Baltic Anomaly Looks Like A Crash Site - New Sonar Image

Originally posted by Strewth
reply to post by gortex

 

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

So.....

According to the article linked by Gortex in his post on page 1, the entire Baltic region was carved out by glacial ice

and now we have a 300m x 60m area with a round(ish) rock?? at one end that is also formed by the same method.

Again, why have Geologists and oceanographers the world over not addressed this seemingly obvious answer that ATS's brightest have arrived at? Their overall silence is deafening. Plenty of ROV's dive for days at a time at depths greater than 90m yet.......nothing.

Hmm, I too remain skeptical.......

The idea that this was a rock sheared by a Glacier was simply a hypothesis of mine. I don't think the article I linked specifically addressed that idea.

However, why are you skeptical that a 60 meter piece of granite would be exposed in an area known to be formed by glacial processes? And why are you skeptical that a glacier could have made the scour mark/gouge on the one side of it? Exposed outcrops of granite and striations are both associated with glaciers.

reply to post by Strewth

For once I agree with Mr Skeptical of everything - lets wait for the doco.

That may be a long wait , it seems nobody really wants to fund it .
Their goal is 242.000 Euros and so far they've raised just over 3.000 .
www.gofundme.com...
Perhaps they should get Steve Greer on the team

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Rest assured, I value your take on this topic and understand your conclusions. I am skeptical of the scientific community not unanimously putting this to bed and when that occurs, alarm bells ring with me.

The localised nature of the anomaly coupled with a "lack" of scientific research leaves me guessing. Yes a 60m dia. piece of granite will cause a gouge. Yes glacial shifts can cause topographical modifications.

No-one is providing definitive conclusions and it's been quite a while since the discovery......therein lies my skepticism.

reply to post by gortex

Perhaps they should get Steve Greer on the team

Sorry to disappoint big G but you've put me in the wrong camp there.

Nice try though.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

But is "a crash site" truly the only way to describe the feature? What evidence does Disclose.tv have that makes them believe "a crash site" is the only way to describe it?

I thought we had reconciled this to it being a region of that sea where various WWI battles had been fought with ships sunk and the picture of the "ship looking thingy" was really a gun turret fallen off the deck and leaning against the hull?

Ships "crash" to the ocean floor, sometimes gouging out great swaths of bottom as they glide to a stop. Underwater mud and metal hulls might stretch this out great distances.

I know there are a hundred threads on this. I did some work on one of them but can't even bring my self to look for it. It is buried under a ton of ATS...

ETA: Plus I think glaciers leave much longer tracks as they remain floating , dragging their arses on the bottom, sometimes for miles.

Originally posted by Strewth
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Rest assured, I value your take on this topic and understand your conclusions. I am skeptical of the scientific community not unanimously putting this to bed and when that occurs, alarm bells ring with me.

The localised nature of the anomaly coupled with a "lack" of scientific research leaves me guessing. Yes a 60m dia. piece of granite will cause a gouge. Yes glacial shifts can cause topographical modifications.

No-one is providing definitive conclusions and it's been quite a while since the discovery......therein lies my skepticism.

Ocean-X is not "the scientific community", and they are the ones who are mostly perpetuating this story -- along with sites such 'disclose.tv" who have a financial reason for wanting people to believe this could be an alien ship (i.e., more hits on their website).

Your argument seems to be:
"There are still guys on the internet who say this anomaly cannot be explained; therefore I'm skeptical if it can really be explained"

Granted -- I suppose it is possible that there is more to this than it being a natural geological feature, but the reason for your skepticism about it being natural should not be "if it can be explained as being natural, then why are there still people talking about this on the internet?"


The internet could be a great tool, but if you fall into the trap of blindly believing what you read on the internet...

...then I'm a French model.
"uhhhh, bonjour"

While I would love this to be of extra terrestrial origins there area few simple little facts that no one seems to talk about that IMHO PROVES it is nothing more than rocks.

The Government has not commandeered the site. People are free to dive on it. Does anyone think for one second that if there was ANY chance of this be of ET origins that some wannabe selling a big story to the press would get to tell the world that ET came here?

No chance of this being alien in origin, none at all.

reply to post by Strewth

Sorry to disappoint big G but you've put me in the wrong camp there. Nice try though.

I think you've read something into that comment that wasn't there , my point was they're trying to crowd fund the documentary but aren't having much luck , as we know from Sirius Steve Greer is the master of crowd funding .

I dont know about crash site but for 'ocean X' its a cash site...until we finally find out its nothing special. But they will keep us guessing as long as possible.

reply to post by Strewth


Here is some posts from other threads ( a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by dreamingawake

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

There's always the possibility that at one time, this anomaly was above sea level, then it may have been some kind of fortification. If you look at Norway, there are actually islands connected by a single lane road at sea level.

The island of Tautra in Norway: goo.gl...

UK has lost three miles of land over 600 years as the coastline has eroded in storms. So many things found underwater were actually above sea-level all those centuries ago.

reply to post by gortex

I think you've read something into that comment that wasn't there

Indeed I have.......my apologies.

Greer gets up my goat as much as he does yours.



reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Irrespective of what my argument appears to be, my argument is simple:

Real scientific research by field specialists is required to address what Ocean-X is claiming to have discovered.

And no - books, journals and the likes thereof are my tools for engagement, not the ramblings of the interwebz. I'm too old and cynical to trust most of what I read online without source back-up.

I appreciate the discussion though - thank-you.

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.

This is and has been my thoughts on this since the start too.

I think this is an ancient, and now obviously sunken temple complex or remains of a settlement.

My hyposthesis is that the circle is natural, but has been worked extensively, into a raised platform with pits acting perhaps as ceremonial or astronomical positions - etched into the surface for observations or ceremonies.

The 'scrape / crash mark', i think is more likely to be for ceremonial or astronomical purposes too.

I expect there will be additional supporting artifacts nearby, hopefully to be found in due course. If this is indeed the remains of a settlement with stone carving skills, it's likey.

Originally posted by gortex
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.

Well, this is where I think you need some balance. It was the Ocean-X team that brought up the samples for the good professor to examine, so why should the team ignore it. Another expert included the possibility of it being a shoal of fish, how fecking stupid is that? When the experts start making cagy remarks, and throw in a bit of pareidolia to boot, you can bet they are up to something er, fishy too. The Ocean-X team don't have to the clout that governments do. As for money making, who really gives a rat's arse? People day and daily contribute Billions to the coffers of big business who sell crap to them, Lord Sugar and his crap audio, Listermint and their oral disinfectant that you could clean out the loo with, instead of spitting it down the sink.

Originally posted by TheUnusualSuspect
OHHH MAAA GAAAAAWWWWD IT'S THE KLINGONS...IT'S HAPPENING!!!

One of the best Battle themes and a damn good track Kapla (now where did I put that Cornish pasty).
Another good one was Voltan's them from flash Gordon were the hawk men dive attack war rocket Ajax.
www.bing.com...

Back to the thread, the video shows the mans own opinion, he is a marine expert maybe not a geologist or archaeologist but a marine expert nevertheless and though there may be an ulterior motive such as gaining more funding from this lucrative find I actually think there is something to this and would love to have a full spectral radar and sonar image of the site as well as a passive and active electromagnetic field analysis.
Even if this is an underwater temple complex then is well pre dates any other European find's and to have been build was probably built by a people whom no longer exist as a modern racial group as it would have to have been in the inter ice age period or even earlier for that are to have been above sea level, the whole area of Scandinavia is slowly rising as during the several last ice ages it was pushed down by the weight of the ice and may have been much higher before that time, Still I can not see that as likely and believe that it may indeed be a crash site of some kind or even a secret facility from the second world war, who knows what the Germans were developing though the later is extremely doubtful - Crash site.

Skid marks indeed.

Though they may have less in common with et stone craft sliding to a stop and more with those marks commonly found in the posterior side of one's skivvies.

Wouldn't a depression in a body of water be seen as a darker area, rather than a lighter area. I think this is a structure of some sort, not a depression.

Look at the other lighter areas in that image that are obviously showing 'raised' areas of the sea floor.

I would hope the researchers would have that comprehension

reply to post by gortex


The oval opening did seem unusual, but then they never did send the camera in or at least have never shown any pictures of what was inside.

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by dreamingawake

 

How can there be a skid mark at that depth? Would that infer that the supposed "craft" was able to power straight through the amount of water to create a crash landing typical of crashing on the surface?

I understand that the wreck can slide across the sea floor, but it seems apparent to me that they are really try to push the "crash landing" angle.

I believe they have said it may have been dry land there at the time the object was formed or crashed or whatever.

Originally posted by dreamingawake

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

lol ...that's true. Please don't let it die...it's too interesting.