• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

OOPArts: Out Of Place Artefacts & Archaeological Erratics

Shadowsot said:
My point is only that for all of the weirdness, which is really what Lovecraftian being strike me as- not biological plausibilities just strange and scary- we still get understandable human characteristics behind the reasoning ones.
Click to expand...

Actually Lovecraft drew inspiration mainly from sea life such as polyps, molluscs, anemones, and mixed assorted bivalves etc. The notion that these things have understandable human characteristics seems far fetched. This is not to suggest that Lovecraft didn't come up with humanoids too, but unless we define human characteristics as "it has a face" (which many H.P.L. monsters notably do not). I am personally fond of Wilbur Whately who looked passably human but ugly except when torn open by a guard dog left the following to autopsy:

The thing that lay half-bent on its side in a foetid pool of greenish-yellow ichor and tarry stickiness was almost nine feet tall, and the dog had torn off all the clothing and some of the skin. It was not quite dead, but twitched silently and spasmodically while its chest heaved in monstrous unison with the mad piping of the expectant whippoorwills outside. Bits of shoe-leather and fragments of apparel were scattered about the room, and just inside the window an empty canvas sack lay where it had evidently been thrown. Near the central desk a revolver had fallen, a dented but undischarged cartridge later explaining why it had not been fired. The thing itself, however, crowded out all other images at the time. It would be trite and not wholly accurate to say that no human pen could describe it, but one may properly say that it could not be vividly visualised by anyone whose ideas of aspect and contour are too closely bound up with the common life-forms of this planet and of the three known dimensions. It was partly human, beyond a doubt, with very man-like hands and head, and the goatish, chinless face had the stamp of the Whateleys upon it. But the torso and lower parts of the body were teratologically fabulous, so that only generous clothing could ever have enabled it to walk on earth unchallenged or uneradicated.
PixelClear.gif
Above the waist it was semi-anthropomorphic; though its chest, where the dog’s rending paws still rested watchfully, had the leathery, reticulated hide of a crocodile or alligator. The back was piebald with yellow and black, and dimly suggested the squamous covering of certain snakes. Below the waist, though, it was the worst; for here all human resemblance left off and sheer phantasy began. The skin was thickly covered with coarse black fur, and from the abdomen a score of long greenish-grey tentacles with red sucking mouths protruded limply. Their arrangement was odd, and seemed to follow the symmetries of some cosmic geometry unknown to earth or the solar system. On each of the hips, deep set in a kind of pinkish, ciliated orbit, was what seemed to be a rudimentary eye; whilst in lieu of a tail there depended a kind of trunk or feeler with purple annular markings, and with many evidences of being an undeveloped mouth or throat. The limbs, save for their black fur, roughly resembled the hind legs of prehistoric earth’s giant saurians; and terminated in ridgy-veined pads that were neither hooves nor claws. When the thing breathed, its tail and tentacles rhythmically changed colour, as if from some circulatory cause normal to the non-human side of its ancestry. In the tentacles this was observable as a deepening of the greenish tinge, whilst in the tail it was manifest as a yellowish appearance which alternated with a sickly greyish-white in the spaces between the purple rings. Of genuine blood there was none; only the foetid greenish-yellow ichor which trickled along the painted floor beyond the radius of the stickiness, and left a curious discolouration behind it.

Now I happen to think this is quite interesting, and even, dare I say it, plausible, given Whateley's backstory of alien trans-dimensional parentage.
 
OOPARTS have to be up there with my favourite Fortean topics. ... [H]ow about anomalous structures, such as ... that weird thing at the bottom of the Baltic Sea?
Click to expand...

There are a lot of "artist's impression" style images of the "anomaly" doing the rounds, but the original image/scan from the Ocean X team is rather less exciting and suggests strongly that it's nothing more than a rocky outcrop:
 

Attachments

  • PSX_20181016_074736.jpg
    PSX_20181016_074736.jpg
    36.8 KB · Views: 19
Last edited by a moderator:
Looking at that breathing apparatus, I would estimate its capacity at maybe 80 litres (similar to a medium to large rucksack). Unless the Assyrians had some way to compress the air, or had some sort of rebreather (which Wiki tells us didn't first appear in very crude form until the 17th century), then it would only grant the diver maybe 8 breaths of increasingly CO2 tinged air. Perhaps 1 minute of autonomy. Even allowing for the users to be very fit warriors, who could probably hold their breath longer than us, that doesn't seem that effective a device. Was it more of a simple floatation aid, so warriors in heavy armour could traverse deep water with less risk of drowning?
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
... Was it more of a simple floatation aid, so warriors in heavy armour could traverse deep water with less risk of drowning?
Click to expand...

A flotation aid is the alternative interpretation I've seen most often for this image, and it's the interpretation that makes the most sense to me.
 
EnolaGaia said:
A flotation aid is the alternative interpretation I've seen most often for this image, and it's the interpretation that makes the most sense to me.
Click to expand...

I found a more recent, but still presumably very old, Egyptian picture of a diver using a very similar looking apparatus. This appears to illustrate the Mark Anthony fishing story, as recounted by Plutarch. The diver's aim in this instance was not to be seen, so a floatation device would seem less likely than a breathing apparatus in this instance. Unfortunately I cannot find any definitive age or provenance of the illustration though.

PSX_20181112_154547.jpg
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
I found a more recent, but still presumably very old, Egyptian picture of a diver using a very similar looking apparatus. This appears to illustrate the Mark Anthony fishing story, as recounted by Plutarch. The diver's aim in this instance was not to be seen, so a floatation device would seem less likely than a breathing apparatus in this instance. ...
Click to expand...

There are two issues in using such a bladder (probably made of leather) as a sub-surface breathing aid.

The first issue is that it would become increasingly difficult to contain and control the air the deeper one dives, owing to increasing water pressure on the bladder.

The second issue is that an inflated bag of air is buoyant, and it would act to float the diver upward unless counteracted with weights (like a scuba diver's weight belt).

I'm not sure the similar ancient depictions (Assyrian; Egyptian) are attempting to illustrate the same thing. The Egyptian illustration seems pretty clearly to depict a diver submerged beneath a boat. The Assyrian frieze is ambiguous as to whether it's depicting a surface swimmer or a sub-surface diver.
 
EnolaGaia said:
There are two issues in using such a bladder (probably made of leather) as a sub-surface breathing aid.

The first issue is that it would become increasingly difficult to contain and control the air the deeper one dives, owing to increasing water pressure on the bladder.

The second issue is that an inflated bag of air is buoyant, and it would act to float the diver upward unless counteracted with weights (like a scuba diver's weight belt).

I'm not sure the similar ancient depictions (Assyrian; Egyptian) are attempting to illustrate the same thing. The Egyptian illustration seems pretty clearly to depict a diver submerged beneath a boat. The Assyrian frieze is ambiguous as to whether it's depicting a surface swimmer or a sub-surface diver.
Click to expand...

I cropped the Assyrian frieze to focus on the central warrior with the apparatus, but the full version shows other divers above and below him. Both this frieze and the Egyptian illustration show divers at or below the level of fishes. In both cases, the air reservoir is beneath the diver and both seem to have a tube in their mouth. If the Assyrian were on the surface, he could breathe without the tube (I appreciate though it could be argued that he is reinflating the float). As for counterweights, the helmet (bronze?), belt and any weaponry strapped to their body should prove sufficient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
AlchoPwn said:
That is sort of correct and sort of wrong too. The device is actually a wine skin filled with air being used to provide oxygen for a commando raid to open the gates of an enemy city. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=3CbqDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA192&lpg=PA192&dq=assyrian+empire+use+of+breathing+apparatus&source=bl&ots=6dV0ry80aZ&sig=C0Z5d-b1wIpi51USFX-83HZU2CM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiK0JGPr8_eAhWOdn0KHSmDASg4ChDoATABegQIAxAB#v=onepage&q=assyrian empire use of breathing apparatus&f=false
Click to expand...

That was what I initially thought too. It was just on contemplating the reality and limitations of breathing from an animal skin containing perhaps 80 litres of air, that I wondered if a floatation device were more feasible.
Whatever the Assyrian and Egyptian devices were, they demonstrate remarkable inventiveness for the time.
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
Looking at that breathing apparatus, I would estimate its capacity at maybe 80 litres (similar to a medium to large rucksack). Unless the Assyrians had some way to compress the air, or had some sort of rebreather (which Wiki tells us didn't first appear in very crude form until the 17th century), then it would only grant the diver maybe 8 breaths of increasingly CO2 tinged air. Perhaps 1 minute of autonomy. Even allowing for the users to be very fit warriors, who could probably hold their breath longer than us, that doesn't seem that effective a device. Was it more of a simple floatation aid, so warriors in heavy armour could traverse deep water with less risk of drowning?
Click to expand...
Since a diver can get a couple minutes from a breath, wouldn't the Assyrian potentially get a minute or two from each of those estimated 8 breaths?
 
Is that because Denmark is not under water?
 
I'm thinking that the large airbag as depicted may not be a simple bag.
Maybe it was pocketed, with lots of internal dividers, to slow the flow of stale air back up the tube. Also, the diver may have had 2 tubes in his mouth - (a) a long one with a simple 'in' valve, stretching all the way down to the back of the bag, and (b) a short one with an 'out' valve.
The stale air would be sent to the back of the bag, while the clean air is at the top end, closer to the diver's mouth. This would mean more breaths than 8 before the diver needs to resurface.
 
Mythopoeika said:
I'm thinking that the large airbag as depicted may not be a simple bag.
Maybe it was pocketed, with lots of internal dividers, to slow the flow of stale air back up the tube. Also, the diver may have had 2 tubes in his mouth - (a) a long one with a simple 'in' valve, stretching all the way down to the back of the bag, and (b) a short one with an 'out' valve.
The stale air would be sent to the back of the bag, while the clean air is at the top end, closer to the diver's mouth. This would mean more breaths than 8 before the diver needs to resurface.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it needs to be that complicated, the 'stale air' could simply be exhaled into the water. This way you would also get a good idea of how much air you had left as the bag emptied.
 
David Plankton said:
I'm not sure it needs to be that complicated, the 'stale air' could simply be exhaled into the water. This way you would also get a good idea of how much air you had left as the bag emptied.
Click to expand...

If you examine the Assyrian frieze, there is a hint of an outlet at the bottom of the bag. Or it could just be where a join in the animal skin was bound together. If the device really was an aqualung, then I agree that the diver could simply remove the tube from his mouth and breath out into the water, just as in normal swimming technique.
 
Anonymous said:
I remember vaguely a few years back seeing a picture in FT of a giant metallic screw that got washed up on a beach somewhere in Wales. Shipping experts had said they had never seen anything like it and it hadn’t come from a boat / submarine this thing was massive. I think there was a man in the picture to give scale. Does anyone remember this?
Click to expand...
Anonymous said:
any news on my screw, its doing my head in
Click to expand...

Sorry for the delayed answer, but better late than never ...

I suspect you're referring to a picture captioned:

This giant 30-ton screw was washed up on a beach at Port Talbot, West Glamorgan. No owner was traced.
Click to expand...

... which appeared in the 1991 Best of Fortean Times. It's mentioned and discussed here:

https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/strange-machinery.20674/

Edit to Add: Here's the photo ...

index.php
 
Last edited:
Kingsize Wombat said:
You'd think someone would want that back.
Click to expand...
Frideswide said:
it has to have at least scrap value!
Click to expand...

My guess is that:

- the scrap value for the object as it lay was at best sufficient to substantially offset or fully cover the cost of removal, and
- any reimbursements from insurance or legal settlements sufficiently offset the investment already sunk in the object

... so as to make replacement from scratch the economically / logistically preferable course of action.

There's also the issue of whether, and at what cost, the castaway apparatus could be salvaged and refurbished to serve its originally intended purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top