Sunken Giant :: Sulu Sea

From the team who brought you "Lake Van Monster - New Theories?". I am happy to introduce Gemwolf and GameSetMatch next tandem adventure of discovery.

Deny Ignorance, The story starts out I ran across the thread Giant skeleton From that thread I visited giantology.typepad.com... the website that was on the video. The website is basicly someones blog on thier intrest on giants and I being very skeptical of the giant skeleton video and believe it to be a fake I checked out the website.

That is when I found this interesting account of a sunken giant off the coast of Manila an island of the Philippines. Ed Guyler a seasoned shipwreck hunter and deep sea diver found him self looking for a 20th Century Spanish galleon back on April 2005, and found something a little more then he bargained for! Approximately 125km North-Northeast of Zamboana in the eastern Sulu Sea, Ed discovered a "Sunken Giant". It appears to be a very large statue. This is the head shot of the statue; he goes on to say that it has a humanoid skeletal structure approximately 200ft tall from head to foot!


This appears to be a very large fin...


He stated on his website that he is getting no interest in the discovery from the Universities and very little Scientific help. Well he has my interest over here! I will show some support. I will email him and let him know who I am who we are and my/our interest in his subject and offer any help that we can. I must say I am completely baffled at the lack of interest...

Hoax or the real deal you be the judge.
Here is his website www.divethedeepscuba.com.au...

Thats a ship wreck in the pictures.

Originally posted by Quest
Thats a ship wreck in the pictures.

I can see how you would come to that conclusion.. I think

If this Ed guy is legit which I believe him to be I think he would know best since he states that he has at least from his website over 15 years of diving and is a seasoned shipwreck explorer... I am giving him the benefit of the doubt as to say I think he would know a sunken ship when he sees one from something like this.

***Update I sent the author "Ed" an email. I hope to have a response soon. Please stay tuned!

GSM

Well, GameSetMatch, I was looking forward to our next mystery... Good choice! I just hope that we're a bit more successful with this one than our previous venture.

I suppose we need to do two things here.
1. Prove that it's not a hoax.
2. Come up with some sort of answer as to what it is.

Let's go.

I did some light editing on the image:





First thing that strikes me odd: The lack of sea growth. Anything that ends up in the ocean and lay still for long enough is covered with all kinds of oceanic creatures.

Note the "stripes/striping" in the foreground of the enhanced picture of the fin. I am not familiar with underwater photography, thus I'd be glad if someone could clear up what the stripes are. Is it because of the water and light (or lack there-off), or are we looking at something else?

Could this really be 180 feet (as I understand it) below the sea? Take a look at this picture of a WW2 bomber wreck, taken at 180 feet.

UPDATE 29/06/05 – Return with salvage team; extracted approx. 12 ft segment of stone from the sunken statue (finger? arm?). Segment was dislodged from statue and lay among rubble near “feet” of the Giant. Approx. 14 hours to retrieve specimen. Feeling increasingly that this is no minor discovery.

Where is this recovered stone? No pictures?

No Google hits on "Ed Guyler".

He doesn't name the University in question. And why does he stick to the particular university? There are thousands of aquatic archaeologists who would jump at an opportunity/discovery like this. Personally I would run to National Geographic as fast as I possibly could.
Nor is he looking for any publicity - no news articles about his discovery.

UPDATE 18/08/05 – My University contacts are curiously disinterested in pursuing study of the Giant. Reluctant agreement to test the retrieved specimen of stone. Press contacts equally apathetic – feel like I’m beating my head against a wall. Anyone with speculation about the Sunken Giant, please contact me!

Aha. So he did contact the press. Personally I feel that his documentation of this discovery is not up to standard. He may not be a scientist (nor does he claim to be) but one would expect a bit more information. Maybe he does have the discovery documented to the bone, but not on the website.

I too can agree that it's unlikely to be a shipwreck.

Time for me to start sending out some emails as well. Watch this space.

Very interesting.

This is one of those stories you want to believe.
Maybe checking out the locals in the surrounding area would be beneficial. Might hold some sort of answers in the form of legends or religions practiced by the people in the area. Then again, it may make more of a mystery.

Good choice for a mystery guys

Now get some answers

Thanks for the support and suggestions Grailkeeper!


I emailed the following persons, asking for advice on how to get someone to investigate the discovery, as well as opinions:
Head of the American Institute of Archaeology.
Head of the Underwater Archaeology Interest Group of AIA.
President of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology.
AIMA/NAS Senior Tutor.

I'll post their replies as soon as I get them - if any.

It would be interesting to know who this discovery belongs to.
Legislation might be protecting this from International institutions.

The most common mechanism by which underwater archaeological sites and artifacts throughout the world are protected is underwater cultural heritage legislation. In 1982 the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provided that ‘States have the duty to protect objects of an archaeological and historical nature found at sea and shall cooperate for this purpose’. All national and/or state/provincial governments have the right to enact legislation and regulations for the protection and preservation of underwater cultural heritage lying in or under their internal waters, territorial seas and EEZ.

Many national governments retain title to (or ownership of) ship and aircraft wrecks that once formed a part of that nation’s military forces (Army, Navy or Air force). These property rights are not lost to that government due to the passage of time and apply whether the vessel or aircraft was lost in national, foreign or international waters.

I found the following guidelines for divers and others who are not archaeologists:

Any person who locates an underwater archaeological site that they believe has not been found before should:
* Establish an accurate location for the site – using GPS (or Differential GPS) and at least one other technique (visual transits, compass bearings, sextant angles etc.).
* Take photographs, draw sketches and make a written record of the extent and nature of the site.
* Do not remove anything from the site.
* Contact the local (maritime) museum and the state or national government heritage agency responsible for the protection of underwater cultural heritage as soon as possible.
In many places around the world, opportunities for ongoing participation in study, including survey, excavation and analysis, exist once a site is reported. Organizations like the Nautical Archaeology Society in the UK, DEGUWA in Germany, and the Maritime Historical and Archaeological Society (MAHS) in the US are one means of participation, as are volunteer programs with government agencies and museums. Specialized training, particularly through the internationally adopted NAS program, are also available for interested divers.

This lead me to send some emails to Robert C. Sonderman Chairman of Curation, Conservation, and Collections Management Committee at The Society for Historical Archaeology (US) and Steven Anthony Preisdent of Maritime Historical and Archaeological Society (MAHS) in the US.

So, basically I'm eagerly awaiting some replies.

I will be extremely interested in seeing what response, if any, you receive from Mr Guyler. There are aspects of his story which I find somewhat perplexing which you may wish to address in one of your emails. For example:

Appears to be a giant statue of some kind – images reveal humanoid skeletal structure approx. 200 ft. tall from head to foot.

Yet the photo of the "head" does not appear even remotely similar to a human skull. Furthermore, if the statue shows a humanoid skeletal structure, where does the "fin" fit into the skeleton? Unless, of course, the statue is that of a human-animal hybrid. I am also startled by the fact that, upon stumbling upon the "discovery of the Century", Mr Guyler took a grand total of 2 photos. I would have been snapping away like crazy, to show the find from as many angles and perspectives as I could.

On his site, Mr Guyler states that, upon discovering the statue, he

Return with salvage team; extracted approx. 12 ft segment of stone from the sunken statue (finger? arm?).

Yet, on his About page, he states that his boat is a grand total of 31 feet in length. It seems somewhat difficult to believe that his 31 ft diving boat was capable of lifting and securing a 12 foot block of stone which must have weighed several tons. I am prepared to accept that he may have had access to a more capable salvage vessel, but I would appreciate clarification on this matter.

At first I thought this object may have been a petrified tree, or a ship's mast, but I am hesitant to make any claims without more information. I shall be interested to see what Gemwolf and GameSetMatch turn up. If Mr Guyler is looking for an educated opinion on his photos, tell him to send them to:

Peter Gesner
Senior Curator Maritime Archaeology
Queensland Museum
e-mail: [email protected]

Mr Gesner oversaw the excavation of the HMAS Pandora and is renowned as a leading world expert in the discovery and recovery of underwater archaeological finds.

Good luck guys.

Good points Jeremiah (and I didn't expect anything less from you! ) . I also saw the problem with loading a 12 foot piece of rock on a 31 feet boat, but I assumed that he came with a bigger boat and team. (But then again, there's that thing they say about assumption... ) ...
I see you gave the address for a person he (Ed) can contact to look at his pictures... Does that mean I'm a bit forward to contact all those archaeologists I did, when the discoverer should have done it?

Yet the photo of the "head" does not appear even remotely similar to a human skull. Furthermore, if the statue shows a humanoid skeletal structure, where does the "fin" fit into the skeleton?

Interesting thread..going to keep an eye on it.

However, humanoid doesn't mean human. Don't you watch Star Trek ? Humanoid is just a basic human-like resemblence, like 2 arms, 2 legs, a head, that sort of thing. To me, the statue looks like a Giant Merloc out of World Of Warcraft

From the same Giantology site you linked to, GameSetMatch:

An Australian divemaster who owns a dive boat in the Philippines has found what appears to be a giant underwater statue of some 300-400 feet long. His site has 2 images, but so far it's hard to make much sense of it all. Though the diver (Ed Guyler) is attempting to document the statue, he doesn't try to answer what it's a statue of.

So let me guess, you agree with the same premise as this guy: the imaginative interpreter: Eric Belson?

And frankly, looking at the photos... I'm not so sure I buy his contention that it's a statue. It looks a lot like a fossil to me, of some sort of gigantic eel or squid.

Correct? Yes? If so:

Question #1:
Who would I believe more, the one who actually was there, took the photos, and asserted that it was a statue [the divemaster] or one [Eric Belson] who is looking at the photos and doing the imaginative interpreting?

Seems that my question has no bearing upon the one [Eric Belson] who is doing the imaginative interpreting of the photos taken by the divemaster that was actually there:

Whether this is a statue or a real creature is impossible to say...

"Impossible to say"?! More imaginative speculation, Eric Belson?
Question #2: So let me get this straight: the one [Eric Belson] doing the imaginative interpreting of the photos, who was not there to actually see this or take the photos, is asserting that that it is "impossible" to determine if the photos show a statue or a "real creature", despite that the divemaster mentions that he felt that they the object is a statue?!
Okie dokie.

The one [Eric Belson] doing the imaginative interpreting makes some decent points, but quite frankly, till actual hands-on-testing of the object is made or are taken, his speculative evidences and reasonings are no where close to making his assertions and claims anywhere valid. I would stick with the opinion of the one--the divemaster-who was ACTUALLY there, that took the photos, and gave his educated opinion. Testing would prove otherwise, and definately beats the hell out of speculative, imaginative conjecture, for which, this imaginative interpreter [Eric Belson] of the photos is doing.




seekerof

[edit on 13-10-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof

So let me guess, you agree with the same premise as this guy: the imaginative interpreter: Eric Belson?

Good points, Seekerof. I think I speak for myself as well as GameSetMatch to say that we strongly doubt that this is a fossil. GameSetMatch posted this in the Ancient and Lost Civilizations forum, and not in the Crypto forum because it is believed to be a statue. I completely agree that Eric Belson's observations are based on very little facts, and a lot of personal opinion and speculation. Let's face it. He wants the statue to be a "giant".

There is no way in hell that - if it was a fossil, it resembles a gigantic eel or squid as Eric Belson suggested.

Surely we cannot completely rule out the possibilty that it is a fossil or the remains of a living creature (and one secretly hopes so), but as you said, Seekerof, until proven otherwise, it is a statue/rock structure.

Update:
No replies on any of the mails I sent out.

Next step: Investigate possible civilizations that could have lived in and or around this area and investigate the reason a statue would end up in the ocean.

Interesting enough the Sulu sea is a familiar reference when talking about ancient asian civilizations. These seas have been travelled by man for thousands of years, and it would be highly unlikely NOT to find any traces of humans beneath the waves.

Here's some highlights when you do a search on "Sulu sea ancient civilizations":

Deepest ocean floor
Topographically, the Asia- Pacific region is characteristically represented by the highest mountain peaks of the Himalayas ("the roof of the world") and the deepest ocean floor in the Sulu Sea.

World Heritage Site
Sulu Sea contains a number of islands. The Cuyo Islands and Cagayan Sulu are part of the province of Palawan while Cagayan de Tawi-Tawi and the Turtle Islands are part of the province of (Click link for more info and facts about Tawi-Tawi) Tawi-Tawi. Sulu Sea is also where the Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park, one of the World Heritage Sites is located.

The pirates of Sulu
So many allusions have been made to the pirate activities in Sulu that it seem necessary to devote a chapter to the organization of this not inconsiderable part of the Moro resistance to Spain. These small islands spawned the terrible freebooters who laid waste the coasts of the East Indian Archipelago.

In order to approach properly the subject of Piracy in Sulu it should be remembered that to the Moro, piracy was the profession of a gentleman. For centuries these Indonesian sailors pillaged the coasts in conducting a huge slave traffic which supplemented their legitimate trading voyages.

More about the Sulu Pirates here

One of the oldest battlegrounds
The region of Mindanao and Sulu is one of the oldest battlegrounds in the world. Until the coming of America, these dark jungles and blue seas knew only the law of the strong, whose song was the song of the kris.

Men of all creeds and colors have scrambled for a foothold in Mindanao--from India, Ceylon, Borneo, Celebes, Java, China, Japan, Portugal, France, Spain, Holland, England. Their bones moulder there, and only the spirits of intrepid adventurers remain. They reckoned not on the courage of the defenders of this soil.

East meets West today in peace upon this centuries-old field of battle. Still in possession of his beloved isles remains the Moro; with this bosque warrior remains the American who finally conquered him.

Buffer zone
During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the Sulu Sea was a buffer zone between the Dutch-dominated waters of Indonesia and the Spanish sphere of influence in the Philippines. Warren traces currents from several different waters in showing how Taosug mariners built and maintained a maritime buffer state based on trade and slave raiding until Spanish naval campaigns, British steamships, and Chinesemigration transformed the conditions that enabled the sultanate to flourish. Sea and ocean basins would also make appropriate contexts for the study of local maritime regions in the Baltic, the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Caribbean, the China seas, the Indian Ocean, and other waters.
Source Document

Monsoon
The climate in the Sulu Sea is influenced by the monsoon seasons. These are the Southwest Monsoon from June to October and Northeast Monsoon from December to June. The Sulu Sea lies outside of the typhoon belt. The mean annual temperature is 26 degrees centigrade and the maximum is 27 degrees centigrade. February is the coldest month, while May to August are the hottest with a mean relative humidity of 86 %. January to April is the dry period with a monthly average of 7- 9 inches of rainfall.

It's clear to see that this area is rich in history and it's not unlikely that there are signs of ancient human activity. BUT, it's a bit far of the coast? Another Atlantis site? More likely the cargo of a ship. But then again, were there enough technology - and big enough ships to carry a "200 foot" (any guesses on the weight?) stone statue?

Ok, This just took a turn to weird.. Yet exciting! Ed put an update on his website as follows:

UPDATE 19/10/05 – The weirdest development yet ... the analysis determined that the 12 ft. section salvaged from the site is not stone, but BONE. Bone?!? Possible eel/plesiosaur skeleton? Click here for the test result Anyone with possible insight or information, please contact me!

** I have not recieved any email from Ed. I wish I had better news than that. Perhaps others would be interested in emailing him?

That would at least to me kind of explain how he got a 12 foot section on a boat. Bone is very light in water and easy to lift. Sliding onto a boat would be fairly easy. Interesting...

I am going to state for the record here that I believe this is a i love bees style marketing item for a new movie or game. It has all the same beginnings.

Originally posted by Mainer
I am going to state for the record here that I believe this is a i love bees style marketing item for a new movie or game. It has all the same beginnings.

That is an interesing and plausable idea. The thing is at this time there is no time or date set for anything. His website is geared for his scuba dives and such. Now could he be doing this for his own marketing agenda? perhaps.. I have thought of this before and we should keep this in mind. Thanks Mainer

If you look at the "report" on the dna test is states that the DNA matches that of the Anguilliformes Order. Anguilliformes are eel. Looking up giant eels I came across this:
www.occultopedia.com...



Interesting.....



[edit on 19-10-2005 by MrMysterious]

I am assuming here, but "Ed" is the Australian divemaster that originally cited that what was found was a statue?

Apparantly so. Then his obtaining a section for testing was quite smart, in that it will put to rest some speculation.

In viewing the letter indicating the test results, I noticed these mentions:

Analysis:
Material structure similiar to Anguilliformes bone, however large sample size is abnormal for species. Unable to determine origin of species from sample based on broad search of current ocean species data.

The handwritten note mentions:

Your stone sample clearly organic.

Would this indicate wood in a petrified state or state of degradation?

This mention:

DNA tests inconclusive.

Appears to be unknown subspecies of eel.

Way to keep us informed on this guys.
Much appreciated.
Very interesting, nonetheless.






seekerof

[edit on 19-10-2005 by Seekerof]

I looked up a couple of sample DNA reports, and the "lab report" doesn't appear very ... reliable. Most lab reports have the lab address and their affiiliation/certification listed at the bottom of each page.

PCR is not the most reliable of DNA testing methods and the sample was undoubtedly contaminated unless they had obtained some sort of core sample.
www.scientific.org...

The large structure could be coral-covered wood, since coral and bone have the same chemical composition. I do hope the diver will answer where the picture was taken. I see wood textures on the lower part of the picture.

Hmmm... Interesting enough, there is a thread in the Crypto forum by a Mr MacDonald stating that Nessie is in fact a giant eel... (This is based on the so-called missing Nessie Tooth). Although I think Mr MacDonald has been proved a spammer and the Loch Ness Tooth a hoax - unless he start to give some real support for his claims in this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...'
Could these two be somehow related? Or do they unknowingly support each other?

Some feedback from my side: I have not yet received any feedback from ANY of the 6 aquatic archaeologist people I e-mailed. I now understand what Ed meant when he said it feels like he's banging his head on a brick wall. (Or something like that. LoL!) Either no one is interested or they are just keeping me (us) out of the loop and actually contacted Ed about his findings.
He’s not good at replying emails either, as GameSetMatch doesn't get any response from him.

Grrr...