• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Shermer vs. "alternative history" Hancock and Crandall

Your lines only appear oh the trees at a certain resolution. They are not there when zoomed in or out. They go straight over hills and mountains.
They are artifacts resulting from the way Google renders the images.
 
We've tried to explain image artifacts to him before, but it doesn't seem to be going in.

I just want coordinates for the images KotA posts.
I quite like finding what they are...helps pass the time while tests are running.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Your lines only appear oh the trees at a certain resolution. They are not there when zoomed in or out. They go straight over hills and mountains.
They are artifacts resulting from the way Google renders the images.
Click to expand...

Nope...that's what I thought too.

I can show you:

When you pull in and out they appear in a range from like 10,000 feet up to 50,000'ish.

Think of it like an 18 hole golf course. If I blind folded you, and plopped you down at the far edge of a dogleg you might think you were just in a nicely manicured park, only from above or with more exploration could you see you were really on a golf course...but after you escape 50,000, it's all just tree forest with no breaks. Some things are only visible from a certain height, and these end where big river basins pass.
 

Attachments

  • plowedforest.jpg
    plowedforest.jpg
    11.9 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:
John Jones said:
This is one ridiculous thread. His claims are all over the landscape, and he does not hesitate to contradict himself back and forth.

Someone PM me if we ever get back to the beer thing. I once had a recipe for beer made from Kellog's corn flakes. Is that evidence that Kellog's of Battle Creek financed the construction of Gobekli Tepe? Hmm?
Click to expand...

Headed back to denial? And I ain't talking Egypt!
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Fascinating. Can you set out Plato's claim in Classical Greek and walk us through your alternative interpretation?

That will generate much laughter. :)
Click to expand...

I think Plato's tale doesn't take into account the geography of Africa, before this tsunami.

If you look at north africa it looks like a poop-ton of sand came out of the Mediterranean and poured out across the Sahara and through the pillars, then turned south east. Before this sand dump, the Straights and the Pillars had different water passages.

A volcano opposite the wash erupted and or landslid into the sea...I predict, that if we look, we can find and date the volcano that destroyed Atlantis using this sand wash.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
I think Plato's tale doesn't take into account the geography of Africa, before this tsunami.

If you look at north africa it looks like a poop-ton of sand came out of the Mediterranean and poured out across the Sahara and through the pillars, then turned south east. Before this sand dump, the Straights and the Pillars had different water passages.

A volcano opposite the wash erupted and or landslid into the sea...I predict, that if we look, we can find and date the volcano that destroyed Atlantis using this sand wash.
Click to expand...

Another woo-laden, fact-free post with a built-in burden of proof shift (highlighted).
 
John Jones said:
Another woo-laden, fact-free post with a built-in burden of proof shift (highlighted).
Click to expand...

No, that's how "science" works.

You look at evidence, form a hypothesis, test it, THEN make a prediction.

I 'predict' I will find a volcano, and date its eruption by following this sand wash.
 
King of the Americas said:
No, that's how "science" works.



You look at evidence, form a hypothesis, test it, THEN make a prediction.



I 'predict' I will find a volcano, and date its eruption by following this sand wash.
Click to expand...


You’ve repeatedly shown yourself to be colossally ignorant of every subject you’ve touched upon in this thread, and here’s another shining example of it.

You don’t understand “science” then, as peer review and falsifiability are a rather important part of it. Your peers reject your claims, and your claims can be easily be shown to be something else (e.g. image artefacts).
 
King of the Americas said:
No, that's how "science" works.

You look at evidence, form a hypothesis, test it, THEN make a prediction.

I 'predict' I will find a volcano, and date its eruption by following this sand wash.
Click to expand...

I neither need nor accept descriptions of the scientific discipline from pathologically credulous lay persons.
 
King of the Americas said:
Yes.

These lines represent the fact that the African rainforest was plowed before it was planted.
Click to expand...
Pretty funny!

Your image:


Link explaining why there are lines:
https://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2016/11/new-landsat-sentinel-2-data-google-earth.html

In many locations you will notice narrow stripes in the imagery. This is because of a faulty part on the Landsat 7 satellite. Learn more about it in this post.

The mosaics are created by trying to select imagery from throughout a given year then selecting cloud and snow free pixels where possible. However, there are a few locations on earth that are almost always cloudy, a problem we discussed in this post.
Click to expand...

They even give an example photo of these lines:


Both your "plow lines" and the "narrow strips" match up.

Go figure.
 
TheSupermeerkat said:
You’ve repeatedly shown yourself to be colossally ignorant of every subject you’ve touched upon in this thread, and here’s another shining example of it.

You don’t understand “science” then, as peer review and falsifiability are a rather important part of it. Your peers reject your claims, and your claims can be easily be shown to be something else (e.g. image artefacts).
Click to expand...

You are not my peer, and I reject your analysis.
 
Gamolon said:
Pretty funny!

Your image:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_134095a2167fd5058a.jpg[/qimg]

Link explaining why there are lines:
https://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2016/11/new-landsat-sentinel-2-data-google-earth.html



They even give an example photo of these lines:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_134095a21688963465.jpg[/qimg]

Both your "plow lines" and the "narrow strips" match up.

Go figure.
Click to expand...

This is NOT what's happening:

The lines stop at the river...
 

Attachments

  • Landsat7.jpg
    Landsat7.jpg
    93.2 KB · Views: 9
  • FUQ.jpg
    FUQ.jpg
    12.8 KB · Views: 6
King of the Americas said:
This is NOT what's happening:

The lines stop at the river...
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you are wrong.

The lines in your photo:



Match the lines exactly in the Landsat photo:


They are at the same angle and width yet YOU want them to be "plow lines". Why can't you just admit you are wrong?
 

Attachments

  • FUQ.jpg
    FUQ.jpg
    12.8 KB · Views: 10
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom