It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists to dive for Baltic Sea "UFO"

page: 10
44
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by followingpythagoras

Originally posted by type0civ
DONT FORGET!!!


There are TWO disk shaped "features" down there.

Two objects video


And - it states in the article that this disk shaped object has 900 foot "skid marks" behind it which kind of takes it being part of a man-made or natural stone structure out of the picture if it is true.

So two round objects, 200 feet in diameter each, in 250 feet of water and one of them skidded 900 feet underwater? I don't know what they are, but it doesn't sound like they are any kind of rock formation to me. I know there have been many sightings of other round objects in the sky that seem to fly in tandem, maybe they crash in tandem as well.

I wish they'd put up a camera immediately down there - and just left it on a live feed so we could all see if anyone else went down there afterward.

yes but could the "skid marks" be cleared area like a road or such. it could even bee sediment just looking like a skid mark that was built up because of the structure.




posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Juggernog

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
A lot of people have brought up the point that the trail is odd for an underwater crash...............that assumes this piece of land was underwater when the crash occurred.


That is actually a valid point. Ive read that the Baltic Sea was, at one time, a landlocked lake which was connected to the Atlantic via a river. Before that though, who knows?
The fact that its "brackish water" tends to back up this theory.

Unlikely. The last glacial period peaked some 20,000 years ago. The ice has rebounded and the baltic remains in its place - something like that. Any object or ruin would have been crushed beneath the glacier and should be unrecognizeable I would think. I'll admit I'm no expert. All I did was google it.

Post-glacial rebound:
en.wikipedia.org...

Somebody out there has a good idea what it's. Myself, if I was more ambitious, would investigate side-scanning radar to see how that might distort what's seen in the images.

What would produce the sharp "lines" that Peter claims to see? I keep thinking of rocks and how some of the "formations" I've seen on different shows also had straight lines in them.
edit on 8-6-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1
Somebody please explain something to me:

Why is it that just because something is circular it's called a UFO? How desperate are people to find something where there is nothing? How much do people see what they want to see?

I will bet that it's not a spaceship. And I will bet that when it's discovered to NOT be a spaceship people will immediately begin claiming a cover-up.


hawas announce the date they were going to tell us what the his quote "we made an exciting find' was in the Pyramid shaft....he then a year later announce another date, before the end of the year, be fore Dec. they would tell us all...that was many years ago and they never did tell us anything!
I followed all this for year in and year out drooling! NOTHING! Bah!



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum

Originally posted by charlyv
Has anyone seen any progress in this expedition as yet? I cannot find anything on it, but it has been 4 days into it, and I would have expected something to come out by now. Perhaps they are waiting to announce what ever they find at the end.


Regular updates here www.oceanexplorer.se...


It says they are down there now and 'really amazed' that they have spent all this money and done this stupid thing. ;-)



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Another thing I'd like to say is that since so many shipwrecks have occurred in the Baltic Sea and since they're so well preserved, I'd not be surprised if this was somehow wreckage. Peter says it's too big to be wreckage, but I wonder if somehow it could be? Maybe he's not as smart as he thinks.

And one another thing... could the "crash trail" somehow have been caused by the rebounding of the glacier? This would put the the whole scene back to 5000-15,000 years ago? So what they'll find is some kind of rock formation that was pushed by the glacier over thousands of years.

EDIT: I found a good article about all this:
thewatchers.adorraeli.com ...
edit on 8-6-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


Just worth re stating, that as far as the geological record goes, there is no evidence to suggest that the area we know as the Baltic sea, has ever been dry. It has always been either ice covered, or submerged, and there is no possibility of human construction on the site as a result.

What ever the structure the team have located is, it cannot be the work of man. Therefore, it is either something natural, like a previously unknown undersea volcano cap, dormant for longer than man can imagine, or something that has arrived in the location later.

The reason that the spokesperson for the investigative team said that this could not be part of a ship, is that the thing is FAR to big, almost twice the size of any known vessel, in terms of its width. I completely agree with his assessment, on that score.

To those complaining that people are using the term UFO to describe this object, I agree that the object is not flying and therefore this precise term is probably being misappropriated in this case. However, this is most certainly a USO (Unidentified Submerged Object). I must stress that when a person says that an object falls into either category, that does not automatically assume that the object is an alien craft, an artefact of a pre-human intelligence on this planet, or any other old thing. It simply states that there is an object, which remains unidentified, in the location or situation as pertains to its sighting, and subsequent classification AS a UFO or USO. It is nothing to get all hot under the collar about.

Of course, there are those who completely fail to make any such distinction, and think that anything of which they are unaware could be evidence of an alien civilisation, but you should not place so much importance on such persons, and their ill informed prattle. I certainly do not, for I surely would have lost the plot years ago if I did.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


The Baltic Sea somewhat resembles a riverbed, with two tributaries, the Gulf of Finland and Gulf of Bothnia. Geological surveys show that before the Pleistocene instead of the Baltic Sea, there was a wide plain around a big river called the Eridanos.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 

It shouldn't be called "object". I think that's where ot gets people irritated.

It could end up being a geologic formation so calling it an "object" is misleading. The biggest reason this could be is because the side-scanning radar has a hard time making a distinction. In several different places I've read that what you see on these types of radars is not usually what you get.

I also hate how sensationalist news sites are calling the two unknowns "two discs". That's not just misleading, it's blatant! One of the unknowns shows a circular shape, but it's misshapen. The other is more rectangular. They're taking this and running with it to get people on their site.

I think there'll be a lot of sour moods once the full information comes out. However, for people in the natural sciences this might be very interesting to them. And then for the archeologists and treasure hunters this could have historical or monetary value. So it could still be worth something.

But worth hundreds of thousands of dollars? Hmm, doubt it! But then again we spend hundreds of millions of dollars on big motion pictures that're not about science but mostly about BS.
edit on 10-6-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Just to state my view again:


So posting this is totally irritating. 'There is something unusual' says the Speculation (because it is no different than me saying it as currently they haven't actually gone down there), more coming up Soon™

Ok it would have been better if you posted this AFTER they got their A$SES down there. I am sure eventually it will be nothing special and some for the sake of conspiracy would make a new one out of it, saying they are hiding it is some rock/sand and is a saucers? Am I right?



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imtor
Just to state my view again:


So posting this is totally irritating. 'There is something unusual' says the Speculation (because it is no different than me saying it as currently they haven't actually gone down there), more coming up Soon™

Ok it would have been better if you posted this AFTER they got their A$SES down there. I am sure eventually it will be nothing special and some for the sake of conspiracy would make a new one out of it, saying they are hiding it is some rock/sand and is a saucers? Am I right?


Spot on, they got a documentary to push here



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   
It is probably Al Capone's vault.



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by StringTh
If they are ruins then that would put the age of the ruins roughly 130000 to 115000 years ago or even older. Sounds impossible to me, but then I have been proved wrong many times.

Given the data until now, it could be either some sort of sunken ship, rock formations or indeed UFO (if someone believes that we have been visited before).

Whatever it is, it's interesting enough to put money and labor into it. Just hope they keep their words and show us what it is/was.

StringTh


The Baltic only flooded at the end of the last Ice Age and given we already know of submerged settlements in the Black Sea and North Sea, it stands to reason this (if not a rock formation) could be one too.



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Imagine if it were a base for a single column to a giant old temple, way cooler than a UFO



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Hey there everyone I found this POSSIBLE explanation for what is down there made by a remote viewing unit ,while the accuracy of this cannot be verified it is never the less quite interesting
www.prnewswire.com...
TRANSCEPTION's preliminary analysis of the seven sessions specifically tasked against the Baltic Sea USO target (plus another one based on directly related tasking), suggests that the site is a complex of structures--a mining/production/resupply facility--among other things, centered around a special type of "lock" (described by the viewers as being "like" a "dam", "barrier", "missile silo", and even Han Solo's "moon tube"), mechanically operated and comprising, at least in part, a cluster of densely packed, hydraulic levers that arc energetically back and forth, controlling the flow of a liquid (most likely water) used in the production of a much needed viscous, energetic, oil-like substance, dark in color and possibly toxic, with constituent and extremely valuable elements/materials mined locally.

Situated immediately below the predominate structure is a gargantuan chamber and network of tubes and/or connecting shafts, all underground. The beings responsible for its existence wear a special face mask to protect them from the environment extant at the time of construction. For the lock to work, it requires a special "key", which is missing. 90% of the site is underground. There is most likely a "Mayan"/ET connection. One of the viewers insists vehemently that humanity is not ready for knowledge constituting the "key", much less the technology constituting the site. The Ocean Explorer team should exercise caution when approaching the, much less anchor immediately over it

Source: PR Newswire (s.tt...)



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by cookiemonster32
 

If it turns out not to be that will you ignore further claims about remote viewing?
Please?



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


truth is no body knows what it is yet but I will keep my mind open to all possibilities you can ignore whatever you like



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


Yea so? Thats just speculation as well. So many people rush to try and prove what it is or isnt, so you can say "I told you so"
Ill just wait till the end of the investigation
edit on 11-6-2012 by Juggernog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by intrptr
 


Yea so? Thats just speculation as well. So many people rush to try and prove what it is or isnt, so you can say "I told you so"
Ill just wait till the end of the investigation

Its a gun turret.


I'm telling you so...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 

That doesn't seem to be quite 200 feet across.




top topics



 
44
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join