>>4153214
> Navyfag then confirmed as they worked on machines which could do the same.
That's not what Navyfag confirmed.
He confirmed the existence of an underwater acoustic channel which acts as a waveguide and can conduct sounds underwater for very long distances with minimal attenuation. He confirmed (via the article) the existence of hydrophone arrays that can triangulate observed underwater noise signatures. He confirmed this program/capability is no longer classified … from which we can deduce that a better capability now exists which is presently classified.
He did NOT confirm how the unusual signals were generated. He SPECULATED they could have come from satellites and they well could have. However if these were longitudinal waves, the source transmitters could be terrestrial and distantly located … the earth's mass is no obstacle to longitudinal transmissions.
Don't confuse speculation with fact.
Learn to sort out what is alleged to be factual from what is a guess or conclusion, that may or may not be factual.
For example you don't know if my statement about longitudinal EM waves is factual. But there's material about it in the open web…you could read that and draw your own conclusion as to whether it's credible or science fiction.
I won't be answering any questions or seeing any replies on this because I have to step out for a little while.