Anyone heard of GeoResonance before? The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.
Check them out - GeoResonance certainly has credibility.
As hard as it is to believe, this is rather impressive technology with the means to look far deeper and at far less detectable stuff than a 777 at the depth reported here.
Forgive me Jeff if I remain skeptical.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-exploration-company-georesonance-believes-it-may-have-found-mh370.3558/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-range_locator#Media_exposure_and_controversy
"A long-range locator is a class of fraudulent devices purported to be a type of metal detector, supposedly able to detect a variety of substances, including gold, drugs and explosives; most are said to operate on a principle of resonance with the material being detected.
Theory of operation
Many treasure hunters swear by the devices; however, skeptics have examined the internals of many such devices and found those that have been examined to be incapable of operating as advertised, and have dismissed them as overpriced dowsing rods or similarly useless devices. Virtually all such devices claim to operate on a resonant frequency principle where the device is said to emit an electromagnetic signal, either through an antenna or a probe, that will respond to a specific substance such as gold, silver, or sometimes even paper money, and that the device will indicate the presence of such material by indicating a change in direction relative to the operator.
This theory of operation is not supported by scientific theory....
http://forums.whiteselectronics.com/showthread.php?68994-Anybody-know-anything-about-long-range-metal-detectors&s=19e3d93b74b1457799c856aea0127956
What's to forgive? I really don't care to win or lose your opinion, Mark - believe or not as you will. I'm not selling anything.
I'm not so sure that GeoResonance is any more far-fetched than the satillite voodoo that put the flight down in the south Indian Ocean, frankly.
Somehow this stuff rang a bell - and now I recall from where. I met an engineer a some years ago who was involved in a court case, defending a patent. His career involved in a number of cutting edge technologies with a talent for creating practical machinery by which to put new ideas to work.
He related this very thing, as I recall - and it is more complex than a 'metal detector' as I understood it then, and read it now. It seems most incredible to believe, I can understand - and the practical applications may not be well evolved yet, hence maybe the stuff has been oversold given the state of the art. But at its core it is remarkably simple: everything physical around us exists with a definite molecular signature, a resonance if you will. This gent related some experience with oil and gas field exploration with the technology with good results.
Maybe startling results - what he related about gas and oil in north America didn't seem credible - but within a couple of years we started hearing about fracking for natural gas in a big way (another technology and not one of discovery, but recovery), and more about oil deposits and exploration.
None of which proves anything, including that this technology was even useful for the discovery of those things. And maybe, in a world hungry for new energy finds, these folks are over-reaching. But what strikes me is the coincidence of what I was told of, then the emergence of industry confidence in resource distribution that exactly fit what he described being 'seen' by this technology, and now the explanation before us.
So I am not sure all the debunking isn't a bit gratuitous - but take it as one will, of course. And we certainly live in a world seemingly full of gratuitous debunkers, themselves often subject to debunking...
Meanwhile, still not one trace of the flight 'down under' in the Indian Ocean to-date.
How hard would it be to validate - or invalidate, GeoResonance's suggestion? We're talking relatively shallow waters. And that's all the company has done - is suggest that what they've 'seen' be checked out - that itself indicates a willingness to 'be wrong'. I don't see where it is grounds to declare them fraudulent.
It is interesting stuff - and it ought to be followed up on as can rather easily be done before tons of time and resources are spent mowing the remote Indian Ocean for something that well may not be there.
