'UFO Takes Down Russian Rocket'....Or?

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: LogicalRazor

Ummmm... no. I do think think every light in the sky is aliens. It's possible though. Basically Anything is since we know so little. I don't know what happened. But the ones who are speaking in absolutes are the ones making fools of themselves. Only a Sith speaks in absolutes. Pretending you know for sure what is possible to have happened. Right when the "thing" comes close to the rocket it immediately begins pouring out thick clouds of smoke. I believe that every aspect of this launch including the "thing" deserves further and thorough investigation.

Maybe it's just a coincidence. Maybe it's also a coincidence that after 2 previous failures they still didn't learn from their mistakes. Maybe it's a coincidence that this particular cargo cannot seem to get into space. As someone who refuses to speak in absolutes, I have to admit that's a possibility. To do otherwise would be to lie to myself.

I just do not accept the "logic" that since "the Russians (or whoEVER) said it was just Internet and Russians are a unique people who are not capable of lying" or that "since it does not or may not appear to make contact with the rocket there is 0% chance it effected it in any way".

By the way thanks for the ad hominem (sp?) attacks about tin foil hats and aliens (which i never mentioned anything about so that's just like me saying "oh yeah! well you probably believe in bigfoot! therefore your argument is invalid!") instead of addressing the issues.

Let's try this again in an intellectually honest way.

#1 is it possible for us to be lied to about the "Internet satellite" and it could have been something more or is that not possible?

#2 Can objects effect other objects without making physical contact, or is that not possible?

#3 Is it possible that the militaries of world super powers to possess advanced technology that the general public is not aware of, or is that not possible?

#3a Is it possible that said technology could be advanced to such a degree that the general public would not recognize or understand it, even if it were displayed before their eyes, or is that not possible?




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Given the tensions between US and Russia lately and a bit of a fallout over the space program partnership, I would not be the least bit surprised that the rocket was sabotaged.

The payload was an advanced satellite, if it were cargo to the ISS I would not be suspicious of the cause.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470

Sorry about the grenade post 3n19m470. After reading (especially this post I'm responding to) seems like we're on the same page. I've asked the same questions to others before as well but I was ignored as usual.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:03 PM
link   
The sudden smoke/burst is nothing more than the second stage boosters firing. If you've witnessed launches before you'd know this. If you've taken university level classes on the subject & watched video after video of similar launches, you'd know there's nothing particularly strange about this specific one. Someone is pointing out anomalies that are commonly observed in such launches. Most of which are either stars, digital artifacts or a result of video compression. Whether you choose to accept that or not or believe in the least likely and more outrageous scenario is entirely up to you. I suppose you can choose to live in an alternative reality. All that said, once the rocket is out of view, its quite possible that the US somehow sabotaged the mission. The more likely and less costly scenario would be via the hacking of the onboard autopilot program which can be remotely accessed from earth. The encryption would need to be broken and at that point, dumping fuel, ditching or disabling any of the remaining booster rockets before reaching a stable orbital speed and angle, the slightest change of trajectory ....would be disastrous. But hey, let's pick the least likely scenario because conspiracies have to be complex and dramatic.
edit on 16-5-2014 by LogicalRazor because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   
I posted a comment about the timing of the video explaining that the "failure" seen is not a failure at all. Comment deleted.

Surprise.

Why is it youtube "UFO" posters are such dicks?



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: RealScience

Something hit it, messed with it after some time so it looks as if the rocket had its own problem, cause if it exploded at the time of hit - would be obvious.
Except that the whole premise is; "Oh look! A UFO! Oh look! An explosion!"

It wasn't a UFO, it was a star.
The rocket didn't explode in the video, the third stage failed to put the payload into orbit.
edit on 5/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
There's also a distinct and very remote possibility that the incident was a result of a malfunction or bad math (Payload too much for the amount of thrust & speed needed to reach a safe orbit). But hey, I guess that's just way too crazy to believe



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: LogicalRazor

The more likely and less costly scenario would be via the hacking of the onboard autopilot program which can be remotely accessed from earth.

The most likely scenario is that the rocket failed to place its payload into orbit because of a hardware failure. It's not the first time it's happened (by Russians as well as others) and it's not likely to be the last.

edit on 5/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
The rocket didn't explode, the third stage failed to put the payload into orbit.


Second or third? Either way, yeah...that ^^^ Thank you for the sanity.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LogicalRazor

The more likely and less costly scenario would be via the hacking of the onboard autopilot program which can be remotely accessed from earth.

The most likely scenario is that the rocket failed to place its payload into orbit because of a hardware failure. It's not the first time it's happened (by Russians as well as others) and it's not likely to be the last.



I didn't mean THE most likely scenario...I was playing to his assertion that it was sabotage. In which case, I was making the statement that it would be less costly and more likely to hackm rather than this being a case of a UFO or shooting it down with a cloaked missile or an EMP burst (As he stated at some point). I wholeheartedly agree that this was a malfunction or miscalculation on behalf of the Russians.



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   
great videos it looks like the one pixel takes out the other pixel that's for sure. This is the worst conspiracy/ufo footage I've ever seen. The pixels could be anything, or nothing but pixels that flash because the footage is zoomed so much that the only thing you can see is the tail of the rocket. .... garbage



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Here's a sharper video
edit on 19-5-2014 by sean because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-5-2014 by sean because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Just to bump the earlier post -- the popular and understandable misinterpretations that the video shows a 'falling' rocket are based on not understanding that cameras track the rocket. And it rises but quickly arcs over towards the horizon -- and thus as viewed from the launch site is 'descending' in the sky [just like distant departing airplanes viewed from the ground]. This is standard for orbital launches of all kinds, but it freaked out witnesses to early space launches [see link]. And by several posts above, still freaks out folks unfamiliar with real space flight. As the camera tracks the 'descending' rocket, non-moving objects in or behind the sky show up as RISING dots -- more freaking out, sadly.




originally posted by: JimOberg
The flight path throughout the video is absolutely normal, with no signs of any deviation from a normal orbital ascent.



BUT it sure does look like 'falling' to somebody not familiar with rocket views.



I explain the geometry effect here:

www.nbcnews.com...



The rocket's failure occurred several minutes later, in third stage, far to the east, well out of ground view.



It is NOT shown on this video.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

They look similar to me, maybe worth someone investigating.
the first image is a screen shot from thornews UFO destroys Russian Proton Rocket & Satellite ZOOMED & Slo Mo at around the 28 sec mark and the second shot is from 911 SCIENTIFIC PROOF NO PLANES... from lewey777






Love and harmony
Whateva





top topics
 
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum