Google clears up Atlantis debris

No, it's not Atlantis, and it's not an alien seaweed farm either.

(Credit: Google Earth)

Guess this is the kind of tech news people really want to read. There was an overwhelming response to our post about Google denying that its Google Earth ocean-floor mapping software had unearthed the mythical sunken island of Atlantis.

I'm talking dozens of comments, 6,000+ Diggs, and an in-box full of fun messages containing everything from alternate theories to moral support from fellow Lost fans who want to see the show's array of wacky maps explained (blast door, please!). It was great to hear from you all, and thanks for chiming in.

Without a doubt, Google was swamped by even more conspiracy-theory feedback, and ultimately they pulled in Walter Smith of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and David Sandwell of UC San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography, two scientists who helped gather some of the ocean-floor data in Google Earth, to clear it all up in a post on the company's official blog.

"Some have speculated that these are the plow marks of seafloor farming by aliens," the post said of the undersea grid pattern off the coast of northwest Africa that had sparked the speculation. "One theory that's gained more traction is that these marks might be the ruins of the lost city of Atlantis. If that were the case, some of the city blocks would have to be over eight miles long--that's about 50 times the size of a city block in New York City."

The blog post expanded on Google's original explanation of the odd formation: "These marks are what we call 'ship tracks,'" it explained. "You see, it's actually quite hard to measure the depth of the ocean. Sunlight, lasers, and other electromagnetic radiation can travel less than 100 feet below the surface, yet the typical depth in the ocean is more than two and a half miles. Sound waves are more effective. By measuring the time it takes for sound to travel from a ship to the sea floor and back, you can get an idea of how far away the sea floor is. Since this process--known as echosounding--only maps a strip of the sea floor under the ship, the maps it produces often show the path the ship took, hence the 'ship tracks.'"

There are other "ship track" patterns visible on Google Earth ocean maps, Smith and Sandwell added, like one off the coast of Hawaii.

But the post refused to outright deny that Atlantis might yet be found through the use of Google Earth. Google is hoping that the resolution of undersea footage will continue to improve, which will take both money and time. "It's great to have so many sets of eyes looking at the data currently in Google Earth and asking questions about what it represents," the blog post concluded. "We and our fellow oceanographers are constantly improving the resolution of our seafloor maps, so we promise to work with Google to keep the virtual explorers out there busy." In other words: never stop searching.

In bygone centuries there were the likes of Magellan and Columbus and Marco Polo. These days, I suppose, we have Google.

[mike_ekim]

So, why do ship tracks only appear in some areas?

[rapier1]

Because not every section of the ocean has ship traffic taking echo soundings that are then bought by google over it. Its important to remember that ocean going vessels don't just strike out willy nilly into the ocean. They generally travel across well known paths - those shipping lanes you are always hearing about.

[fredtheviking]

Good question. It could be that the area in question was recently graph and the data was not "clean up". It is not unlikely that the ship(s) that were graphing the area were leaving "lines". These "lines" would form grids not unlike one would see in the city. A simple and logical explaination, but claiming it is Altanis seems more simple, but is not. We would need more than just grids in the Ocean.

[ralfthedog]

I think it is Sea Marmots. sea marmots are like space marmots Only they live in the sea not space.

Fear sea marmots.

[atomD21]

The Marmot uprising is at hand! Quickly, to the shelters!

[ThatIsWhatSheSaid]

Hahhahaa. Said so staidly.

'Fear sea marmots.'

[Sfumato420]

Just a thought. I would think that the City of Atlantis would have a higher culture, and thus the design of their city would have a more intricate pattern than just a rectangle.

[molotov]

Not at all. The grid design is a huge advacement and is only applied in newly developed cities. Thus the Atlantis' planners were so advanced that they applied the grid 12,000 years before us.

[geneb19]

According to Plato, the city of Atlantis was formed of concentric rings. So this grid being shown couldn't be Atlantis. I'm quite sure that Aquaman has the answer...so just email him and resolve this whole issue.

[fdunn3]

OMG... That is the lost city of Luckenbach, TX.

Call Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings right away!

[Cnede]

Ships do not make right angle turns no matter what they are using, please they need to come up with a better explanation. Ships, boats, ocean vessels etc, cannot make right angle turns, please look at the image again particularly at the edges. .

[crazynexus]

pay attention to what they said.. you're talking a large swath of ocean in that one image. When zoomed out far enough, like this image is, ANY turn by a ship will look like a 90 degree bend! go look at an aerial photo sometime.. the further you zoom out, the more straight a road will appear, even if it is very curvy. I stare at aerial photogs all day, it's a very basic principle.

[PolarExplorer]

Actually ships can essentially make right angle turns. They can do 360 degree turns in a single spot, they can move sideways. With the advent of bow thrusters, stern thrusters, Z-drives, etc... any good shiphandler can make a 90 degree turn like this. There is even newer technology where command and control computer systems that can do this automatically.

[xxrrxx2002]

It's just your assumption that the image was produced in one-go and in real time. They could have started & stopped at different times and the image u r seeing now is just a composite image.

[Rick Cavaretti]

Atlantis? Isn't that a show on Sci-Fi?

[mementh]

no no no no.. that landed either in the Pacific or in San Francisco Bay but you can't see it due to the Cloak.

Boy are they going to have trouble when they go to launch that thing though... Wonder what excuse they will use.
*wink* ;)

[t8]

Google is removing evidence of Atlantis so they can put a data center on it and utilize any ancient technology that is there.

[NoVista]

Think of Albert Speer and his buddy with the toothbrush mustache -- they liked BIG.

Therefore, one might conclude that is where some of the 1945 German scientists went -- not all escaped to South America. They've greatly improved the original 1944 flying discs. And the foo fighters.

[jpmccloud01]

LOOK, what ever that area is, it's more than their saying, but not Atlantis, good because atlantis is a holly grail idea, but some type of artifact site of something long ago possible. Google said something about other area on google earth that look similar. Where on that cite do you see anything closely resembling this. Answer non. I think Google messed up and isn't willing to say "oops". If not than there should be a look to see if anything is out there to end this mystery. It looks like a site, smells like a site, let's see if it's a site

[porscheguy360]

I agree with jpmccloud01. I don't think it's Atlantis, but Google's definitely trying to hide a mistake.

1) If you zoom in, you noticed that it says the data is from SIO, NOAA, THE US NAVY, and GEBCO. US Navy = Pentagon. Not saying a conspiracy theory, it's just that I'm sure the Navy has a whole lot of information that's not public domain, and maybe this was a hiccup.
2) If you zoom out/in to an eye altitude of approx. 800 miles, the formation is still clearly visible. Personally, it's around 800mi that I can first see it while zooming in. If you do a quick little survey of the rest of the ocean, you'll notice there is no such other feature. You have the assorted trenches, ridges, sonar scans, etc., but nothing of this complexity. Also, those other sonar scans Google presents as evidence off the coast of Hawaii...those aren't visible until around 200 miles up, not nearly as complex.
3) The location is bizarre. If this feature were close to shore or a lot closer to the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, I could believe that it was just a coincidence. But it sits just outside of where the ridges end. And you don't decide to turn on the sonar in the middle of the ocean for s***s and giggles. Either it's on from the moment you leave (so as to maximize the scanning that gets done - in which case you could trace these lines all the way back to shore AND the scanning would be uniform) or you're looking for something in particular.

[lrsmith77]

its the little feet on bottom of the ships that leaves tracks you dummies