It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

UFO Destroyed the Falcon-9 Rocket /SpaceX/Facebook & Israeli Aerospace Industries

page: 34
144
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
This was not an innocent satellite, otherwise something would not have destroyed it.



Nah, it has to be the IllumiNSAMasons.



A false choice.

Good luck defining where the illuminati starts and ends.
Similarly, good luck defining where your own government starts and ends.

More importantly, good luck defining where an INDIVIDUALS influence starts and ends.

As a thought experiment, try to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Just for once in your life use your own imagination, and try to answer any one of those three questions and prove it factually.


You are thinking in black and white, just like you were trained, trying to hold a conversation with a more advanced person who isn't held down by that mental restriction. The open ended nature of our reality and the organizations that exist in it is just too much for your brain to handle. Certainly the ability to manipulate masses of people does not exist this way, it's too frightening to bear. Everything you need to know was taught to you in school and will be revealed through your usual channels of media right?




posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: westernstar22

Right. The "more advanced person" would be you? Wow me. What happened?



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

The way it was presented in the article, I agree that counting the seconds as it travels between towers is moot if it's based upon a slow motion video. The actual speed is so fast many missed the object flashing through the image in the first place, as did I.

Thank you for mentioning the two bangs. I was unaware of them until you mentioned them.

I'm pretty sure I posted links to Doppler radar gifs earlier in the thread.

I don't think anyone shot themselves in the foot. Apparently, the sale of the Israeli Spacecom company to the Beijing Xinwei Technology Group was dependent upon a successful launch of this rocket. Someone didn't want this transfer to take place or that satellite to go into orbit. Perhaps it had very advanced tech and would have been spying on/gathering intel in areas which some parties didn't want.

Edited to Add: Or, perhaps someone doesn't want these parties in a partnership.

I was reading the comments under Ian's two articles at VT last night and some think it was O. who was behind it. ( Just sayin'...
)
edit on 10-9-2016 by tweetie because: added commentary



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: drphilxr

Yes. Many called drone right off of the bat. That's what Ian and Jeff at VT think, too.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie

O.? Oman? Oz?
And now you made me read all the comments and find out some lady got upset because of some hybrid stuff? I am more confused than usually.

I read the Spacecom Xinwei deal is still on the table, just the price dropped significantly. Which is why I stick with China. That and they're the only ones smart and technologically advanced enough to be capable of doing this.
Besides the a.word stuff which shall not be named. The grey elefant in the spacebar.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

I'm sorry. I've taken to shortening Obama's name to O. of late. The comments under VT articles can sometimes be more interesting to me than the articles, especially if the authors respond to readers.

So, the Israel/China deal is still on that table? That changes the picture. I'll see what I can find.

The A. word is still on the table for some. I'd call it off-world interests. :-)
edit on 10-9-2016 by tweetie because: grammar



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie

But why would they blow up this one and not redirect little Kims test missile up his a.?
I hope we'll get the next update during this week.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

If you believe anything from Veterans Today, then you're in a lot of trouble.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Oh, boy. I can't compare Kim's shenanigans with what happened to Space X's rocket so I don't have an answer to that. That's two very different scenarios. I don't like the term useful idiot but it seems Kim falls into that category.

I'm still checking for updates on occasion.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 10:14 PM
link   
i don't have the time to look back to search, but someone has posted Musk's most recent tweets here, right?

Very interesting, as he is trying to identify "quieter bang" sounds before explosion.

Also per his retweet of SpaceX's tweet "If you have audio, photos or videos of our anomaly last week, please send to report@spacex.com. Material may be useful for investigation."



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

I think you're confusing me with tweetie.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
a reply to: westernstar22
Yet, you are the one to refuse basic physics and lack the knowledge. And now you´re being bold calling others to think black/white. Do you even read your posts before you hit submit?

It´s comical, because you point out others are too dumb to get the situation
"is just too much for your brain to handle."
yet you fail to acknowledge simple facts, like how cameras operate. You failed with your thread and with any argument you made about the slow-motion part. I wonder if you had put any thoughts in how wrong you are on that.

Wake up.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Hmm, yeah, my bad!



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or a dot that happens to be within feet of the rocket.....



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or a dot that happens to be within feet of the rocket.....



Without any reference, we can't tell how far away it is from anything. All we know is there's a "thing" between the camera and the furthest away the camera can record something.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or a dot that happens to be within feet of the rocket.....



Correct; we have no idea whether it was close to the rocket or somewhere closer to the camera. And that is exactly why it is possible that it was an insect.

I'm not saying I think it is definitely an insect. What I am saying is that the people who say "it can't possibly be an insect" are incorrect. It certainly can be an insect flying somewhere closer to the camera rather than flying close to the rocket.

Sure, if it was only feet from the rocket, then it would have been moving too fast to have possibly been an insect. If that were the case, then the people who say "it could ONLY be a drone or missile or alien craft -- but not possibly a bug" people would have an argument. However, we don't know how far from the rocket or the camera the object was.


edit on 2016-9-11 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or a dot that happens to be within feet of the rocket.....



Correct; we have no idea whether it was close to the rocket or somewhere closer to the camera. And that is exactly why it is possible that it was an insect.

I'm not saying I think it is definitely an insect. What I am saying is that the people who say "it can't possibly be an insect" are incorrect. It certainly can be an insect flying somewhere closer to the camera rather than flying close to the rocket.

Sure, if it was only feet from the rocket, then it would have been moving too fast to have possibly been an insect. If that were the case, then the people who say "it could ONLY be a drone or missile or alien craft -- but not possibly a bug" people would have an argument. However, we don't know how far from the rocket or the camera the object was.




You guys clearly really want this thing to be an insect and continue to rationalize that explanation in spite of common sense. Please use the birds and bugs that are clearly visible as a reference in the video and then trace the trajectory of the drone.

Don't look up a screenshot that someone else did, but actually spend 20 or 30 minutes with your own brain, on your own computer, doing your own research.

It's completely understandable to not believe this is the result of ALIENS, but to continue to push the bug explanation is getting borderline religious.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or a dot that happens to be within feet of the rocket.....



Correct; we have no idea whether it was close to the rocket or somewhere closer to the camera. And that is exactly why it is possible that it was an insect.

I'm not saying I think it is definitely an insect. What I am saying is that the people who say "it can't possibly be an insect" are incorrect. It certainly can be an insect flying somewhere closer to the camera rather than flying close to the rocket.

Sure, if it was only feet from the rocket, then it would have been moving too fast to have possibly been an insect. If that were the case, then the people who say "it could ONLY be a drone or missile or alien craft -- but not possibly a bug" people would have an argument. However, we don't know how far from the rocket or the camera the object was.




You guys clearly really want this thing to be an insect and continue to rationalize that explanation in spite of common sense. Please use the birds and bugs that are clearly visible as a reference in the video and then trace the trajectory of the drone.

Don't look up a screenshot that someone else did, but actually spend 20 or 30 minutes with your own brain, on your own computer, doing your own research.

It's completely understandable to not believe this is the result of ALIENS, but to continue to push the bug explanation is getting borderline religious.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
What is the purpose of contuing to show up in these threads and type "well i looked at it and i still think it might be a bug"

"hey guys, looks weird i agree but i still think its probably a bug"


I mean OK you think it's a bug. got it. After 34 pages of screenshots, closely examined video, trajectories and discussion people have shown why it doesn't look or behave anything like a #ing bug. Yet oddly enough these people just keep wandering in here and with no proof or no example at all just regurgitate the line

"Hey guys yeah i looked and i think its probably a bug"

???

Good luck convincing everyone that a giant round floating orb flying in a perfectly straight line at the exact moment of the explosion is just a bug. There are plenty of videos on liveleak and youtube of flying round drones blowing up entire #ing villages and guess what they look like from far back? kinda bug like. Only when you use your #ing brain and look closer, you can tell its a manmade flying object.

Snap out of it already. The flying object deserves explanation and has a lot more merit than your silly bug theory. Stop trying to call this reasoning logical and scientific.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: westernstar22

And you really need it to be anything but a bug or a bird.

You can't tell how far away from the camera it is, therefore you can't tell how big the object is and how fast it is moving.

Here's something to ponder. 2 balloons, 100m apart and the closest is 100m from the camera. One is closer to the camera than the other, one is also bigger than the other. That would cause an optical illusion of them both being the same size and same distance from the camera.

Like I said, all there is is an object of unknown size at an unknown distance from the camera. There's no way of telling what it is by the footage shown in this thread.




top topics



 
144
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join