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.
My post was a comment on a post made by Gortex
The Unknown Baltic sea object is 60 meters in diameter. It sits on an equally wide foundation at least 7 meters in height.
If it is a glacial erratic, it is the mother of all glacial erratics.
It is my personal opinion that any geologist that - based on what we know for now - says this is probably a glacial erratic, is guessing.
Watch the video in the OP of this Baltic UFO ATS thread.. It is plenty clear enough to see a rock pile. That is what they have given us. The thing is, it is clear enough. The video that they released is proof.
Originally posted by LionOfGOD
reply to post by butcherguy
It is simply not possible to get a clear picture,
for the baltic sea has VERY low visibility under water.
Won´t matter how much light you get down there, the water won´t become any clearer.
I know, i´ve swam in it.
Originally posted by gortex
As I've already pointed out the history of the area with its many periods of Glaciation suggest that the formation probably is as a result of Glacial activity , the history of the Ocean X team suggest that they're willing to play the story for all its worth and information given by them probably isn't all that reliable .
Is everyone sleeping through the part where I ask for multiple photos to be taken at close range so that they can put together a PHOTOMOSAIC? I get it, they have to get up very close to take a clear pic of the rock pile, and they tell us we can't take a pic of the whole giant UFO, because it is way too big (oh, and it turns our electrical equipment off too, haha).
So it's understandable that it is difficult to get shots of an object 60 meters in diameter.
Science isn't about picking the theory one thinks is the most plausible and defend that at all costs.
Originally posted by interupt42
In tradition of previous documentaries , if the following occurs:
1. No additional facts or results from the analysis are released prior to the release of the document.
2. Continued hinting of wild speculations as to what the object could be.
3. No confirmation as to what the object is.
4. Additional capitalization of circumstances to make the object appear more mysterious than it is.
Than its MOST LIKELY a bunch of hype and nothing of value will be released.
Originally posted by Morg234
reply to post by gortex
And of course the reason behind the unusual interference of their electrical equipment.
The company have created a submarine that they hope will appeal to tourists and wannabe shipwreck hunters who will pay to take a trip down to the bottom of the Baltic Sea to see for themselves.
www.dailymail.co.uk...
Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
If they can film the Titanic wreck and even map its debris fall out why cannot they film this area? Makes 1 think maybe they are busy down there inside it now
Originally posted by gortex
Do you have any evidence other than the statements made that there really is unusual interference to their electrical equipment ? , or is it just a bit of back story to appeal to the curiosity of the prospective tourists they expect to ferry to the site .... and charge handsomely for the privilege .
Originally posted by dtrock78
The reason you dont see academia and/or state/federal agencies studying this object is simple. Cash.
Originally posted by Heliocentric
Originally posted by gortex
Do you have any evidence other than the statements made that there really is unusual interference to their electrical equipment ? , or is it just a bit of back story to appeal to the curiosity of the prospective tourists they expect to ferry to the site .... and charge handsomely for the privilege .
Peter Lindberg has stated that there was plenty of electronic malfunctioning in the vicinity of the object, he also stated that this happens frequently (electronics and water don't mix) on all dives and that he has no idea if this is somehow related to the object or not. He's sceptic to the whole idea.
In every interview made so far that issue is systematically brought up, and while Lindberg falls back on a neutral stance, there are plenty of armchair investigators on the internet speculating wildly as to why that is.
Originally posted by Heliocentric
If I've understood it right, the Ocean X Team has not publicly divulged the coordinates for the site. They're ship wreck salvage divers, and they proceed as such
Originally posted by bluestreak53
So he agrees that there is basically nothing unusual at all about the fact that they are experiencing random failures in their equipment? So maybe people can stop speculating that the rock formation is emitting high powered electromagnetic radiation since there is no evidence at all to support this?
Originally posted by Heliocentric
If I've understood it right, the Ocean X Team has not publicly divulged the coordinates for the site. They're ship wreck salvage divers, and they proceed as such
Originally posted by bluestreak53
So what is there to salvage from a rock formation? No cases of champagne or Spanish gold buried under the rock. No, but they do still try to make this appear more mysterious than it is and feed speculation for the purposes of promoting their documentary.
Originally posted by bluestreak53
So what does this have to do with aliens and UFOs? Other than the fact that Ocean X tried to make people think they had found an "ancient crashed alien spaceship" in the ocean by putting up highly deceptive illustrations on their website?
Originally posted by Heliocentric
Originally posted by bluestreak53
So he agrees that there is basically nothing unusual at all about the fact that they are experiencing random failures in their equipment? So maybe people can stop speculating that the rock formation is emitting high powered electromagnetic radiation since there is no evidence at all to support this?
Lindberg has stated that although certain electronic equipment seemed to work fine, they did not work when brought down to the object, and I believe some worked again when brought out of the zone. He noted it and mentioned it, but added that electronic equipment failures during dives happen all the time, and he has never speculated on the object being the cause, others have done that.
Originally posted by Heliocentric
We don't know if it is a rock formation or not, you're jumping to conclusions. When the Ocean X Team received the first images of the object, all they knew (and still know) was that there was a round, 'unnatural' object on the sea floor, that could potentially be something to salvage.
Originally posted by Heliocentric
As to the deceptive illustrations on their web site, do you care to point them out and explain how you've been deceived by them?
To double check, Life's Little Mysteries consulted that expert. Turns out, neither he, nor any of the other experts contacted about the Baltic Sea object, think there is anything mysterious about it. "It's good to hear critical voices about this 'Baltic Sea mystery,'" Brüchert wrote in an email. "What has been generously ignored by the Ocean-X team is that most of the samples they have brought up from the sea bottom are granites and gneisses and sandstones." These, he explains, are exactly what one would expect to see in a glacial basin, which is what the Baltic Sea is — a region carved out by glacial ice long ago. Along with the mundane rocks, the divers also gave him a single loose piece of basaltic rock, a type of rock that forms from hardened lava. This is out of place on the seafloor, but not unusual. "Because the whole northern Baltic region is so heavily influenced by glacial thawing processes, both the feature and the rock samples are likely to have formed in connection with glacial and postglacial processes," he wrote. "Possibly these rocks were transported there by glaciers." Glaciers often have rocks embedded in them. At the end of the Ice Age, when glaciers across Northern Europe melted, the rocks inside them dropped to the Earth's surface, leaving rocky deposits all over the place. These are sometimes called glacial erratics or balancing rocks. Lindberg and the Ocean X Team did not respond to a request for comment on the glacial deposit theory.
Originally posted by bluestreak53
Which is all totally normal for camera equipment used on dives. So what the big "woo hoo " mystery? You take a piece of electronic hardware down to deep ocean depths and gaskets malfunction. Water or moisture gets in and the electronics fail. You take it back up to the surface and all works fine. No experienced diver would suggest that this is unusual or abnormal.
Originally posted by bluestreak53
There has so far been no evidence provided that would suggest that this is anything other than a natural rock formation.
Originally posted by Heliocentric
As to the deceptive illustrations on their web site, do you care to point them out and explain how you've been deceived by them?
Originally posted by bluestreak53
Just go to their website and take a look at the illustration they use as a backdrop on their website. Highly deceptive and misleading since we know from the experts...
Originally posted by Heliocentric
So once again, we need more data before we can make any statements.
Originally posted by bluestreak53
Originally posted by Heliocentric
So once again, we need more data before we can make any statements.
Hasn't been an impediment to you making repeated long posts arguing against everyone who says there is (at this point) no indication that this is anything more than a totally natural rock formation.
Originally posted by bluestreak53
And as long as you get people putting up threads on this totally overhyped "discovery" you are going to have people challenging them to provide any sort of indication that this is one iota related to aliens or UFOs.