Two Ocean Floor Anomalies

While browsing today, I came across a headline on one of those clickbait sites that read "Two Enormous Sunken Alien Bases Discovered on Google Earth". (I won't link to the article, but a Google search of that headline will reveal several sites with a similar story.) My curiosity was piqued and I went to the site to read the article. I don't believe for one second that they are alien bases, but the geometry of the "anomalies" is interesting. I loaded up Google Earth and was able to find the locations:

Anomaly One: "Gulf of California anomaly", 26°47'5.93"N, 110°36'49.53"W
Approximate dimensions: 80 miles x 30 miles. Virtually straight lines that intersect at 90° and 45° angles. Also a perfect "U" shaped ridge.



Anomaly Two: "Caribbean Sea anomaly", 14°18'18.83"N, 67°17'2.33"W
Approximate dimensions: 90 miles x 20 miles. Two intercepting zig-zag lines (double helix like)



I've tried to verify the images in the NASA World Wind app, but for some reason my version only shows low resolution images (not of just the ocean, but the entire planet). Maybe someone who has a working version can look them up.

Can anyone explain what these are or how they may have been formed?

Those are ship sonar scanning lines, not some anomaly on the ocean floor. What they're looking for apart from shipwrecks and simple cataloging of the seabed, I dunno.

still, as big as they are....it's a hail of an anomaly, huh!!!

like the underwater base there also.....from a thread ATS

originally posted by: SentientCentenarian
Those are ship sonar scanning lines, not some anomaly on the ocean floor. What they're looking for apart from shipwrecks and simple cataloging of the seabed, I dunno.

I second that
Sry no submerge alien base there

a reply to: Shadoefax

I definitely think I see something in these photos that is not of any kind of natural origin.

90% angles? Sorry, the probability of them not being natural but rather being man made is overwhelming.

a reply to: SentientCentenarian

I've puzzled over these interesting markings, lines, and designs before on Google Earth. Very nice to finally have an explanation! Thank you.

I made a thread about the two other really big ones off the coast of Peru..

People shrugged it off as a satellite picture issue, im still not so sure though as the perfect patterns seem really odd

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: SentientCentenarian
Those are ship sonar scanning lines, not some anomaly on the ocean floor.

It that is so, I wonder why Google Earth bothers to include them. If they do not portray physical properties of the ocean floor, what would be the purpose of aggregating the data and implementing it? It would be more honest to just show nothing but a flat, featureless surface.

a reply to: Shadoefax

Here is from today's stories on this "anomally" from DISCLOSETV.COM. The site itself and story are suspect...

www.disclose.tv...

originally posted by: antiguaEstrella
a reply to: Shadoefax

I definitely think I see something in these photos that is not of any kind of natural origin.

90% angles? Sorry, the probability of them not being natural but rather being man made is overwhelming.

They are man made. They are sonar scanning lines. It's basically where they have used sonar to scan the bottom of the ocean and so that particular area has more information/resolution. The ships go in straight lines. It's as if they had a blurry picture and made small portions unblurry.

originally posted by: Shadoefax

originally posted by: SentientCentenarian
Those are ship sonar scanning lines, not some anomaly on the ocean floor.

It that is so, I wonder why Google Earth bothers to include them. If they do not portray physical properties of the ocean floor, what would be the purpose of aggregating the data and implementing it? It would be more honest to just show nothing but a flat, featureless surface.

Why would you remove data? Over time more and more data will be available and the ocean floor will become more featureful. What would be the point of removing information?

I think I'm missing something here. Are these patterns physically on the ocean floor?

If the answer is "yes" and they were created by sonar (and sonar is the primary method used to determine ocean floor features), why don't similar patterns appear everywhere on Google Earth?

If the answer is "no" and they are only artifacts appearing on sonar images and don't represent true, physical features, then what is the point of including them in Google Earth? And again, why don't similar patterns appear everywhere on Google Earth?

a reply to: Shadoefax

There is no physical pattern, no alteration. It's basically a part of the ocean floor we have high rez images of because it was mapped with sonar. The ocean around it is the regular low resolution images.

The lines seen here show the paths taken by ships using sonar to map small sections of the ocean floor in greater detail.

While these formations are human-made, they are only made of data. In other words, there are no physical lines on the ocean floor. These lines are artifacts of the ocean floor mapping process.

oceanservice.noaa.gov...

originally posted by: antiguaEstrella
a reply to: Shadoefax

I definitely think I see something in these photos that is not of any kind of natural origin.

90% angles? Sorry, the probability of them not being natural but rather being man made is overwhelming.

I see that argument quite a bit, not sure where it originates but nature says otherwise-

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Signals

This time it is man made though, but you are correct. Sometimes it looks too good to be true .. and ends up just being nature.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

There is no physical pattern, no alteration. It's basically a part of the ocean floor we have high rez images of because it was mapped with sonar. The ocean around it is the regular low resolution images.

The lines seen here show the paths taken by ships using sonar to map small sections of the ocean floor in greater detail.

Well, if the patterns are supposed to contain high-resolution images, they are not evident in Google Earth. I can zoom in on my backyard and see weeds in the flowerbed, but I can see no extra detail when zooming in the sonar images. In my opinion, it would be better just to leave these sonar created false images out completely. They do nothing but advance conspiracy theories and confuse Google Earth users.

a reply to: Shadoefax

It is perfectly evident. I don't know why you want less data. It's been explained why you want to keep arguing is beyond me.

www.gearthblog.com...

I will prefer more data every time. Anyone who sees conspiracy theories here and doesn't acknowledge the facts is someone who will see them no matter what you do.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to:

It is perfectly evident.

With all due respect, no ... it is not evident at all. If you zoom in to any spot that is supposed to show high-resolution imagery, all you see is a featureless blue screen.

I don't know why you want less data.

I want to see any data that represents a true image of the ocean floor, not arbitrary boundary lines of areas that are supposed to contain high-resolution imagery but actually don't.

a reply to: Shadoefax

I have linked several pages that explain in detail and prove there is more data. It seems you want it to somehow be bad and thus refuse to change your mind despite evidence.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Shadoefax

There is no physical pattern, no alteration. It's basically a part of the ocean floor we have high rez images of because it was mapped with sonar. The ocean around it is the regular low resolution images.

The lines seen here show the paths taken by ships using sonar to map small sections of the ocean floor in greater detail.

While these formations are human-made, they are only made of data. In other words, there are no physical lines on the ocean floor. These lines are artifacts of the ocean floor mapping process.

oceanservice.noaa.gov...

Right.

Sonar anomalies are to underwater bases as drones and ball lightning are to UFOs.

To me it's plausible that these are all just convenient fake excuses.

Totally unverifiable and thus beyond suspicion?