UFO

In the summer of 2011, Swedish marine explorers looking for various goods from shipwrecks, which sank in the Baltic Sea a long time ago, came across a peculiar discovery. The Swedish treasure hunters’ sonar revealed an extraordinary image: a formation of objects at the bottom of the sea that bears an uncanny resemblance to Star Wars’ fabled Millennium Falcon.

One year later, Swedish divers set on an expedition and took a closer look at the vestige site. In the depths, the explorers found that the site shaped like an almost perfect 60 meters in diameter circle, which mainstream press outlets were quick to stamp it as a UFO landing site, is actually a circular rock formation.

It was “like small fireplaces” with stones covered in “something resembling soot”, according to the team of underwater researchers who dubbed themselves Ocean X Team.

Scientists are still examining the footage from the expedition, but the whole site appears to be a giant stone, “the kind divers see in keys and harbors” — a peculiar formation, granted, but… just a stone. Well, I guess Han Solo didn’t park his ship there after all.

“It’s not obviously an alien spacecraft. It’s not made of metal,” said  Peter Lindberg, the leader of the Ocean Explorer team. The scientist didn’t miss the opportunity to make a little fun of the situation, though . “Who says they had to use metal?” he joked. “This trip has raised a lot of questions.”

ufo-2-580x317

While the whole deal, which was deviously portrayed from the get go by the media, has been freed of its extraterrestrial aura, this expedition raises some intruiguing questions.

For one, the rock isn’t covered at all in silt, which should have typically occurred on the bottom of the sea, Lindberg said. Even more odd for a seemingly natural formation, the main object is disc-shaped and “appears to have construction lines and boxes drawn on it,” Lindberg said. “There are also straight edges.”

Also, “the surface has cracks on it,” said Lindberg. “There is some black material in the cracks, but we don’t know what it is.”

Many samples have been passed on to scientists, and more detailed footage of the site has been promised by the diving expedition. If anything, though, this discovery perfectly illustrates man’s power of fitting patterns together, something that has allowed for one of the world’s greatest scientific discoveries to be made, but which also plunged man in making demented claims.

There’s a thin line between reason and imagination.

via RT.com

Enjoyed this story? Like ZME Science on facebook:
Independent science reporting, always spot on. Join ZME Science's daily newsletter

You Might Also Like

53 Comments

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5

    What an absurd piece of writing. Out of interest, where in the article was ‘solved’ revealed?

  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8

    How is it solved when they have not finished investigating. And on their last dive to the sight they found what they believe to be a passage way inside. Also their  electric device’s stop working when they get close to it.

  9. 9
  10. 10

    Portraid = Port used in raids or sometimes Raided Port. Not really tasty liquor to be honest. :P

  11. 11

     I think you should look up the definition of solved. See if you can find me the definition of portraid as well.

  12. 12

    Why is it these online zones aren’t edited?  Poor spelling and punctuation means—hello, folks!—don’t take it seriously!!

  13. 13
  14. 14

    Retarded piece of crap. How is it solved? Shitty journalism. The writer should look for new work.

  15. 15

    This article smacks of agenda. To be able to say it is solved you have to be able to say what it is, not just what you believe it is not.  Here is what I think it could be, based on what little we have been told. It looks to me like an unusual geologic formation from the late ice age that was at one time above water and was the center of attention of early human inhabitants who would climb onto its surface and build fires to be seen from great distances. The “runway”  is actually a river channel that was scoured out by a glacier and the anomaly is a small section that was subsequently sculpted by water flow, giving it its mushroom shaped appearance.  The top layer, which may be of a harder nature, bears cracks and fissures, possibly from the overlying ice pressure, which may have been subsequently modified by early peoples. Nothing I have seen so far supports my preference that it be a crashed UFO or something exciting like that.

  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18

    If its a natural “anomaly” than show us the pictures. If you won’t then it’s a cover up.

  19. 19

    Haha – this makes me laugh.  It is only a “giant stone”, a natural formation they urge, yet a paragraph or two later state that it has construction lines, straight edges, and “boxes drawn on it”.

  20. 20
  21. 21
  22. 22

    Dumb title for the article. Perhaps one day I’ll come across a significant amount of unexplained phenomena and claim that a “mystery” has been solved – what a schmuck.

  23. 23
  24. 24

    So, are they all done. They’re probably will not be any more real news about this anymore.

  25. 25

    it’s a glacial deposit, it’s all a lie
    the samples are checked by geoligist
    http://news.yahoo.com/mysterious-baltic-sea-object-glacial-deposit-154845865.html

  26. 26
  27. 27

    Nature throws up unusual rock formations every now and then. The Giants Causeway in Northern Ireland is one , it has a geometric structure to it from volcanic lava suddenly freezing with ice sheets and glaciers. The Baltic sea “ufo” is probably akin to something like that and the scientific community have to move very slowly and thoroughly before announcing anything. People like me can dream and talk openly about ufo’s and the like , but the scientific community have to be very rigorous as chaos would prevail if they weren’t. I would hedge my bets on a rock formation , but it would be great if it were something other worldly. Similarly there appears to be geometric patterns on Mars of huge proportions. When I showed a friend of mine the online pictures from ESA , he clearly pointed out that it was due to light aberrations from the camera ( distortions of the sensors and lenses ) , he works as a cameraman and has seen them himself .

  28. 28
  29. 29
  30. 30
  31. 31
  32. 32
  33. 33

    Has anyone seen the NASA Teather Incident. Actual footage filmed by NASA of circular like vessels swarming the length of the broken teather as if they are wondering what it is – I believe it was 12 miles long ( it looks shorter). The vessels are shaped exactly like the Baltic Sea Anomaly, they pulsate with some sort of energy and you can see the shape of the vessel in between the pulsating. I do believe that is what is at the bottom of the Baltic Sea. One day, Mankind will be blessed with the knowledge of the universe, but we must make peace with all nations before we are granted the gift.

  34. 34

    Dude, the reason the ‘Ocean X’ is claiming there is soot is to make you believe that this object fell through the atmosphere, thus burning up like a space re-entry vehicle. Why do people constantly fall for BS like this… remember the ‘crop circles’

  35. 35

    Soot is a residue of incomplete organic combustion. I don’t think they are that stupid to think that space craft would be made of wood and I don’t think most people would be either. They only said it “resembled” soot anyway. Seems like you are the one who has been taken in- by excessive need to find BS.

  36. 36
  37. 37
  38. 38

    The explorers exhibited a sense of humor, especially when the leader joked, “who said they had to use metal.” I mean – did anyone laugh out loud at that? But let’s not judge the situation by the article. There are many questions about whether this was once not covered by water and used as a cooking area; or gathering area — if people placed the stones; though I don’t know how it would remain intact like that if it’s at the bottom of a sea. Do the rocks have an energy output that prevents a build up of silt? Etc. I’m sure though that the vast oceans and seas have so many mysteries we will never even hear about or see. Live long and prosper folks.

  39. 39

    The scientists say that it is made from rock, it quite
    obviously looks like rock, it has been found in a location where you would
    expect to find rock, the divers who found it say that it is made of rock, Ergo
    it is a 99.99999% certainty that it is a rock. For rocks sake get real
    !!!!!!!!!!! However I would absolutely
    love it if it did turn out to be a UFO, who would not, I bet all the scientists
    would. However we must not let our desire for wish fulfilment blind our
    judgement. It is a stone bonking certainty that it is a rock and there is about
    a (1,000,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000,000) to the power of 1000,000,000,000
    chance that it is a UFO.!*!*!*!*!*!*

  40. 40

    darnit :( one day… one day we will discover a UFO…. just gotta keep our eyes open

  41. 41
  42. 42

    I think they want us to think that it is nothing. Everything points to a crashed ship to me

  43. 43

    Who can say what materials an alien (or even our) spacecraft might be made of? Carbon fiber composite isn’t metal, ceramic tiles aren’t metal…

    Though just from pictures, it looks like a basaltic intrusion.

    Sample analysis and sensor readings would be useful…

  44. 44
  45. 45

    If there’s one place that is still full of wonder, containing many
    different mysteries, it’s probably the bottom of the ocean. The deep,
    dark depths are a final frontier of sorts, and there is still much to
    see down there. As an example of what’s potentially waiting for us
    thousands of leagues under the sea, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_NWe02iG-w&list=PLRopuV_zqf1UJlFDAMI8PqcTfX1pcbxyy&index=28

  46. 46

    The X-team never claimed it was a UFO. The retarded mainstream science outlets (like this one) and media did. They should look up the definition of UFO too :)

  47. 47

    You see Gary… there is two sides to irrational and unreasonable… There are those that claim to know for a fact that something is not true and those who claim to know for a fact that something is true. Both sides of that argument are equally as irrational. It’s like the difference between an atheist and a person with faith… They both irrationally believe they know something that they have no empirical evidence to support.

  48. 48

    “Everything” points to a crashed ship? Really? Everything? Which facts are those? Not theories, facts.

  49. 49
  50. 50

    What exactly, if anything, has been “solved” here? What we have in this article are the usual contours of the rush to dismiss as “demented” any claim that does not fit in the realm of tolerated thoughts.

  51. 51
  52. 52
  53. 53

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>