"Sea Mushroom"? What is in the Baltic?

[CleanLucre]

Carbon on its surface? Disrupting electrical equipment? Left a 2,000 foot trail in the sea bed?



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/baltic-sea-ufo-mushroom_n_1594371.html

[Skinner]

1. Millennium Falcon

[CleanLucre]

2. OMG!!!!!!!!

Whoa

[zappaman]

6. Nevermind...looks like it has been solved

http://weeklyworldnews.com/aliens/43256/alien-spaceship-found-in-baltic-sea/

[zbdent]

26. silly me ... I had the damn thing in reverse ...

[CleanLucre]

3. Torsion Fields?

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2012/06/25

[zappaman]

4. It's a revenue generator

Not sure, but I think PT Barnum had something to do with it.
Nice picture, by the way...who's the artist?

[CleanLucre]

5. hahahahahahaha

reportedly there is carbon from fires on the (underwater) surface of the object. Interesting, huh?


http://gaanderson.hubpages.com/hub/Baltic-Sea-UFO-UnIdentified-Submerged-Object

[RZM]

7. This sounds like a job for Stone, Hoffman, Schrieber, Jackson, and half of Coyote n/t

[frogmarch]

8. Baltic ufo is likely just rocks

http://www.inquisitr.com/258095/baltic-sea-ufo-really-just-rocks/

snip:

The Baltic Sea UFO is more likely a rock formation that occurred where fluid or gas vented, Charles Paull of California’s Monterey Bay Aquarium said in an interview with Popular Mechanics.

Hanumant Singh, a researcher with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, also told Popular Mechanics that the images of the alleged Baltic Sea UFO released by the team had several inconsistencies. For one, they were taken with an inexpensive type of sonar that contained several distortions. The picture also revealed a reflection of the image that indicated the instruments weren’t properly wired, Singh said.

Ocean X is something closer to a treasure hunting team than aquatic observers. The team is mainly focused on finding sunken treasures, including champagne bottles from a shipwrecked Swedish schooner, The Los Angeles Times reported. The report questions whether the Baltic Sea UFO was maybe nothing more than an attempt to market the undersea adventurers.

The picture in the OP is an artist's rendition. When I looked at photos of the object, my first thought was that it could be a concretion.

[CleanLucre]

9. that left a trail in the sea floor

[frogmarch]

10. Yes, the diving crew

said they saw a trail leading up to it.


The diving team noted a 300-meter “runway” leading up to the object, implying that it skidded along the path before stopping

Just because it skidded, if it did, doesn’t mean it’s an alien craft. It still could be a glob of rock.

[CleanLucre]

11. glob of rock

like a meteor?

[spin]

12. That size meteor would be very valuable. (n/t)

[CleanLucre]

13. it is very valuable

[zappaman]

14. It's very valuable?

In what way?
If you don't know what it is, how can you say it's valuable?

[CleanLucre]

15. the attention

being paid to it indicates its importance

[zappaman]

16. Really?

Cuz it's all over the internetz today that Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise are divorcing.
I guess the attention being paid to it indicates its importance.

[CleanLucre]

17. yeah

his acting resembles a hunk of rock

[frogmarch]

23. I was thinking of a concretion. I suppose

a concretion could form over a meteorite, though. I have some walnut-size sandstone concretions that formed over insects during the Oligocene. All the ones I've broken open contain insects, anyway.

Here's a page showing pictures of concretions, including one of a conglomerate concretion, which I think might be what the object is, even though its shape is different from the shape of the glob of rock in the picture.

http://geology.about.com/od/more_sedrocks/ig/concretionpics/


Concretions in beds of conglomeratic sediment (sediment containing gravel or cobbles) look like conglomerate, but they may be in loose unlithified surroundings.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. To be a UFO, doesn't this need to have been seen flying?

That is part of the definition, right?

[CleanLucre]

19. did it fly in?

[Bolo Boffin]

20. Did anybody see it fly in? n/t

[zappaman]

21. and why does the OP look like something from PROMETHEUS?

Oh...right...someone painted a picture....

[CleanLucre]

22. love your sig line!

perfect

[obama4ever11]

24. mushroom

Did someone say mushroom?

[William Seger]

25. New "explanation" catches fire on internet

Within about 3 days, this "explanation" has been posted on over 4,000 websites:

The weapon was built with wire mesh which could have baffled submarine radar, leading enemy craft to crash - much in the same way as turning out a lighthouse could be used as a weapon against shipping.

But now former Swedish naval officer and WWII expert Anders Autellus has revealed that the structure - measuring 200ft by 25ft - could be the base of a device designed to block British and Russian submarine movements in the area.

The huge steel-and-concrete structure could be one of the most important historical finds in years.

Autellus claims it would have been built of double-skinned concrete and reinforced with wire mesh to baffle radar - which could explain why the dive team's equipment repeatedly failed near the mystery object.

Given that submarines can't use radar under water, and that wire mesh doesn't "baffle" radar (or sonar), nor does it cause electronic devices to fail (fortunately, since it's used extensively in concrete slabs), and that there doesn't seem to be any reference anywhere else on the web to any such anti-submarine device, I'd have to say that "sunken UFO" is more plausible, since we don't know whether or not they exist. The only interesting thing about this theory is how fast and far it has spread simply because Anders Autellus is referred to as an "expert." As nearly as I can tell, Autellus must be referring to anti-submarine nets, which were intended to trap submarines rather than "baffle" their radar. Those did use concrete anchors, but this thing (200 ft) is implausibly large for that purpose.