Baltic Sea USO: 3D Sonar reveals perfectly straight lines and angles embedded into the structure

20 july dive, where results?

just gave you your 100th flag congrats

Originally posted by Doalrite
just gave you your 100th flag congrats

Thx.

Hope you enjoyed the thread.

How can you not tell the difference between a giant 60metre UFO and a huge 60m rock or structure made of stone??

Yes thats what it boils down to.

Even if you had zero visibilit you would be able to tell if its a ufo or rock just by, taking samples (if possible), knocking the surface and checking "the feel" and just generally feeling the object. a rock is a rock a UFo would not be made of stone.

What is strange is the right angles and formations like the stones on top that looked like a fireplace.

Anyway, I predict that these guys are gonna get into some kind of trouble over this...

Originally posted by rkingpin
How can you not tell the difference between a giant 60metre UFO and a huge 60m rock or structure made of stone??

Yes thats what it boils down to.

Even if you had zero visibilit you would be able to tell if its a ufo or rock just by, taking samples (if possible), knocking the surface and checking "the feel" and just generally feeling the object. a rock is a rock a UFo would not be made of stone.

What is strange is the right angles and formations like the stones on top that looked like a fireplace.

Anyway, I predict that these guys are gonna get into some kind of trouble over this...

Sorry to interrupt but how? A UFO is unidentified, so how would you know what one looks like?

What it simply boils down to is whether this is natural or a man-made structure

reply to post by Zcustosmorum


Didn't you really mean this?

What it simply boils down to is whether this is natural, man-made or alien-made structure.

I think its probably been said before but I don't think you can call this thing a UFO in any circumstance...its not a flying object... maybe a USO.. unidentified sunken object.

I have the feeling these salvagers are going to have an "accident" and this whole thing will be swept under the rug.

What I find truely wierd is how come the governemnt didn't just sweep in and take over. Even on the slightest chance this thing could be.

Does anyone have a link to some results from the 20th july dive?

reply to post by wewillnotcomply666


It's best to join the Ocean Explorer Facebook group, they give updates there. In a nutshell they went back and most if not all of their equipment broke during the dive. They "forgot" the hard disc to record any images with their camera and they couldn't find the hole again.

Basically nothing new. I think they are way out of their depth here, it's needs a proper research team with a submersible to get the information we are looking for and these guys are not doing anyone any favours. That and their uncanny ability at syringing snippets of information to people interested in what it actually is.

October

reply to post by October


There are some news,

It seems like the probability for the circular object being separate from the base just went up, according to this drawing posted on their web site :

www.oceanexplorer.se...

Now we also know that the equipment keeps on breaking down, and they managed to get samples of the circular object itself.

Baby steps yeah, so there's room for more speculation...

Originally posted by bluestreak53
What actual evidence do you have that this is anything but a rock formation - as they have admitted.
So if it is an unusual rock formation, you are going to taunt me because I said it was stupid to keep adding threads of a stupid "UFO" that was never anything but a rock formation?

I can't find any evidence that it is a rock formation. They have admitted that it might be a rock formation, but not that it is. What evidence do you have?

Originally posted by gortex
Its not Alien .. its a rock .
Its not a UFO ...Its a rock

Evidence, please.

Without evidence, I'd say it's not a rock formation, but swamp gas, or possibly chinese lanterns.

Originally posted by moniker
Without evidence, I'd say it's not a rock formation, but swamp gas, or possibly chinese lanterns.

Yeah that makes alot of sense. Lets ignore that the diving team thinks its a rock and say that because of non-existing evidence it points towards being something impossible. I am very curious to hear how you would reason for it being a chinese lantern, do tell!

reply to post by moniker

post by moniker
Evidence, please. Without evidence, I'd say it's not a rock formation, but swamp gas, or possibly chinese lanterns.

Then I'd say you haven't followed the story and are commenting from a point of ignorance .

The first thing we will see is some kind of rock formation that looks to be cast in cement, he said.

When they swim further, they see several rock formations. - It looks almost like a pearl necklace or that someone has tried to make a fireplace with an inch-sized rocks on the ocean floor.

The furnace-like rock formations on top of that which constitutes the large circle that was discovered with a scanner tool last year. Divers images shows that the circle in turn consist of several blocks formed by “rolls” or “mushrooms” that is attached to each other, forming the circle. Overall, the object is 60 meters long and about as wide.
www.thetruthbehindthescenes.org...

Its rocks .... even they say its rocks .