Archaeologica.org

Minimalist wrote:
and then the Club will simply denounce anything he finds as "pseudo-science."

At that point we need to step in again of course. To disseminate the information and battle the new "Arch's".

It's a never ending process.

I thought we were looking for wooden boats from 20,000 years ago?

We were, and you're right, it's gonna cost a bunch of money. One of us needs to win the lotto, damn it.

Since the end of the cold war we got a few hundred navy submarines, with high-tech sonar on board, with no real purpose... Here's a galant task! A great service to human culture.
This, in addition to tracking and mapping whales, and other sealife, for natural conservation purposes of course.
Good exercise, too!

Hmmmm...we could write up a proposal to disseminate to relevant congressmen. Hell, we've commercialized NASA to some extent, carrying paid for payloads.

Wouldn't be more cost effective to drag one of the sonar devices around that map the sea bottom to high precision? Those devices can be used locate areas meriting further study.

Charlie Hatchett wrote:

Since the end of the cold war we got a few hundred navy submarines, with high-tech sonar on board, with no real purpose... Here's a galant task! A great service to human culture.
This, in addition to tracking and mapping whales, and other sealife, for natural conservation purposes of course.
Good exercise, too!

Hmmmm...we could write up a proposal to disseminate to relevant congressmen. Hell, we've commercialized NASA to some extent, carrying paid for payloads.

There ya go!
Get the wheels in motion.

Only nobody said nuthin' 'bout no payin'!
The submarines, sonars, and crews, are already bought and paid for. Budgeted for 40 years of service. Their mission is to keep super-proficient with the technology entrusted to them. I.o.w. exercise, exercise, exercise.

'We', the archaeologic community should merely need to provide 'm with target area maps and a good briefing, then later collect and process the data.
Of course you sugarcoat the whole thang with a big PR doodah! Navy submarines in National Geographic magazine and TV! Everybody's happy!

Of course you sugarcoat the whole thang with a big PR doodah! Navy submarines in National Geographic magazine and TV! Everybody's happy!

You know, you might just have something there, Rok.

Yea, think about, U.S. submarmarines patrolling along a coastline off, I don't know ...let's say syria. Just tell them you're looking for atlantis. I'm sure they'll understand.

Charlie Hatchett wrote:

Of course you sugarcoat the whole thang with a big PR doodah! Navy submarines in National Geographic magazine and TV! Everybody's happy!

You know, you might just have something there, Rok.

I should hope so: I used to be a corporate communications strategist...

Forum Monk wrote:Yea, think about, U.S. submarmarines patrolling along a coastline off, I don't know ...let's say syria. Just tell them you're looking for atlantis. I'm sure they'll understand.

Good point.

Didn’t the latest expedition off Houston use a Navy nuclear sub?

Some kind of “back-up” role?

"Practical training” for our crew, etc..etc…

Forum Monk wrote:Yea, think about, U.S. submarmarines patrolling along a coastline off, I don't know ...let's say syria. Just tell them you're looking for atlantis. I'm sure they'll understand.

What's there to 'understand', Monk? Those Syrians or others would need to know that subs are there in the first place, wouldn't they? And if those subs are any good at what they do (= staying hidden at depth), Syrians and others would never know! Just ask the Russkies about their frustrations in locating and tracking US subs, or vice versa. In 50 years that's proven to be nigh impossible.

And even if those subs are discovered: they're doing their thing at 50 miles from the coastline, minimum. Mare Liberum! (The sea is free). They're far from territorial waters. No jurisdiction.

No, Monk, Syrian (or others') sensitivities are a moot point.

I don't think our submarines are equipped with THAT kind of sonar. Now, if the Atlanteans had submarines of their own, maybe we could detect those?

Most site that would be of interest to us should be in seas too shallow for large subs, talk to inshore fisherman.

300 feet is excellent boomer water, Digit! 200 feet is comfortable cruising depth for those dudes.
Inshore fishermen trawl water that is 10 to 100 feet max. We don't need to look there. Too shallow. And too 'recently' flooded: in the holocene. And I'm looking for HSS in the pleistocene.

Fair comment Roc!