this pattern is not the result of radar scanning by boats given the extremly large area of the pattern,as said larger than wales.

are they saying a few boats spent all their time mapping an area larger than wales during which the same malfunction was present throughout.

find me a boat which travels in a perfect rectangle....not gonna happen.

it would have taken an age for boats to scan an area this size.

i believe atlantis to be the habitation of future human who travelled and lived in the past in a secluded island so as to not alter the time line, and who were subsequently destroyed when future ai decided to end humanities line.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by welivefortheson]

I think I will add one more theory just to juice things up a bit. Since it seems too big to be a "city", too architectural to be scan lines from boats on the surface, could it be something else altogether?

I propose that it could indeed have something to do with modern day "aliens" who have established some sort of underwater base. After all many people have reported seeing UFO's entering and leaving the water. Where do they go?
Could this be it?
If so, it would certainly be something that the PTB would want to keep hidden. They would rush to explain it away with any story they could ASAP - therefore "scan lines".

Doesn't it depend on where these images are being taken from? If they really are 'satellite' images, then surely nothing that deep in the water could show up?
Even if so, the distortion of the light from the water would be too immense, right?

Originally posted by HiveTyrant
Doesn't it depend on where these images are being taken from? If they really are 'satellite' images, then surely nothing that deep in the water could show up?
Even if so, the distortion of the light from the water would be too immense, right?

I read somewhere, probably on Google, that the satellite data is used by measuring the height of the ocean and then using that information to infer the topography of the ocean floor. It is a technique that yields results much less accurate than sonar. Based on my experience in geology and reading satellite imagery, this is a reasonable explanation. I am a very cynical person, but I don't see this statement as at all unbelievable.

I have looked at some images of water just offshore from land and you can see the bottom and get a good idea of the topography in some places, but as soon as the water is a certain depth, you can't see anything. I would be surprised if one can see beyond 30 meters (98 feet). Also, there are different types of imagery such as infrared which gives a different look at things, but I know nothing about that.

If this is indeed the shadow of Atlantis how did it survive sinking three and half miles below the sea? I thought Atlantis was the victim of a great cataclysm. . . In the picture there's no evidence of destruction or disruption of the sea floor that one would expect if an island had somehow been pulled below the waves. You should see fissures in the sea bed and disturbance!
It's to pristine and perfect to be the fabled Atlantis.

If researchers are basing their search for Atlantis on the writings of Plato, then they won't find it. Plato heard the story of Atlantis from an Egyptian priest, and his descriptions of it are very different from the original Egyptian texts--that's where people should be looking for their answers.