• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Unidentified Submerged Objects

Status
Not open for further replies.
Feb 5, 2009
32,302
0
1,125
The Earth has the surface area of approximately 197 million miles of which at least two thirds of it (or around 71%) is covered by water and yet only 5-10% has been explored. In fact we know more about the surface of Mars than we do our own oceans. Unidentified Flying Objects are often attributed to misidentified weather phenomena, celestial bodies, military aircraft or weather balloons. But what if these objects were also flying into and out of water? Less known, these are called Unidentified Submerged Objects.





This is the Santa Catalina channel, a 26 mile wide stretch of the Pacific Ocean separating the city of Los Angeles between the Catalina Island. The Island’s association with unidentified flying objects goes back to the late 1960s when footage of an unknown object in the sky caught the attention of Lehman Hansen’s video camcorder and was broadcast on national television, heralded as genuine footage. The fascination was both a combination of what was seen as well the location; the Island and its surrounding waters would become entangled with the remarkable. Decades past but reports of strange sightings of UFO’s going into and out of the channel escalated. Patrick Dennett has been investigating these reports for almost twenty years for his magazine UFOs Over California.

"The whole area here is just a huge hotbed of UFO activity. I’ve covered probably 2 to 300 cases of these things flying over the mountains and water here. Actually there was a huge wave of sightings over the Santa Monica mountain range on June 14th 1992. Witnesses counted in total around two hundred objects, but whats interesting about this case was that the objects came from below [the water] and not above"

On 10:24pm on June 14th, for almost two minutes, the waters of the Pacific explode with light as hundreds of bright disc-like craft are witnessed flying out of the water together in complete silence, often a characteristic of these objects. Reports of this incident were called in as places as far away as Malibu. The following is an actual recording of a telephone call made to the police that night.

Audio of call to police

According to Dennett, the incident was also reported to the US Coast Guard’s sector on Long Beach which ultimately declined a search request. This event was only the second in Los Angeles in three years. On the morning of February 7th, 1989, scuba-divers, boat sonar systems and people on the shore witness a long dark unidentified craft emerge out of the Pacific. For about ninety seconds, the unidentified object rests on the surface before a dozen fast moving smaller objects break off it and depart vertically separating from the larger object. About a minute later, it submerges back into the water - its last sonar contact saw it move south towards the Catalina channel.

What is immediately unique to reports of these submerged objects is the ability to ‘break apart’ from one object to several individual ones. One case that best demonstrates this occurred on February 8th 1960. The Argentinian Navy were tracking two ‘submarines’, thought to be American, when sonar suddenly showed them to break apart and fly out of the water. Arthur Paul Stonehill recounts that “two gigantic submarines sighted by the Argentinians inexplicably multiplied into six other objects. Nikita Khrushchev [the Soviet leader at the time] was so intrigued by this he sent delegates to Buenos Aires to investigate these claims”. Whilst some have contended that this was no more than military submarines test firing torpedoes, others argue that submarines were not able to launch six or more objects simultaneously in 1960.

Another extraordinary incident was reported in the international press on November 11th, 1972. Again, what is described as a fast moving 'submarine', is detected off the west coast of Norway in the Sognefjord, the world's second longest fjord, and pursued for two weeks. A fleet of surface ships and specifically equipped 'sub-hunter' helicopters are assembled to find the object but it is only nine days later when the unidentified submerged object is seen visually; a massive cigar shaped object emerging from the waters. A navy ship was reported to have fired at it leading to the craft to again submerge before depth charges were dropped. The navy devised a blockade to trap the USO but they never found it again. Bjarne Grimstvedt, inspector general of the Royal Norwegian Navy, who led the hunt, claimed in 2005 that no foreign submarine was ever identified.

Carl Feindt has been researching USO phenomena for almost a decade, compiling at least nine hundred reported incidents for his website. One of the earliest accounts of the 20th century was reported in detail in the Philadelphia Inquirer on August 1st, 1904. A British cargo ship, the Mohican, en route to Philadelphia was, according to the paper, "enshrouded in a strange metallic vapour which glowed like phosphorous". Feindt claims subsequent reports confirmed both the captain and crew later an object, originally what looked like a cloud, came across the ocean and approached the Mohican glowing. The captain, seeing the fear in his crew, tried to distract their attention away from the strange object to get them back to work. Interestingly, the ship's compass was described as rotating around like "an electric motor"; a characteristic often present in similar sightings. The crew, in the mean time, were unable to move metallic objects from the deck of the ship suggesting a magnetic field was involved.

The 1947 crash of what the US Air Force initially declared a ‘flying saucer’ heralded the beginning of the popularisation and intrigue surrounding strange flying objects in the sky up till this day. Despite the lack of media and public awareness, the most referenced case involving USO's occurred in 1967 in Shag Harbour, Canada. On the night of October 4, 1967, at about 11:20 p.m. Atlantic Daylight Time, it was reported that something had crashed into the waters of the Gulf of Maine near Shag Harbour. At least eleven people saw a low-flying lit object head towards the harbour. Multiple witnesses reported hearing a whistling sound "like a bomb," then a "whoosh," and finally a loud bang. The object was never officially identified, and was therefore referred to as an unidentified flying object (UFO) in Government of Canada documents. The Canadian military became involved in a subsequent rescue/recovery effort. The initial report was made by local resident Laurie Wickens and four of his friends. Driving through Shag Harbour on Highway 3, they spotted a large object descending into the waters off the harbour. Attaining a better vantage point, Wickens and his friends saw an object floating 250 m (820 ft) to 300 m (980 ft) offshore in the Gulf of Maine. Wickens contacted the RCMP detachment in Barrington Passage and reported he had seen a large airplane or small airliner crash into the Gulf of Maine.

Assuming an aircraft had crashed, within about 15 minutes, 10 RCMP officers arrived at the scene. Concerned for survivors, the RCMP detachment contacted the Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) in Halifax to advise them of the situation, and ask if any aircraft were missing. Before any attempt at rescue could be made, the object started to sink and disappeared from view. A rescue mission was quickly assembled. Within half an hour of the crash, local fishing boats went out to the crash site in the waters of the Gulf of Maine off Shag Harbour to look for survivors. No survivors, bodies or debris were taken, either by the fishermen or by a Canadian Coast Guard search and rescue cutter, which arrived about an hour later from nearby Clark's Harbour.

By the next morning, RCC Halifax had determined that no aircraft were missing. While still tasked with the search, the captain of the Canadian Coast Guard cutter received a radio message from RCC Halifax that all commercial, private and military aircraft were accounted for along the eastern seaboard, in both Atlantic Canada and New England. The same morning, RCC Halifax also sent a priority telex to the "Air Desk" at Royal Canadian Air Force headquarters in Ottawa, which handled all civilian and military UFO sightings, informing them of the crash and that all conventional explanations such as aircraft, flares, etc. had been dismissed. Therefore this was labeled a "UFO Report." The head of the Air Desk then sent another priority telex to the Royal Canadian Navy headquarters concerning the "UFO Report" and recommended an underwater search be mounted. The RCN in turn sent another priority telex tasking Fleet Diving Unit Atlantic with carrying out the search.

Two days after the incident had been observed, a detachment of RCN divers from Fleet Diving Unit Atlantic was assembled and for the next three days they combed the seafloor of the Gulf of Maine off Shag Harbor looking for an object. The final report said no trace of an object was found. While the official story of the incident ends here, further evidence attributed to various military and civilian witnesses might imply a highly secretive military search involving a small flotilla of Royal Canadian Navy and United States Navy ships about 50 km (31 mi) northeast of Shag Harbour near Shelburne (see map above), site of HMCS Shelburne, a top secret submarine detection base jointly operated by both navies as part of the Integrated Undersea Surveillance System (IUSS).

According to one military witness, he was allegedly briefed that the object had originally been picked up on radar coming out of Siberia. After crashing in Shag Harbour, it traveled underwater up the coast and came to rest on top of a submarine magnetic detection grid reportedly located off Shelburne, where it was supposedly joined by a second vehicle. Navy ships were allegedly anchored off HMCS Shelburne's facilities at Government Point for a week, according to the witnesses, in an attempt to recover the object. A barge was said to have been brought in from the United States to assist in the recovery, as reported by another military witness. Regional newspaper stories did mention a barge with "atomic furnaces" being brought to the government wharf at Shelburne Harbour on October 6 for emergency repair, theorized by some as a cover story to explain its presence there.

One American diver, known only as "Harry" in the book Dark Object by Styles and Ledger, stated that the object wasn't from planet Earth. "Harry" claimed photographs were taken by the divers and some foam-like debris brought up. Another military witness claimed that there were actually two objects, one perhaps trying to assist the other. The naval search was suddenly called off on October 11. That night, a seemingly identical UFO was reported departing the area by witnesses near the original Shag Harbour crash site.
The most recent History Channel documentary about the incident, which aired on August 10, 2006, also reported that one of the divers involved in the Shag Harbour search did come forward during the mid-1990s, refusing to allow his identity to become known publicly. Once the researchers verified that the man in fact had served as a diver during that search, he recounted his version of what had happened at Shag Harbour.
In this recounting, by the time the divers reached Shag Harbour, they already knew that nothing would be found there, because the target had already been located off the coast at Shelburne. He went on to further say that the Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force as well as the United States Air Force and United States Navy monitored the "unknown objects" by radar and sonar, and that the objects were underwater. This monitoring continued for at least three days, until a Soviet Navy submarine was detected entering Canadian waters northeast of Nova Scotia. With that, the navy ships departed to intercept the submarine, and by the time they had returned, the "unknown objects" had evidently departed.

However, unlike the event at Shag Harbour, no official documentation or confirmation has yet emerged to support witness stories of a second search near Shelburne. There has been nothing to substantiate the diver's claims, with the exception of archived records that indicate a substantial amount of search and monitor activity in the Shelburne area during that 10 day period.

Discussion point: Whilst UFOs can be explained as weather phenomena, military aircraft or cosmic bodies, what suggestions are there for explaining when these go in and out of water?
 

UnluckyKate

Member
Jan 15, 2008
18,253
3
0
Ignis Fatuus said:
Because you are a well known enthusiast of conspiracy nut websites, I would like to see some sources that are not bullshit.

Your OP only contains a reference to this: http://www.waterufo.net/menu.htm

Which does not exactly inspire serious consideration.

We did a better job at creating a webpage in my first hour of HTML class...
 

Az987

all good things
Feb 24, 2005
10,175
0
1,305
USA, Maryland
I saw something on the TV about a UFO following a Russian nuclear sub. Pretty neat stuff. They had a reenactment and everything!

I think someone tried to debunk it by saying they were probably all drunk.
 

Dragon

Banned
Jul 7, 2007
24,878
0
0
UnluckyKate said:
We did a better job at creating a webpage in my first hour of HTML class...

Microsoft Frontpage 2.0 does a better job as well......
...
 

PnCIa

Member
Nov 26, 2005
2,784
4
1,415
Germany
Never heared of this to be honest. But yeah why not, if someone or something gets here i doubt they would have a problem to be underwater when it comes to the technology needed.
 
Feb 5, 2009
32,302
0
1,125
Ignis Fatuus said:
Because you are a well known enthusiast of conspiracy nut websites, I would like to see some sources that are not bullshit.

Your OP only contains a reference to this: http://www.waterufo.net/menu.htm

Which does not exactly inspire serious consideration.

The OP was compiled based on recounts of various reports made across. A couple were from past documentaries that stream a transition animation of text on a document, for example in reference to one of the incidents involving a submarine picking up a USO on sonar, but haven't been able to find a copy of that document online. The Water UFO.net website does a similar job, citing various reports from books and newspaper articles.

Despite the link between UFOs and USOs, there is a surprisingly little information in comparison in terms of archiving, thus making it even harder to find evidence for these than UFOs themselves. But even when in the past I've provided sources, the requirement then is evidence itself. The discussion with this subject has often always been the possibility or the rationale behind these sightings. For example, if you see a strange object in the sky, it could be just misinterpreted for something conventional. And we've had those discussions often without any proof other than witness testimony.

But when water is involved, it dramatically undermines the likelihood of conventional explanation. At least in my eyes it does, but then again I'm admittedly bias here. So the question is, hypothetically even, if any of those accounts in the OP were true, then what could they possibly be? Because interestingly, hardly anyone hears about USOs, even some of the most well informed sceptics here on GAF.
 

UnluckyKate

Member
Jan 15, 2008
18,253
3
0
SystemShock2 said:
and look at the color scheme of UFOs and Water!

The art director of this webpage is a genius ! Maybe they should have hired in for the cover of the book !

Oh wait...
 

Ignis Fatuus

Banned
Feb 17, 2009
12,539
1
0
Meus Renaissance said:
The OP was compiled based on recounts of various reports made across. A couple were from past documentaries that stream a transition animation of text on a document, for example in reference to one of the incidents involving a submarine picking up a USO on sonar, but haven't been able to find a copy of that document online.
So basically you have no sources. Thanks for clearing that up.
 

Devolution

Member
Mar 18, 2007
53,184
2
0
California
Meus Renaissance said:
Discussion point: Whilst UFOs can be explained as weather phenomena, military aircraft or cosmic bodies, what suggestions are there for explaining when these go in and out of water?

Too much salt water.
 
Feb 5, 2009
32,302
0
1,125
Ignis Fatuus said:
So basically you have no sources. Thanks for clearing that up.

I specifically included the Water UFO link because it is one of the few sites that archive reports and their sources. As most of the incidents cited in the OP occurred during the early 90s and before, it is extremely difficult to find copies of the online newspaper reports of those accounts. But in the videos I've watched, those newspaper reports are shown on the screen. Some of the self-described researchers ran their own magazines of reported sightings. There are obviously sources for these accounts, but none of the incidents in the OP have sources that I can link you directly. This is no different than UFO sightings - they get reported to local media and then picked up by others. But even if I did link you to a source, probably from a newspaper, it would still be a witness testimony to which you'd scoff at anyway. Unless witness testimonies are significant for you.
 
Feb 5, 2009
32,302
0
1,125
Az987 said:
http://rt.com/news/russian-navy-ufo-...s-love-oceans/

The Russian Navy declassified all their UFO records a couple years ago.

Vladimir Azhazha, former navy officer and a famous Russian UFO researcher

The 50% of UFO sightings being over water isn't as surprising when you consider most populated areas are next to or near large bodies of water. So to me it translates as UFO sightings are made where there is a higher concentration of people.
 

ced

Member
Jun 7, 2004
5,307
0
0
41
Just like with some UFO (black triangles?) reports, I think a lot of those sightings could be military.

It does make sense though if you are probing or visiting a planet with intelligent life and want to remain undetected that water would make great cover.
 

Marleyman

Banned
Jun 21, 2010
10,536
0
0
Very intriguing, especially that 911 call. I want to believe that they are out there, ocean or elsewhere. We just need more concrete evidence.
 

Marleyman

Banned
Jun 21, 2010
10,536
0
0
ced said:
Just like with some UFO (black triangles?) reports, I think a lot of those sightings could be military.

It does make sense though if you are probing or visiting a planet with intelligent life and want to remain undetected that water would make great cover.

That would be some advanced military shit from the descriptions of the objects.
 

Kurdel

Banned
Apr 10, 2010
11,477
0
0
Quebec
ced said:
Just like with some UFO (black triangles?) reports, I think a lot of those sightings could be military.

It does make sense though if you are probing or visiting a planet with intelligent life and want to remain undetected that water would make great cover.

No it doesn't.

If they can manage interstellar travel they can probably take 60 billion megapixel photos from cameras the size of flies.

Thinking they have to physically come here and see things with their own eyes is ridiculous, and makes sense.
 
Feb 5, 2009
32,302
0
1,125
The Shag Harbour incident is the most prolific USO case and thus did get extensive coverage



The one that started the Document train for Shag Harbor. this is called a CFAO 71-6 form meaning a UFO report form for the Canadian military. [CFAO means Canadian Forces Action Order]. Because it is in Zulu time -or what is known today as Universal Correct Time [UCT] The time is 4 hours in advance of the local time of 9:20 am on October 5, about 6 hours after the incident. The scratched out margin notes (a) refers to a general UFO report and pattern while (b) asks of a Mr. Greenwood whether it could have been a meteor which was later discounted subsequent to confirmation of the time it was seen to stay aloft, its rate of descent and its regular patter of lights.



Squadron leader bain's Priority message to canadian Maritime Command tasking that command to investigate UFO report in Shag Harbour, NS



Department of National Defence Memo









There are other press reports of it but no images of the articles, rather only the text of the articles remain
 

UltraMav

Member
Oct 2, 2010
901
0
0
I thought this was going to be about unknown sea creatures and stuff. A little disappointed, but at least I get to watch some UFO conspiracy theory action.
 

ced

Member
Jun 7, 2004
5,307
0
0
41
Kurdel said:
No it doesn't.

If they can manage interstellar travel they can probably take 60 billion megapixel photos from cameras the size of flies.

Thinking they have to physically come here and see things with their own eyes is ridiculous, and makes sense.

I'm not saying that one would have to physically visit a planet, I said that if one wanted to do it and remain undetected that water would make great cover...

I could also see a lot of reasons to physically probe a planet, just like in our infant space exploration stages now it would be beneficial to put humans or advanced robots on Mars.
 

Ebris

Member
Mar 29, 2010
584
0
845


Awwwwwshi-

Edit: Beaten by Felix, though happy I'm not the only paranoid mofo in this thread.
 

TUSR

Member
Jun 3, 2009
33,495
0
920
Canada
Ebris said:


Awwwwwshi-

Edit: Beaten by Felix, though happy I'm not the only paranoid mofo in this thread.

Our reptilian overlords will mind control us and make us panic and drop our weapons in combat.
 

belvedere

Junior Butler
Jun 2, 2006
9,148
1
0
Zaptruder said:
You live in a demon haunted world. I feel sorry for you man.

He's right, there's no such thing as things we can't identify that may or may not be flying.

It's fact, it's not even debatable. There has never been an unidentified flying whatever ever, and there never will be.

There's skeptical and there's delusional. Sometimes the hardcore skeptics are worse than the tinfoil hat crowd.
 

Blitz2o

Banned
Feb 11, 2011
168
0
0
Vancover, Canada
"Another extraordinary incident was reported in the international press on November 11th, 1972. Again, what is described as a fast moving 'submarine', is detected off the west coast of Norway in the Sognefjord, the world's second longest fjord, and pursued for two weeks. A fleet of surface ships and specifically equipped 'sub-hunter' helicopters are assembled to find the object but it is only nine days later when the unidentified submerged object is seen visually; a massive cigar shaped object emerging from the waters. A navy ship was reported to have fired at it leading to the craft to again submerge before depth charges were dropped. The navy devised a blockade to trap the USO but they never found it again. Bjarne Grimstvedt, inspector general of the Royal Norwegian Navy, who led the hunt, claimed in 2005 that no foreign submarine was ever identified."

Captain Nemo I bet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.