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

Sea Serpents & Monsters (General; Miscellaneous)

I'm heading there tomorrow. I know it's a whale, but I was actually planning to go there tomorrow anyway to find out about the fishing, and resident seal.

Thanks for posting that hunck, my fiancee lives in Port Talbot and I spend about half my time thee, but I'd totally missed this.

That's a nice coincidence. Maybe you can give us an on the spot report.

I'd be interested to hear about the resident seal as well - is it just the one?
 
The last of a series of coincidences yesterday. One of those days.

Anyway, plan is to head there in early afternoon. Have a look at what's there, and see if there's anything identifiable left. To try and get a better idea of what it was.

Hopefully take a few photos, and have a better look at the vertebrae.

As for the seal, as far as I've been told today, there's an area where mullet pool up somewhere near there, waiting for the tide to carry them over a weir. From what I hear this attracts the odd predator including 'a' seal.

I don't know much about this area, as I come from the other, Gower, end of the bay. Be nice to see what's what though. This carcass adds an extra bit of interest.
 
After assuring me we wouldn't be spending our day off together looking for a partially burned cetacean spine, Mrs Rover told me that it's known to be the remains of a pilot whale which washed ashore a few months ago.

Not much of an on the spot report sorry. I might sneak down there some time soon anyway though.
 
Apparently standard slugs sometimes attack and kill chicks in nests. Who knows what this one feeds on, besides starfleet officers.
 
Looks like Hull is becoming a Fortean hotspot. After 'Old Stinker' the Werewolf, there's reports it has its own water monster...

Is there a Nessie in the Humber? Hunt is on for beast 'with a head the size of an elephant's, six humps and terrifying flashing eyes'
  • Mike Covell, from Humber Monster Watch, trying to track down the beast
  • He has even formed a patrol to monitor the shores of Hull's famous river
  • In the 1920s, Hull lived in fear of the sea beast with numerous sightings
  • In 1925, a 'giant octopus' was found by fishermen on Withernsea beach
A search has been launched to track down the 'Humber Monster,' a sea beast said to have a head the size of an elephant, six humps and terrifying flashing eyes.

Mike Covell, from the Humber Monster Watch, is hoping to track down the creature in time for Hull taking up the title of the UK City of Culture in 2017.

Mr Covell has even formed a patrol to monitor the shores of the city's famous river.

Throughout the 1920s, trawlermen from Hull had reported strange sightings of a creature in the Humber and the North Sea,' he said, according to The Express.

He added: 'In 1923, a Hornsea school teacher was swimming off the coast when he was attacked by an unknown sea creature.'

In the 1920s, Hull lived in constant fear of the sea beast with numerous sightings and updates in newspaper reports.

Eyewitnesses at the time said it could travel at more than 100mph, had a head the size of an elephant, six humps and terrifying flashing eyes.

In 1934, another frightening encounter with the monster was recorded, this time by Thomas Atkinson.

He had been walking with his wife and children by the river when they witnessed something black swimming in the Humber, according to the Hull Daily Mail.

The creature turned to face the family and stared at them with its eyes the size of portholes until they fled in terror.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-terrifying-flashing-eyes.html#ixzz4JwI854Hq

Does this make Hull a candidate for future Unconventions?
 
I need some help. Is there any posts on the bloop sound that was picked up by undersea microphones.
 
I'm not sure about threads here, but the sound itself has been convincingly explained. It was cracking Ice. Sorry.
No the cracking ice theory has been debunked no ice is in the area where the sound was picked up.
 
The sound was not in Antarctic.it was heard near South America.
 
No the cracking ice theory has been debunked no ice is in the area where the sound was picked up.

Any definitive debunking of the icequake theory would be news to me. It is still the case that the 1997 Bloop characteristics most closely match verified icequake sounds from the Antarctic region. Can you cite a source for this debunking?

There didn't have to be ice in the immediate vicinity. Ultra-low frequency sounds like the 1997 Bloop can travel substantial distance in the deep ocean. The Bloop was detected on multiple sensors ranging up to circa 5000 km apart.

A point source location, estimated via triangulation from the data those widely distributed sensors provided, lies off the western coast of southern Chile. This estimated location lies squarely within a corner of the Antarctic Plate which abuts both the Nazca Plate and the Pacific Plate.

If the Bloop had not so closely resembled icequake sound profiles it probably would have been attributed to some sort of deep sea seismic event around those plate boundaries.
 
Fox's hunch is that the sound nicknamed Bloop is the most likely to come from some sort of animal, because its signature is a rapid variation in frequency similar to that of sounds known to be made by marine beasts. There's one crucial difference, however: in 1997 Bloop was detected by sensors up to 4,800 kilometres (3,000 mi) apart. That means it must be far louder than any whale noise, or any other animal noise for that matter. Is it even remotely possible that some creature bigger than any whale is lurking in the ocean depths? Or, perhaps more likely, something that is much more efficient at making sound?

The is from the Wikipedia page.
 
Reading the full Wiki article there, the final conclusion seems to be that it was ice. But, this is Wikipedia, handy, especially as a starting point, but not to be relied on.
 
Fox's hunch is that the sound nicknamed Bloop is the most likely to come from some sort of animal, because its signature is a rapid variation in frequency similar to that of sounds known to be made by marine beasts. There's one crucial difference, however: in 1997 Bloop was detected by sensors up to 4,800 kilometres (3,000 mi) apart. That means it must be far louder than any whale noise, or any other animal noise for that matter. Is it even remotely possible that some creature bigger than any whale is lurking in the ocean depths? Or, perhaps more likely, something that is much more efficient at making sound?

The is from the Wikipedia page.
Unless the bloop travelled solitonically in thermal layers.
 
Fox's hunch is that the sound nicknamed Bloop is the most likely to come from some sort of animal ...

That was the alleged state of Fox's opinion circa 2002 (check the reference publication date on the Wikipedia page).

As detailed in this 2012 article:

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/bloop-mystery-not-solved-sort-of

... it wasn't until after a broad survey of subsea noises was done from 2005 - 2010 that it became apparent the 1997 Bloop's sound characteristics (including the variation ... ) were entirely consistent with verifiable icequake / ice calving noises.
 
Unless the bloop travelled solitonically in thermal layers.

I don't know about describing the sounds' propagation as 'solitonic', but ...

The allusion to thermal layers and virtual boundaries among them (i.e., thermoclines) is definitely relevant. Thermocline boundaries are known to affect undersea sound propagation - even to the extreme of preventing sounds from a colder, deeper layer from propagating to warmer water above it.

The location given for for an estimated point source happens to lie within the northernmost area underlain by very cold Antarctic deep water.

My point is that it's entirely plausible for a sound originating at or near the Antarctic coast to propagate within the deep water zone and not audibly 'surface' until it reached a point quite some distance away.

This is why I've long suspected the triangulated sound location represents a point of 'escape' for detectable sound (as contrasted with the location of the sound's cause).
 
I don't know about describing the sounds' propagation as 'solitonic', but ...
You would need a 'channel' for that, but it's not completely out of the question that a sound might propagate as a soliton undersea and then if might lose virtually no energy in covering a long distance. It might even be, that a different sound was originally produced and only that frequency component that would transmit as a soliton (or series of soliton wave) in a temperature inversion channel, is picked up a long way off.
 
I'd never heard this particular bit of sea-monster lore before:

Wreck of German U-boat found off coast of stranraer.

...Experts believe the vessel could be the UB-85, a sub sunk by HMS Coreopsis in 1918, according to official records.

However, naval folklore suggests it may have been attacked by a "sea monster".

Mysterious sinking

The entire crew of the U-boat is reported to have abandoned ship due to the "monster attack" and once aboard the British HMS Coreopsis, their commander, Captain Krech described their encounter.

He is said to have spoken of a beast with "large eyes, set in a horny sort of skull… with teeth that could be seen glistening in the moonlight".

He apparently claimed that the sub was so damaged in its battle with the "monster", it could no longer submerge. It was found floating on the surface of the water by the Coreopsis...
 
Back
Top