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.

 

UFO leaving a Wormhole?? Amazing footage!

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
And BY THE WAY, why is it soooo hard to believe that wormholes exist?


Most people are addicted to their bubbles of belief systems. What else is nicer than a nice bubble-belief-system bath and ignore every possibility? They likely say: My fortress of belief system is my castle.


Have a nice day.

Greetings

PS: I edited my posting to clarify my statement. You are absolutely right.


[edit on 15-2-2009 by TheWriter]




posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


The “explanation” of internos on page www.abovetopsecret.com... is wrong. As one can see, the wormhole trail (first + second picture on that page) clearly resulted from a corkscrew like motion, which could NEVER be caused by a rocket or a plane (unless the pilot/controller was dead drunk). That’s why the picture of the real rocket (third picture on www.abovetopsecret.com... = “Delta II Rocket Launch, Vandenberg AFB, CA, November 8, 1997, 17:35 PST”) depicts an even flight path and certainly not a corkscrew like.

(P.S., to C.H.U.D.: the first version of my last post seems to have been too demanding for you, thus edited, should help)

[edit on 14-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]

There's a HUGE difference between what we know and what whe BELIEVE to know: to claim to know how a wormhole looks like, is something that gets beyond my understanding, since NO ONE exactly knows how they would look like, unless, of course, you would be able to PROVE it: so... what a wormhole looks like, and WHY?
Like that?

If yes, then why? If not then why?

Like that

If yes, then why? If not then why?

Like that

If yes, then why? If not then why?

Now, please share some wormholes photos or videos, so we can compare them, since i'm wrong, since you know how they look like ...


Paradoxically enough, in order to understand what we are looking at, a basic knowledge about ballistics would be more helpful than some knowledge in propulsion, believe it or not. Your observation about the corkscrew like torsion stands correct, I even appreciated it, that says about you that you are a good observer, what is wrong is to believe that it's out of place, because it's NOT, plain and simple. Rotation on its vertical axis is what happens to every body shot at hight speed, take a gun and try by yourself: if you could see a slo-mo of a bullet, then you would notice that it ROTATES on its longitudinal axis. A good observer and a trained one are often on two different categories, or better, planets. I know "experts" who would not be able to explain this, for example


Now tell me: in your opinion, what we see is the trajectory of the missile, or is not?
And if it is, then why we don't see a straight line? And if it's not then why?
And what is then, and why?
Now watch at this Space Shuttle launch and please tell me:

Google Video Link

does the space shuttle rotate on its vertical axis or doesn't? And if it does, (and it DOES), then WHY? The corkscrew shape, is NOT some random one, it's the ideal way to beat the attrition, this is why you see a corkscrew effect: because what you see is nothing but a bullet being shot and rotating, imagine a huge and very fast SCREW: that is. IF you know the difference between a nail and a screw, then you can understand this.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWriter

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
And BY THE WAY, why is it soooo hard to believe that wormholes exist?


Most people are addicted to her bubbles of belief systems. What else is nicer than a nice bubble-belief-system bath and ignore every possibility? They likely say: My fortress of belief system is my castle.


Have a nice day.

Greetings


Yes, addicted to the giant bubbles of our excruciatingly truth seeking main stream media.

Have a nice day too!

[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


first thing that came to mind for me was a meteorite. As always, an excellent post Internos.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Can i just say that was an amazing post!!!

Not like i needed telling but the information and how it was prestented was great to show the effects of "cockscrew"



going to watch discovery blast off again "anyone want to pay for me to watch this thing live?" hehe



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
And BY THE WAY, why is it soooo hard to believe that wormholes exist? For instance ever heard Steven Greer state our government already have “ALIEN REPRODUCTOIN VEHICLES… BASED ON ADVANCED ANTI GRAVITY AND ZERO POINT ENERGY PROPULSION SYSTEM” with “FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT CAPACITY” and other surprises?


Hi CoolBlackHole, for many it still is, but absolute not for me.

It’s obvious in my opinion that space travelling especially beyond our solar system at the way we do it from point A to B is absolute too dangerous, senseless and useless because of the immense distances and what would be needed for such extremely long during trips in the sense of, cargo, food supplies, water supplies and the list goes on. Shielding against the great danger of radiation and how to deal with the very realistic risks of being hit by space debris.
Then, how would people react in situations like that, sitting on each other lips for such long times so to speak, that sorely will give very much and serious problems.

There are more people then Steven Greer as you know who claim such things and I am convinced they are the real deal.
Whether you call them wormholes, stargates, portals or such.

Look what Clifford Stone’s collaborator Joseph Zeromski said about it.


JZ: No, because being an aerospace engineer, I looked at it more scientifically, how the craft would travel from one galaxy to another using wormhole technology, I checked with different national societies and other sites, and this technology definitely does exist. This is something Clifford talks about, and you can’t make it up.


www.paolaharris.com...

Look at this info from Homer G. Ellis, it’s called “The warp drive and antigravity”.


The warp drive envisioned by Alcubierre that can move a spaceship faster than light can, with modification, levitate it as if it were lighter than light, even allow it to go below a black hole's horizon and return unscathed. Wormhole-like versions of the author's `drainhole' (1973) might provide the drive, in the form of a by-pass of the spaceship composed of a multitude of tiny topological tunnels. The by-pass would divert the gravitational `ether' into a sink covering part of the spaceship's hull, connected by the tunnels to a source covering the remainder of the hull, to produce an ether flow like that of a river that disappears underground only to spring forth at a point downstream. This diversion would effectively shield the spaceship from external gravity.


lanl.arxiv.org...

Here is the extremely for me difficult to follow pdf file.


lanl.arxiv.org...



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by JPhish

"first thing that came to mind for me was a meteorite...."


Of coursly, a meteorite, hehe, so convincing. Or what about: “it’s only” a promotional balloon, or falling down debris of a truck blown up by Al Qaida. All equally convincing.

Signature. Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.” ---> Right, seek on. Because stating it’s a meteorite certainly isn’t the truth.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by CoolBlackHole
 


You avoiding internos' questions?

Or are you feverishly searching youtube for a grainy video of a "wormhole"



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
Could it be you are addicted to the giant bubbles of the main stream media?

Have a nice day too!
[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]


Ha Ha Ha
Nice reply


Greetings

PS: Quickly have to edit this posting ... I have no TV and no radio


[edit on 15-2-2009 by TheWriter]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
"... Paradoxically enough, in order to understand what we are looking at, a basic knowledge about ballistics would be more helpful than some knowledge in propulsion, ... corkscrew ... Rotation ...."


Thanks, nice footage, but the corkscrew/rotation issue has been settled, see my second last post on page 2.

And btw how do you explain the corkscrew/rotating motion in the third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... It certainly isn't a 'ballistic' motion seen in slo-mo.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
"... Now, please share some wormholes photos or videos, so we can compare them, since i'm wrong, since you know how they look like ...
..."


Come on, we all know that our beloved government desperately try to hide certain facts, and of course also try to hide regarding photos/videos. That’s why it’s of course hard to find evidence. So, when something is DELIBERATELY hidden/denied/suppressed by a government, it’s illogical to principally assert a claim as wrong just because there just isn’t enough evidence YET. That’s just why the photos/videos are concealed, to make providing evidence impossible.

And just by the way, the second and third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... ARE proofs for wormhole like phenomena. They do NOT depict dust trails, as explained in my second last post on page 2 of this thread.

[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
to claim to know how a wormhole looks like, is something that gets beyond my understanding,


Hi internos, thanks for your very interesting reply.


You are sorely not the only one, I also don’t know how a wormhole looks like.


Originally posted by internos
NO ONE exactly knows how they would look like, unless, of course, you would be able to PROVE it: so... what a wormhole looks like, and WHY?


Here is just my personally view on this remark, nothing more.
I am 100% convinced [despite many will find me therefore naive or stupid or such and I can’t prove it in any way with “hard” evidence of course] as said or claimed by many whistleblowers so far, that the knowledge about whether you call them wormholes, stargates, or portals or such is already in the hands of so called human “black ops”.
If they really 100% understand how it all works I don’t know but they have that knowledge.
But it still goes as it is with all the real Alien stuff.
And it most probably will be as what Ben Rich, former Head of the Lockheed Skunk Works has said once.

these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity

To give you another really scary example.

It was said by Richard Hoagland in this interview.

www.projectcamelot.net...


I was told the other night, by an intel source on the phone, and this is an exact quote - it's so striking and so important that I get this right, because it exemplifies what's been going on behind the scenes for all these years in terms of them telling us the truth:


I was told that they would rather give up a major American city to nuclear terrorism, than give up this physics.

Thanks my friend, and sorely for your U2U.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole


Thanks, nice footage, but the corkscrew/rotation issue has been settled, see my second last post on page 2.

And btw how do you explain the corkscrew/rotating motion in the third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... It certainly isn't a 'ballistic' motion seen in slo-mo.

That is an OUT OF CONTROL launch: ask to Anatoly Zak if you want to know more, you can find him here:
www.russianspaceweb.com...
Please, contact him then share here his reply: ask to him about the launch that took place in Baikanur, on September 14, 2006. We are Not perfect machines, we are HUMANS, and we make mistakes: do you know how many people loss their lives because of human mistakes? USA paid the highest price for space exploration, because of HUMAN MISTAKES. This is the price you have to pay mate, but now we know about Mars, Jupiter, Venus, SAturn and so on: even their moons, stuff that we would be unable to even DREAM. And today we KNOW that. Because of space exploration, including MISTAKES. You are NOT exploring the Ocean, you're exploring the unknown.


[edit on 15/2/2009 by internos]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by CoolBlackHole
 


You avoiding internos' questions?

No, answered them.




Or are you feverishly searching youtube for a grainy video of a "wormhole"

Not at all, because I already found it (e.g. the second and third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com...).

And sorry, but they're not quite as grainy as you'd like them to be ...

[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole

Originally posted by JPhish

"first thing that came to mind for me was a meteorite...."


Of coursly, a meteorite, hehe, so convincing. Or what about: “it’s only” a promotional balloon, or falling down debris of a truck blown up by Al Qaida. All equally convincing.

Signature. Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.” ---> Right, seek on. Because stating it’s a meteorite certainly isn’t the truth.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]


dude, chill out, i only said what initially came to mind for me. I wasn't claiming anything. No where in my post did i state it was a meteorite. L2R.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:40 AM
link   
Hi,

I can't really be credited with anything to do with this video (I was named at the start of this thread), other than that I reposted it!

These missile tests do produce some spectacular shows - and it looks like that's what the "Wormhole" video actually was in this case.

There are PLENTY of highly anomalous NASA UFO videos, however, and I usually default to Gordon Cooper, Robert Jacobs and Travis Walton when discussing the UFO topics. In fact, this is what my website is concerned with.... www.checktheevidence.com...

Look at how 9/11, the UFO/ET question and Free energy are all connected - through people like Steven E Jones and Project Orion. The ultimate effect of these things is to keep free energy tech covered up - partly because it was used on 9/11 (see articles on my website and links etc).



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
"... how do you explain the corkscrew/rotating motion in the third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... It certainly isn't a 'ballistic' motion seen in slo-mo.

That is an OUT OF CONTROL launch: ask to Anatoly Zak if you want to know more, you can find him here: www.russianspaceweb.com... Please, contact him then share here his reply: ask to him about the launch that took place in Baikanur, on September 14, 2006. We are Not perfect machines, we are HUMANS, and we make mistakes: do you know how many people loss their lives because of human mistakes? USA paid the highest price for space exploration, because of HUMAN MISTAKES. This is the price you have to pay mate, but now we know about Mars, Jupiter, Venus, SAturn and so on: even their moons, stuff that we would be unable to even DREAM. And today we KNOW that. Because of space exploration, including MISTAKES. You are NOT exploring the Ocean, you're exploring the unknown.

1. No problem to believe such launches took place in Baikanur. But many problems to believe that they were what we see in the third youtube video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... That video’s gist -the rotating motion- is not in the slightest explained on the Russian page. Thus the page doesn’t provide evidence for the two occurrences being the same, sorry.

And, excuse me furthermore, claiming it's a rocket simply contradicts the laws of phyics.
A rocket simply does NOT look nor move like the object/scene we see in the third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com... Forget it. Even an “OUT OF CONTROL launch” won't explain this. Ask any rocket/ballistic engineer (as far as he's allowed to tell the truth).

2. Btw, what about 1a/b/c of my second last post on page 2 of this thread?

3. Yes, “we are HUMANS” and we/our engineers “make mistakes”. At the same time our knowledge of the laws of physics is still a VERY limited “3rd dimensional” knowledge. For instance google for “+LHC +dimensions” (www.google.com... yielded 312,000 results at the time of this post), then read on about e.g. the further dimensions many scientists “suddenly” have begun to “discover”…. For instance here's just one of the results on the first google page: "The LHC may find extra dimensions"... .


In summary, our knowledge of physics is still only about 100-200 years old, that’s a ridiculous “kindergarten” knowledge compared to civilizations which might be thousands or even millions of years ahead. And that’s exactly why we should be very careful with dismissing certain phenomena by all too simple explanations like “it’s only a ..”.

[edit on 15-2-2009 by CoolBlackHole]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole

a) Does obviously not depict a “dust trails”. On close up especially the last part of the wormhole trail is a big, very regularly shaped T U N N E L. A contrail would never, never look like this. Accordingly the rocket videos/pictures do at no time depict a tunnel, let alone such a regularly shaped one. Neither do the pictures you posted on this page.


I never said what we were seeing in the footage was a “dust trail”. The examples I used were to illustrate that high altitude winds turn straight trails into corkscrew trails quickly - do you think it matters much what the trail is made by/of ?

How do you know that a contrail produced by an object traveling through the upper atmosphere would not produce a tunnel? Have you researched this subject?

Show me where it says that a tunnel can not be produced?

Here is an article about meteoroid tunnels.

Another

The same physics is responsible for these as in the example in question. Objects moving through the atmosphere at high speed will create tunnel like trails. Yes - the particles produced by the rocket are not the same physical composition, but they produce the same effect.

Ask a rocket scientist if you don't believe me. (Go to www.jpl.nasa.gov... and ask someone there or contact ESA via this page if you don't trust NASA).



Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
b) The tiny “thing” exiting the relatively huge tunnel looks exactly as we would expect an air/spacecraft exiting a wormhole to look like (from afar). This is significantly different from the rocket videos/pictures.


Considering that wormholes are a theory, and no one has seen one, how can you say what an air/spacecraft exiting a wormhole would look like?

We already know this was a missile launch (thanks to internos). Are you saying, that two separate events, which could be seen for hundreds of miles around, occurred at the same time, and no one noticed this?


Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
c) The same goes for the 'opening' of the tunnel. One can distinctly see the tunnel break open immediately before the 'thing' exits. Again no such event in the rocket videos/pictures.


You expect every launch to be a 'carbon-copy'?



Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
CONCLUSION: it's not any 'rocket' video, but a genuine wormhole footage.


Sorry, but that is not the case. Just because you have not seen it for yourself, does not mean a rocket launch can not appear to do this. As said before, since we don't know what a wormhole might look like (even if they do exist - and we certainly have no proof of that), there is no way you can say that is footage of a wormhole.


Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
2. As to the third video on page www.abovetopsecret.com...:
How do you explain THAT corkscrew motion, which certainly isn’t caused by winds?


Why could it not be? What makes you so sure?

[edit on 15-2-2009 by C.H.U.D.]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Hi internos,

Great work as usual, but, you are mistaken about the rotation causing the twisting in the trails - as I said before, this is due to high altitude winds. Please show us a source that says otherwise.

Also, look at the photograph you posted yourself - if it's the rotation, then why is the contrail not distorted everywhere along it's path, and why is the trail disconnected and 'ripped away'?

If you watch a shuttle launch, the shuttle only rotates early on in its ascent, and there is very little if any corkscrewing in the contrail this low down.

Edit to add this example:



Keep your eye on the shadow. There is a slight disturbance where the shuttle turned, but apart from that, the trail is straight as a die, would you not agree?





The Minotaur's ascent to reach the desired orbit around Earth was timed perfectly to produce a spectacular "twilight phenomenon" that occurs when rockets or missiles are launched just before sunrise or shortly after sunset. Unburned fuel particles and water drops in the rocket's contrail freeze in the less dense upper atmosphere and get reflected by sunlight at high altitudes to generate such breath-taking scenes. The winds aloft twist the exhaust cloud, giving it a corkscrew effect.

Source: spaceflightnow.com



Differential velocities of upper atmospheric winds
versus altitude will cause the contrail to corkscrew and scramble
fairly rapidly, much like the contrails we see from Vandenberg rocket
launches on the west coast.

Source: METEOROBS

[edit on 15-2-2009 by C.H.U.D.]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoolBlackHole
And that’s exactly why we should be very careful with dismissing certain phenomena by all too simple explanations like “it’s only a ..”.


So we should include this as an 'unexplained' phenomenon just because one person (you) refuses to believe the vast majority of people here, that this is a normal, but at the same time rarely seen event?

Perhaps we should start including sightings of Chinese lanterns (CLs) as definitive proof that something out of the ordinary is going on, since a few stubborn 'believers' insist that the unusual thing they appear to do can not be accomplished by a CL, despite it having been shown that they can easily appear to hover etc.?

I quite agree with you, that everything should be thoroughly investigated, so as we do not miss 'the one' (if it exists), but in this case, the cause has been established, beyond doubt, and there's no point flogging a dead horse.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join