges from the straight of Florida and goes directly to Bahamas Islands. This is hard to explain geologically, but is a perfectly reasonable ship track. Florida is home to several ocean-going research institutions. Another of the linear features crosses the Florida-Bahamas line and appears to extend from Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts to San Juan Puerto Rica. That would be a logical ship track of a vessel from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. So, my guess is that all of the anomalous linear features you are looking at are artifacts from the ship tracks used to make the map."

Regards,

Dr. DunbarThis is the same answer I am getting elsewhere. And it makes sense. But once again, why isn't this addressed more specifically in the sources we've been looking at? It's as if no one has checked to be certain that is what these lines are. They just say, I think that's all they are. And here they are hugely prominent on these maps.

I'm more and more convinced they are artifact. But I'd still like a more definitive statement, "Yes they are!"

[hokie]

There are many fascinating methods of imaging that can tell us about objects on the nanoscale to the galactic scale. All of these techniques have their issues. For example, there is paper that found a +/- 20% object volume difference in people reading MRIs. Imaging and interpreting images is difficult as we see here with the images provided by online sources. The same is true of many other methods. I think this thread has been a constructive lesson in showing how some imaging methods are done and the problems with the final product.

[King of the Americas]

This is the same answer I am getting elsewhere. And it makes sense. But once again, why isn't this addressed more specifically in the sources we've been looking at? It's as if no one has checked to be certain that is what these lines are. They just say, I think that's all they are. And here they are hugely prominent on these maps.

I'm more and more convinced they are artifact. But I'd still like a more definitive statement, "Yes they are!"

I asked the good doctor for a link to a map w/o these lines, so we'll see.

THAT should indicate that they are a mapping anomaly.

They showed up in every map I've seen, so far...

[hokie]

The problem you'll have is that the data comes from the same source. It's costly to get.

When maps are made by companies, that is land maps, do you think every company sends out teams to make maps? Often companies buy the data or they might steal it. I've heard that companies often put mistakes into their maps. If the mistake shows up in another map it shows copyright infringement.

But back to these maps, my guess is that so few teams are out there making the maps that the maps will likely come from the same source.

[King of the Americas]

The problem you'll have is that the data comes from the same source. It's costly to get.

When maps are made by companies, that is land maps, do you think every company sends out teams to make maps? Often companies buy the data or they might steal it. I've heard that companies often put mistakes into their maps. If the mistake shows up in another map it shows copyright infringement.

But back to these maps, my guess is that so few teams are out there making the maps that the maps will likely come from the same source.

Try doing a search for "ocean floor maps".

NOTHING, detailed.

I did find this:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-18096638.html

Science World- Feb. 23, 1996

"...the Navy released 'photographs' of the ocean floor, that gave the public its first real
view of the ocean's bottom..."

I have yet to 'see' the actual map, if someone else finds it, please post a link.

[hokie]

When we think of the earth we learn that around 70% of the earth is covered with water. Learning that the underwater maps are so hard to obtain and as yet are often rough it tells us that there is a lot to learn about the 70% of the earth that is under water.

[Skeptic Ginger]

OK, this is getting closer to explaining the images:

From Google Earth forums (http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1201179#Post1201179)

It was an explanation for this image: ‘Atlantis found on Google Earth’ (http://www.theblogofrecord.com/tag/atlantis-found-on-google-earth/)

[Sean84]

By the way, what would you do with the material removed from the trenches?

You'd build a wall around it to keep out the mermongols and hippies. Your arbitrary 150+ mile long undersea trench is prime real estate after all, the resale value alone justifies the multi-trillion dollar expense, not to mention it's tourist attraction value.

[King of the Americas]

OK, this is getting closer to explaining the images:

From Google Earth forums (http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1201179#Post1201179)

It was an explanation for this image: ‘Atlantis found on Google Earth’ (http://www.theblogofrecord.com/tag/atlantis-found-on-google-earth/)

Yeah, that was linked earlier in the thread.

Dr. Dunbar just retorted:

"I do not believe the linear features you pointed out are real bathymetric features on the seafloor and are in fact artifacts of data collected along ship tracks. Two lines of evidence suggest this: (1) Several of the lines extend from port to port, (2) Bathymetric maps based on satellite geoid measurements do not show these features. Note that with modern navigation, ships can steer pretty much any track they want, regardless of wind, current etc."

Alright, one geologist says "fault lines", and another says "imaging artifacts"...

Shall we get one more expert, to break the tie?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yeah, that was linked earlier in the thread.

Dr. Dunbar just retorted:

"I do not believe the linear features you pointed out are real bathymetric features on the seafloor and are in fact artifacts of data collected along ship tracks. Two lines of evidence suggest this: (1) Several of the lines extend from port to port, (2) Bathymetric maps based on satellite geoid measurements do not show these features. Note that with modern navigation, ships can steer pretty much any track they want, regardless of wind, current etc."

Alright, one geologist says "fault lines", and another says "imaging artifacts"...

Shall we get one more expert, to break the tie?I'm convinced the lines are artifact. I believe the actual fault lines appear as different structures.