tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post4324271433004733814..comments2024-01-05T05:02:20.353+00:00Comments on CRYPTOZOOLOGY ONLINE: Still on the Track: LINDSAY SELBY: The Kodiak dinosaurUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-85551470306043630392010-01-21T20:27:58.860+00:002010-01-21T20:27:58.860+00:00The problem with sonars from that era is you can&#...The problem with sonars from that era is you can't measure the dimensions of a moving object unless you know its speed and direction of travel. As both the boat and the object were mobile, this is impossible. Nowadays there are Didson sonars - http://www.soundmetrics.com/FM/fm_fisheries.html - for those who can afford them :-)Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01982472466101488997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-25632658762941614482010-01-21T18:58:49.412+00:002010-01-21T18:58:49.412+00:00Thanks for writing about that. I heard about it b...Thanks for writing about that. I heard about it before and would like more detailed information on it.<br />Thanks -<br />Phillip O'Donnell<br />Cryptozoologist<br />phillip@livingdinos.comPhillip ODonnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06885574308561964803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-8060376156095304552010-01-21T16:21:11.092+00:002010-01-21T16:21:11.092+00:00I puzzled over this object for a long time. It jus...I puzzled over this object for a long time. It just so happens that I have seen a copy of the original in Sanderson's files and I am not entirely convinced that the image is genuine. It is also obviously NOT a 200 foot marine Brontosaurus, which is what the image resembles.<br /><br />Giving Mackal a chance, I suppose it could be an elongate primitive whale seen in two different views but recorded on one tape. The MYLARK was turning at that point and my assumption was that the objeck could also have been in motion and the tail end got recorded twice owing to the relative positions of the object and the craft recording the object. That would cut the actual length of the object in half (to 100 feet) but we would have NO idea what the head end would look like in that case.<br /><br />Conceivably, that could mean it is a very distorted reading of a submerged blue whale.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com