Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Baltic Anomaly Looks Like A Crash Site - New Sonar Image

page: 1
31
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Major News - Baltic Anomaly Looks Like A Crash Site - NEW SONAR IMAGE




From the video at 0:18




In a video released today, the latest high dimensional images shows what can only be described as a crash site on the bottom of the Baltic Sea. Complete with gouge in a underwater mountain and the long skid mark on the sea floor. In this video you will hear the voices of diver Stefan Hodgeborn, Peter Lindberg and Dennis Asberg.

More at: Source


Wasn't released today, however, haven't seen this posted yet. I'm not well, versed in the info about it but it has caught my attention when first shared, figured the update would be relevant. With that it looks like there's more to it than previously thought, with the "long skid". As the update is describing more so the anomaly as a crash, what you say ATS?
edit on 19-8-2013 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Thank you for the update, I'm looking forward to the day we can all see HD pictures of that item.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 





Baltic Anomaly Looks Like A Crash Site

If that is a crash site why is the channel the UFO created so much smaller that the UFO that created it ?
It looks like more evidence that this so called anomaly is Glacial in origin , its time to drop this dead donkey and move on at least until the documentary is finally released .



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikestaff
Thank you for the update, I'm looking forward to the day we can all see HD pictures of that item.


Indeed, the images have came from mushroom-like claims to, what is displayed now.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 

Yes, seen that. May have been on it's side? Not sure about the glacial theory, looks less plausible, than at least what others have proposed. Interesting none the less.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:19 AM
link   
A crash site of what? A craft made from stone? I thought we knrw for a long time already it's not a craft but a stone structure of some sorts.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoRulesAllowed
A crash site of what? A craft made from stone? I thought we knrw for a long time already it's not a craft but a stone structure of some sorts.



These tests show that a Basalt rock lying on the surface of the anomaly has burned organic material on it, and thus provides scientists with another piece of information.
Scientists’ first impression was that the anomaly was dated at least 15,000 to 140,000 years old. A volcanic explanation can be ruled out due to the fact that there has been no active volcanic activity in the region for approximately 150 million years.

thebalticanomaly.se

Might just be the rocky basalt layer that is exposed?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:31 AM
link   
You people just can't let this Baltic Anomaly die.

Can you?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:33 AM
link   
It's possible that the "skid channel" could have been partially covered by sand/sediment over the years.
Still I find this mystery very interesting.
Why is taking so long for any real evidence or facts to emerge?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 





Not sure about the glacial theory, looks less plausible, than at least what others have proposed.

Not according to Volker Brüchert, associate professor of geology at Stockholm University who has examined some of the returned rock samples .

"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."
news.yahoo.com...



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by CatherineWheel
You people just can't let this Baltic Anomaly die.

Can you?


Some people find it interesting, some are learning about it. Perhaps bring up the topic with the researchers in an email? Also, you don't have to look at these threads



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


Yes, read that earlier. Am looking for examples in those areas that are similar looking to this "the closest [depiction] so far" illustration of the Baltic Anomoly seen here.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


I don't remember the depth at which this anomaly is located.

I'm thinking...is it possible...if it is a craft of some sorts...could it reach the bottom with enough force to skid along the floor. If it crashed from air...the water resistance would either destroy it or slow it down significantly ?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by gortex

If that is a crash site why is the channel the UFO created so much smaller that the UFO that created it ?
It looks like more evidence that this so called anomaly is Glacial in origin ,


that's a weird question. What do you know about ufos that makes you think the channel should be "larger"(?)than the ufo? Maybe the ufo slid along on its side edge? And what in the world makes you a "glacial channel" expert?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


I don't remember the depth at which this anomaly is located.

I'm thinking...is it possible...if it is a craft of some sorts...could it reach the bottom with enough force to skid along the floor. If it crashed from air...the water resistance would either destroy it or slow it down significantly ?


ahhh, but wait a minute- you can't go there unless you know something about ufos that we don't. They need special characteristics (beyond conventional craft) if they can zoom in and out of the oceans so it is wrong to assume under those conditions they would act like any conventional solid object hitting water.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 

why is it so unreasonable to assume the rocks were kicked up during the crash and settled back down on top of the craft?



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by CatherineWheel
You people just can't let this Baltic Anomaly die.

Can you?


"Hey Doctor! there's this peculiar mold growing in this petri dish!"

"Let it die will you? Just let it die!"



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 06:30 AM
link   
If you sink a boat onto an undersea mountain (that has a slope) it will tend to slide down it leaving "skid" marks. Wouldn't be the first time.


Yes its a wreck site. Yes the boat "crashes" to the bottom.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by CatherineWheel
You people just can't let this Baltic Anomaly die.

Can you?

Neither can you, apparently.

Otherwise, why are you even here?

S&F op.
edit on 19-8-2013 by doobydoll because: type-0



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 





Maybe the ufo slid along on its side edge?

Yeah that's probably it




why is it so unreasonable to assume the rocks were kicked up during the crash and settled back down on top of the craft?



Why is it so unreasonable to believe that given the Baltic's history of Glaciation the eminent professor of geology who has studied the returned samples is correct and this alleged anomaly is a result of Glacial processes .

Or is it just that its more fun to fantasise and play lets pretend that there's something unusual down there .


reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
 



I don't remember the depth at which this anomaly is located.

It's located at a depth of 85 to 90 meters.

edit on 19-8-2013 by gortex because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
31
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join