His only dataset is faulty. Google Earth images are stitched together representations, they are not true observations.
I don’t don’t it compelling. Same as I don’t find Mark Sargent’s flat Earth videos compelling.
It takes more than lazy pattern assignment to rile up an actual scientist.
Actually,I posted a study shows that google earth is very accurate. In my opinion Google just does not want to get sued by claiming you can use it for transportation,or what ever.
And we can all see with our own eyes how accurate those global maps are…
" 1. The accuracy of elevation data from GE is better along roadways compared to other elevation data sources in the conterminous USA, with MAE, RMSE, and GE roadway elevation error standard deviation of 1.32 m ,2.27 m and 2.27 m respectively;""
The m is for meter…
Yes, the note on roadway elevation accuracy is for… ROADWAY ELEVATION ACCURACY.
Not ocean ridges and stitched together satellite images… seriously… you are comedy 
Gee… Thanks.
Surface elevation is easy and is but one of many pieces of the dataset that comprises the images.
Perhaps he can come up with more compelling data and I’ll have another look but this just doesn’t do it for me.
The data set being referred to in your link is an irrelevant data set.
This is what I’m talking about…when you don’t even understand the data you’re looking at…you can’t make good observations or gain good insights from that data set.
I made it about 10 minutes and then skipped forward. His theory didn’t get any more convincing as he advanced it.
It’s clear that he is not a scientist. His “theories” are laughably ignorant. He sounds like a stoner who was gazing at a globe one day and Eureka! he saw the light. Almost nothing of what he says is based on geological fact.
That may all be true, but his works speaks for itself. I can see the patterns he’s talking about. So, even if he has off explanations, he still found something amazing.
First off, the patterns he and you can see are for the most part, an artists impression. The vast majority of the ocean floor is unmapped.
Secondly, the appearance of the surface has very little to do with what goes on beneath the surface. Essentially everything that he assumes from looking at the map has been studied by actual geologists and scientists who use actual data (as opposed to uneducated opinion) to arrive at their conclusion. His arrogance is beyond belief that he seems to think that he has discovered something that they have all missed, just from looking at an artistic rendition of the ocean floor.
That was my impression of him, as well. I can hear him saying “Dudes, totally check this out, it’s far out!”
The algorithms could be creating the unsure images in the same way over and over again, which would explain this guy’s observations.
I grabbed a Ken hamm children’s book at goodwill where it proves that dinosaurs were on Noah’s ark and your teachers don’t tell you because they’re arrogant and brainwashed.
Someone out there bought that for an actual child.
Ummmm…
That’s the problem, he didn’t do any work. He looked at some pictures and came to a conclusion.
Oh yeah, sure… look how all this stuff was together! Next thing the guy will be saying is Hey! all of the planets and stars in our galaxy were together… and then Hey! all the galaxies were together and everything was all smooshed together like a tiny little dot!
ha ha ha… what a crackpot!
