[zakzeus (OP)]

A strange object spotted during a sonar survey last year continues to baffle Swedish treasure hunters who have now dived the site.
The Ocean X Team normally look for shipwrecks in search of historic artifacts and antique wines, but decided to investigate their discovery, which some believe to be a UFO, more closely.
Located at a depth of around 85 meters (280 feet) in the Baltic Sea between Sweden and Finland, the rounded object is about 60 meters (195 feet) in diameter.YouTube screenshot of the 'UFO' captured in a sonar image. (The Epoch Times)

Mod: Fixed spelling on title

[CliffordK]

It is a most interesting artifact.
http://reinep.wordpress.com/2012/06/17/the-ufo-shaped-object-found-at-the-bottom-of-the-baltic-sea-it-could-be-real/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2172503/Sonar-scans-UFO-Baltic-sea-actually-secret-Nazi-super-weapon-lost-World-War-II.html

The descriptions that I'm seeing indicate that it is a stone or concrete structure.  Perhaps with wire reinforcements.  If that is true, then it is likely a 20^th century EARTH artifact of some sort. 

I doubt it would have flown, at least in the atmosphere.

What would be the form of a spaceship built from mining asteroids?  Anyway, I think that is too much to speculate at this time.

It is possible to build concrete floating structures.  Perhaps it was a floating dock.  I will be curious what they find as the research continues.

[RD]

or  E.  Geological feature sculpted by erosion.

 ( the "crash landing" trail could be material eroded from the plinth carried away by current ).

somewhat similar to a "hoodoo"  ...

 [ Invalid Attachment ]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoodoo_%28geology%29#Gallery

[CliffordK]

Definitely a flying saucer atop a landing tower there!!!

The phenomenon needs more exploration.  Although, I find it doubtful that that it will be anything than either a WWII era derelict, or perhaps a natural phenomenon, and thus may not hold a huge monetary value. 

They've apparently taken rock samples of the underwater phenomenon.  Analysis?  There was a claim of a metal grid, but I haven't seen any proof of it.  A strong magnetic field?

What would a tangential asteroid impact into the deep ocean look like?  Granted, this isn't that deep.  But, seawater could potentially absorb enough energy that a deep crater is not formed.

Being in the Great White North, is it possible that it is a Glacial Erratic?  Perhaps left over from a previous ice age?

[RD]

... Being in the Great White North, is it possible that it is a Glacial Erratic?  Perhaps left over from a previous ice age?

the largest known erratic is 40m, the USO (Unidentified Submerged Object :¬) is 60m, so maybe too big for an erratic.

An asteroid wouldn't have the proportions of a coin ( 200' diameter 12' thick ).

[CliffordK]

Here is another more critical article about the anomaly (which I found after coming up with the Erratic theory).

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/08/31/deep-sea-baltic-ufo-hunt-turns-up-glacial-deposit/

So, a Glacial Erratic or Dropstone seems to be favored by this author.

In which case, it may be one of the largest Glacial Erratics yet discovered.

Notes indicate that the Baltic Sea was likely filled with a glacier during the last glacial period, so it would not have to be carried by an iceberg.

I'm sure that there will be more information coming out about this in the future, but perhaps scientific analysis will fall to obscurity with the UFO theories prevailing.

[CliffordK]

It is interesting to see the path of where observations and media go wrong. 

See a circular object, that has a rough outline of a FICTIONAL spaceship (the Millennium Falcon), and it gets splashed across the news as an alien spaceship.

Then as it is determined to be stone, there are questions about concrete and rebar, but apparently no direct observations of rebar.

And, mechanical and equipment failures get blamed on mysterious electronic fields...  without any direct observations of these phenomena. 

Don't they get geologist consults before spending hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions of dollars in evaluating a natural phenomenon?  Without actually having seen one, or worked in a glacial basin, it didn't take much to think of a glacial erratic/dropstone as a likely natural interpretation for the phenomenon (before finding the more recent reviews).

Are we that culpable based on fictional representations of possible aliens?