Google Earth Pic Questions

Found these two pics on Google Earth today. My computer is pretty basic and was wondering if anyone could have a look at the pics as well as the area as a whole. The "words" may be nothing but the whole area in general is pretty cool.

Area is between Puerto Rico ans Caracas in the Car sea.

 

on my computer, they both look like snow. the first picture clearly says "doo" and the second one had some elaborate message in braille, which i don't know how to read so i can't decipher it.

 

Those pictures are gonna look the same on any computer...Google Earth is only allowed to use a certain amount of detail and zoom in their sat images.

 

If they're out in the middle of the sea (you really should give us the GPS coordinates), I have no clue what the first could be. The second looks like a fissure or extinct volcanic vent. If the first picture was near a port I'd suggest they were caissons used for reinforcing harbors, really popular in the 30s and 40s.

 

16 degrees 35'N, 66 degrees 48' W

 

Dude you may have inadvertently stumbled upon the Lost City of Atlantis, or not



Hotwater

 

lol The sarcasm is strong in your post Padawan. lol

 

OK, it kind of looks like scan lines. They take thousands of pics and scans and string them together, but the fit is not always perfect and leaves geometric errors. Being that it's over 100 miles south of Puerto Rico I doubt it's a fabricated structure, but I'm using regular Google Maps. The other site does look like volcanic vents now that I see how it aligns with everything else.

 

It's what's left of the lost continent of Atlantis, converted into a vast underwater complex used by the Illuminati to run the New World Order, the Masonic Empire, Wall Street, the United Nations, and the Bermuda Triangle. Or it's water spots on a camera lens, not edited out by Google because they don't give a fuck about empty ocean pics.

 

Thanks. I am too using regular google earth. Everything is pieced together even 'space' pics of the earth and other planets. Is anything not CGI affiliated lol.

The pic just looked pretty cool and though if someone could enhance it that would be even better. There is lots of these out there, I just find them interesting.

 

Approach lots of things like power plants, paper mills, hospitals and theme parks from above and you'll see electronic averaging. It creates a weird Tron-like geometry as it tries to reconcile multiple satellite passes at different angles. Look at places where lots of cars park and you'll see a real mess.

I remember when the quality was really good. Perhaps they are trying to sucker more of us into their pay service.

 

Atlantis is/supposed to be of the coast of South Spain/ West Africa.

There is a lot of underwater 'cities'/ places found, have a look. Most pretty impressive not to say the least but Dwarka in fascinating.

Also you have the underwater cities off Cuba: Cleopatra's palace: Yonaguni Japan among others.

Your sarcasm is not even funny nor needed.

 

Feel free to explore the region without mishap since it’s located outside of the Bermuda (or Devils') Triangle which lies to the north


hotwater

 

There is a technique they are starting to use called Satellite Archaeology. Basically they can ad on filters (light) to see through the earths surface to what lies below. History is not set in stone and perhaps in the next 20 yrs (provided we are still here ) we may have some actual truth and proof (unsuppressed that is)that we have been here before and that we (animals and plants included) as well as the earth, continue to hit the reset button over and over again.

 

These are not "pictures". The deep ocean is displayed as a patchwork of various topography scans, sonar readings, depth recording and mostly just pure speculative artistic renderings. They contain a ton of bad data point artifacts and the seams between scans create misleading and erroneous features that simply do not really exist.

 

Or what you see is what is actually there…..take for example the planet mars, for many years skeptics have used the same argument to discredit Richard C Hoagland who in his groundbreaking novel 'Monuments of Mars' has identified various structures on the surface including the face on mars (The Cydonia Mesa) and a nearby a pyramid complex similar to those found in egypt



Hotwater

 

Technically anything NASA shows us is interpreted through an artist impression using CGI and Photoshop; am I or anyone 'allowed' to disagree with their renditions of what a far distant galaxy, the moon and to a lesser extent the Earth 'really' look like? Or are their 'pictures' the only reliable source therefore indisputable?

The original post never said they were real, just interestingly cool, but I allow the 'what if factor' in my thought process as well.

 

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FPcOQ8B3mbSw%2Fhqdefault.jpg&f=1