Gigantic Earthwork

[Twin]

I found this Bird image in 2005 using Google Earth to view Nazca Lines. While this bears little resemblance to them in size or detail, it does seem to fit the Nazca theme. If you follow the GE timeline, you will notice that the image has been slowly eroded to the point of being barely detectable.

Yes I know about Pareidolia. You may notice this is quite detailed.

The bird is perched on a green stem with branches and leaves. It is holding a leaf (Farms) in it's

beak. There is quite a lot of detail in the body feathers.

If this is an earthwork, it is gigantic - about 20 Mi., 32 Km. That would be in keeping with the gigantic stone work in South America. I entertain the idea that this may be an image of Noah's dove but, who knows?.

Google Earth:

14°44'24.04"S

75°19'58.96"W

An almost identical view can be seen on Bing Maps, ironically using the Bird's eye feature.

This is my first thread so I'm hoping the link works ok.

The link is from a scan of a print made from a screen capture.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

I must need my eyes checked, sorry like Sergeant Schultz I see nothingk!

[Twin]

Birds beak is about 1/3 from the top an 1/2 way across with a light green (leaf) going NE from there.

Sorry, I should have circled it.

[Gingitsune]

Don't mock my poor drawing skills. -_-

[aquatus1]

I found this Bird image in 2005 using Google Earth to view Nazca Lines. While this bears little resemblance to them in size or detail, it does seem to fit the Nazca theme.

Wait...the beginning and end of that sentence don't follow. Asides from looking like an animal (when viewed in a manner completely and totally distinct from the Nazca images), what are the similarities?

Yes I know about Pareidolia. You may notice this is quite detailed.

That's the beauty of pareidolia. It can be as detailed as you want it to be, or as abstract, since the details are being viewed in your mind's eye.

The bird is perched on a green stem with branches and leaves. It is holding a leaf (Farms) in it's

beak. There is quite a lot of detail in the body feathers.

I can see that. I can also see an green line image of a dancer leaping gracefully, arms raised, hair flowing in the wind. The front leg forms what I think you are calling the twig.

If this is an earthwork, it is gigantic - about 20 Mi., 32 Km. That would be in keeping with the gigantic stone work in South America.

Um...no.

The largest earthmound in the world is in Europe, Silbury Hill, and it's only 500 feet or so in diameter. There's nothing even close to the size you are talking about.

I entertain the idea that this may be an image of Noah's dove but, who knows?

An almost identical view can be seen on Bing Maps, ironically using the Bird's eye feature.

This is my first thread so I'm hoping the link works ok.

The link is from a scan of a print made from a screen capture.

It's cool and all, but come on...that's not man-made.

Edited October 20, 2014 by aquatus1

[Emma_Acid]

That's the beauty of pareidolia. It can be as detailed as you want it to be, or as abstract, since the details are being viewed in your mind's eye.

And also that I looked at the first post and found a completely different bird.

[Junior Chubb]

And also that I looked at the first post and found a completely different bird.

Me too, flip around 90 degrees and voilà... a nice eagle shape becomes apparent.

[stereologist]

Interesting. I saw a completely different bird as well.

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Me too, flip around 90 degrees and voilà... a nice eagle shape becomes apparent.

This picture is crazy I see a dragon tattooed on this Hawk's ( oh it's eagle, need to work on my English ) neck

Edited October 20, 2014 by Sir Smoke aLot

[Junior Chubb]

This picture is crazy I see a dragon tattooed on this Hawk's ( oh it's eagle, need to work on my English ) neck

I think that is where the OP saw a bird...

The power of water erosion.

[Myles]

Actually that pic does look like a bird. Pretty cool.

However, I don't think it is anything more than the bird image I saw in the clouds yesterday.

[Twin]

The erosion I mentioned was Google Earth's treatment of the images not the actual erosion on the ground.

[back to earth]

Here is what I see (aside from the bird) the 'leaf' ( a pale green valley floor watered by the stream / river) continues up valley to steeper mountains (less vegetation) then broadens as it goes off image at the top border, giving a large watershed. This flow is channelled between the mountain or rocky ridge below the tip of the beak and the sand / higher plane above it. Then, on flatter ground the stream diverges and meanders over the plane to make the pattern of the body and wings.

But it is a cool bird though (especially of one squints a bit)

Edited October 20, 2014 by back to earth

[back to earth]

https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/14%C2%B044'24.0%22S+75%C2%B019'59.0%22W/@-14.6521015,-75.3469631,42517m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

[Junior Chubb]

The erosion I mentioned was Google Earth's treatment of the images not the actual erosion on the ground.

The erosion I mentioned is what sculpts the landscape and created all the dips and ridges in the picture you posted.

[PersonFromPorlock]

The OP is to be congratulated on a sharp eye - in terms of shape, it is a pretty good bird. However, most of its features are formed by sand dunes and it seems unlikely they've survived in that configuration from antiquity.

[Twin]

PersonFromPorlock has a valid argument. Yet, there are a couple interesting things to consider.

Compare the 2005 image with the progressive degradation of it on Google Earth's timeline. If I were to make a video of this for Youtube, I might have a viral conspiracy theory running.

Many of the dunes are fortuitously channeled between mountains or mountain ranges. They flow much like rivers with many ripples but not much change in flow.

I admit that I never thought this was a designed figure but, the formation and it's components are so compelling, I had to point it out.

If I were not imaginative enough to leave open the (remote) possibility this was constructed, I would probably not be a member of UM.

If I DO imagine it a creation, it would be of a technology amazingly beyond anything else ever done. In fact, that would put it in the realm of religion. Exactly where the Nazca mindset was.

I am not trying to put an end to this thread with these comments. I thank all contributors and I'm sure there are many other points to be made. Please make them.

[aquatus1]

Compare the 2005 image with the progressive degradation of it on Google Earth's timeline. If I were to make a video of this for Youtube, I might have a viral conspiracy theory running.

Wouldn't progressive degradation be exactly what we would expect from a geological delta?

[Twin]

I was referring to the quality of the photos. The 2005 photo seemed to be a single shot - all the same resolution, the same time of year, the same color scheme,etc.

The current view is made of at least a dozen photos: different sizes, resolutions, seasons, and color schemes. There are currently two areas near, the center, that are completely without detail. All these together create an area that can barely be recognized as coherent.

Geographically, I find little or no change from 2005.