It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Woah! Did I just see the entire sea floor lift up?!

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:01 PM
Just for the record, most Americans are not familiar with the term Boxing Day (December 26th), so we do not know it as the Boxing Day Tsunami.

The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake was an undersea megathrust earthquake that occurred at 00:58:53 UTC on December 26, 2004, with an epicentre off the west coast of Sumatra, Indonesia. The quake itself is known by the scientific community as the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake.[3][4] The resulting tsunami is given various names, including the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Asian Tsunami, Indonesian Tsunami, and Boxing Day Tsunami.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:04 PM
Now he's suggesting a nuke went off and the rov was just stabilizing itself.

[edit on 3-8-2010 by boomadatigger]

[edit on 3-8-2010 by boomadatigger]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:16 PM
reply to post by lasertaglover

Yes I remember this tragic interaction between Earth and humans... Thank you for clearifying this, that was a major quake that spread around that whole region. Cannot be compared to this seafloor rise?

[edit on 8/3/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:20 PM
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


The Tsunami was caused by the sea floor rising! For the 328989238 time.

As well as the sideways movement between the plates, the sea floor is estimated to have risen by several metres, displacing an estimated 30 km3 (7 cu mi) of water and triggering devastating tsunami waves. The waves did not originate from a point source, as was inaccurately depicted in some illustrations of their paths of travel, but rather radiated outwards along the entire 1,600 km (994 mi) length of the rupture (acting as a line source). This greatly increased the geographical area over which the waves were observed, reaching as far as Mexico, Chile, and the Arctic. The raising of the sea floor significantly reduced the capacity of the Indian Ocean, producing a permanent rise in the global sea level by an estimated 0.1 mm (0.01 cm or 0.0001 m)

[edit on 3-8-2010 by tommyb0y]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by tommyb0y

K and thinks that is the number they are paying you huh
? Anyway I am through with this, the message is out some see light some prefer darkness we shall all see eventually and really I hope I am wrong about much I have sensed but the sad thing is when I sense these things the bs follows near by... Nice debate catch you around

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

The only people that have been right up until now are those that try to debunk all this constant speculative crap made by attention seeking you tubers! Has it not hit home yet?

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:31 PM
[edit on 3-8-2010 by boomadatigger]

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:34 PM
It appears there was an earthquake in that region yesterday. Can anyone make out the time on the vid and does it correlate with the earthquake report?

Reed, a retired Texaco geologist-geophysicist who has been studying the region's geology for over 40 years, says the accepted theory of a quiet geologic evolution of the Gulf of Mexico Basin is fundamentally flawed and needs to be revised.

According to him, the Gulf was and is tectonically active -- and it is the likely origin for not only the New Madrid seismic activity, but also for the Middleton Place-Summerville seismic zone near Charleston, S.C.

"For all the years I have worked the Gulf of Mexico Basin I have been forced to accept the 'passive' Gulf formation theory, which holds that the only movement in the basin is updip sedimentary loading that moved the salt southward," Reed said. "But there is little evidence to support this theory, and it doesn't fit what is observed geologically or geophysically.

"As Hugh Wilson said (1993), 'It would be geologically unusual for such a large basin as the Gulf of Mexico to remain almost tectonically undisturbed for 170 million years while major orogenic disturbances repeatedly struck bordering areas.'"

Reed, over the years, has gathered evidence that supports plate motion in the Gulf basin. Thick salt and sedimentary sequences in the basin mask this tectonic motion, but there is enough basin and peripheral evidence to show plate readjustment is occurring -- evidence, he says, in the form of volcanics, earthquakes and rift zones that are accompanied by magnetic, refraction, seismic and gravity data.


posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:46 PM

Originally posted by smash_the_system
No wonder they won't show what's going off down there! Thad Allen says that everything's HUNKY dory and the Static Kills almost ready to be put into place. Yeah right. Don't wanna go off topic but wasn't there a quake in Louisiana yesterday?? I was also reading on beforeitsnews today that a nuclear charge was used somewhere around the area..

That bit of sea floor definitely looks unstable

really? earthquake? nope none down here, I am in Lafourche Parish, no shaky here. Well I was in N.O. all day yesterday, nothing shook there either.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:47 PM
Nope, I saw the ROV tilt. That is false sense of fear.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:50 PM
reply to post by boomadatigger

The probe moved.

Because ground is not elastic. That would be considered a 6er or something in Earthquake scales. It would also bee seen above.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:53 PM
so the Ocean just farted?

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:57 PM
reply to post by janon


Excuse me, what was that again? Did you say it appears as if the Rover moved and not the ocean floor?

How is it that one person can see something so definitively, and then someone else can come in, watch the exact same video, and come up with something so outlandishly opposite of what the video itself shows? I am totally perplexed here.

Let me ask you something. Did you see the information that NASA released about a solar tsunami getting ready to hit earth today? Out of curiosity, what is YOUR version of what that article says? Because, I see one thing from that article, but, I think your version of what that article says will be entirely different from the point of the article itself. I happen to believe that your version of reality may be in total contradiction of reality itself. So, I am genuinely asking...

What is your version?

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:57 PM
This sort of stuff is really trivializing ATS. Boy has this place changed!

The Rover moves (oh my god!) and when it moves it stirs up the silt on the ocean floor (double, oh my god!).

Come on folks, this is even ridiculous for the Skunk Works.

12 flags! For what exactly folks?

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:02 PM
Just some food for thought....

but these methane releases are quite normal no? I think claiming that it was a nuke going off or an irregular methane explosion without any evidence other than a video with the seafloor rising the going back to normal is not much evidence at all.

if it was a nuke I would have sworn that the seafloor would have gone down a couple of feet or at least inches.... it went back to normal...

Plus in the distance it looks like in the background there was a gas release.


posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:03 PM
It looks to me exactly like the robotic arm remains motionless, but the camera is tilted down and then up. The cameras are frequently adjusted independently of any movement of the ROV or its robotic arms. I've seen similar events many times.

As someone else noted, it seems unlikely that such mass motion of that large an area of the sea floor would result in such a small disturbance of surface debris, silt, etc.

I cannot prove that this is what it was, so I will not state categorically that it was what it looked like to me. But that's what it looked like to me.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:15 PM
MAN, I was fine until all the" watch this," watch this""OMG stuff! jesus did YOU think people wanted to hear you running your yap the whole time? I had to turn it off!

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:22 PM
The best way to see if the rover camera moves up and down is to look at the object on the right side that is stationary, it looks like a mechanism/pump thing for the robot arm.

If you scroll through the flash, you can see the ROV is not moving. Grabbing the bar and scroll through the footage a few times you will see it is the ground moving.

And by the way, everyone in this project is very much aware of the banolith below the seafloor-

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:23 PM
reply to post by Cajun Raptor

Were you near Clinton,La. around 11:30pm on Sunday night. That is where it is being reported to have happened and it was a 3.0 magnitude quake according to the USGS. A quake hasn't been felt in Louisiana since 1967. So yes there was an EQ down there.

posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 03:25 PM
Well BP must know we are seeing this and wondering what it is or isn't so why don't they just tell us and put our minds at ease.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in