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.

 

Spectacular Phenomena In The Sky. What Is It?

page: 117
431
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


You can make a long exposure (not over exposure) of anything that is spinning and it will make the object appear more precise and smooth than it really is, you could put a cookie with a bite taken out on a turn table and take a long exposure and you would get an image of a perfect disk.

I'm not saying the long exposure MAKES the spiral so precise, all that is required for that to happen is for the source to be spinning at a uniform speed and on a stable trajectory and for it to happen in a vacuum where the only influence on the shape is the movement of the object dispensing the fuel or whatever it is.

What I am saying is that the long exposure will smooth out any inconstancies or roughness in the spiral and make it appear more artificial than it would to the eye.

The important point I'm making is that in the photos the spiral is massive and has about 12 rings whereas in the videos you can barely make out more than 4.

This is the effect of the slow shutter speed freezing several seconds in time, all blended together in one image. The videos are a much better portrayal of what happened because they are in real time where as the photos don't just capture the moment but also several seconds or even minutes up until that point.

The spiral was never that big and never took up that much sky, it's just an effect of the slow shutter speed capturing the both the spirals current position and it's already travelled path for somewhere between seconds and minutes.

That's why the photos do not portray accurately what happened.




posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Or its an electromagnetic effect that is not easily distorted by atmospheric conditions.

I think rocket, but not conventional rocket.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I have some alternative theory on this dilemma.

Heres the first LHC DOORWAY IN/OUT

The LHC compiled it's strongest round that night LHC POWER OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!

how do u get youtube video numbers?


[edit on 12-12-2009 by Jordan River]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Or its an electromagnetic effect that is not easily distorted by atmospheric conditions.

I think rocket, but not conventional rocket.


Not out of the question!

The thing is I'm sure a rocket is capable of making the spiral and I think the shape of the spiral was dictated by the spinning of the rocket and whatever matter it may be spinning off of the rocket in a spiral shape, that doesn't seem far fetched at all to me, it's apparent perfection of form is far from impossible to achieve.

And maybe you're right, maybe it wasn't something leaking but something emitted on purpose. Maybe there was nothing physically leaving the rocket but it was emitting some kind of force and the spiral was just water being separated from the air by it?

It might just be like pouring flour over the invisible man, the spiral might be some kind of invisible force but the atmospheric conditions where right and spiral unintentionally became visible!?!?!

I don't know enough about the atmosphere in general to know if that could happen.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by np6888
We all know who Phage is, but the question is, why would he bother debunking this site, unless there really WAS something?


voice of reason doesn't mean 'debunker' in the sense you seem to be using it. just because phage's logic illuminates that which seems mysterious doesn't mean there is anything to cover up. just means there is usually a logical explanation and for some reason, phage usually has it. hah



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdeeman
 





The spiral was never that big and never took up that much sky, it's just an effect of the slow shutter speed capturing the both the spirals current position and it's already travelled path for somewhere between seconds and minutes.


But then you are saying that the outer rings in the pic were actually traveled paths, that actually were that big in the sky.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


Yes it had that much diameter but it was not as dense and solid as it appears in the photo. I can't explain it any more, comparing the video to the photos illustrates it perfectly.

The photo portrays the spiral in a way that was not seen in real time and to the naked eye.



To the naked eye the spiral would have been bright at the source and would have quickly lost brightness the further away it gets from the centre.

The photo picks up what was not bright enough to see with the naked eye and it also documents more than one moment in time.

All I'm implying is that the appearance of the spiral would have been more like the videos and not the photos.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Let me try to clarify what I'm saying lol

I'm not saying the spiral didn't span that far or wasn't that big, I'm just saying how it appears in the photos is not the same as how it would have appeared to people watching.

To people watching it would not have had as many rings at any one time and it would not have appeared to cover so much sky.

The photos also do not convey how long the spiral lasted.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatdeeman
Let me try to clarify what I'm saying lol

I'm not saying the spiral didn't span that far or wasn't that big, I'm just saying how it appears in the photos is not the same as how it would have appeared to people watching.

To people watching it would not have had as many rings at any one time and it would not have appeared to cover so much sky.

The photos also do not convey how long the spiral lasted.


In this thread theirs a person whom have witnessed the event. He claims 15minutes which is not what the report said. i heard 2-10minutes (reports) and this man said 15 minutes



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Jordan River
 


The problem I suppose is different people's definition of "the event"

The remnants of the plume could have lasted a long time so saying the event lasted from first observation to the sky being clear could easily be 10 minutes but the actual appearance and disappearance of the white spiral probably lasted no more than 3 minutes and judging by videos it looks like it could have been even less.

It's hard to ascertain the true duration without knowing exactly what each person meant when they said how long it lasted.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


"Maybe you have NOT studied peripheral subjects such as real space flight, real physics, real optics".....Ohhh pLeAsE!!!! Wake up Jimbob!!!!....your alarm is going off!! AGAIN!

It as NOT a failed missle test!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Well I think Jim is one of the few people to believe it is a missile but ISN'T a failure so I don't know why you're acting like that.


I got the impression that Jim believes this missile may have how shall we say.... classified abilities.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatdeeman
reply to post by Jordan River
 


The problem I suppose is different people's definition of "the event"

The remnants of the plume could have lasted a long time so saying the event lasted from first observation to the sky being clear could easily be 10 minutes but the actual appearance and disappearance of the white spiral probably lasted no more than 3 minutes and judging by videos it looks like it could have been even less.

It's hard to ascertain the true duration without knowing exactly what each person meant when they said how long it lasted.


agreed I think his name started with a B. check it out. I think it's somewhere around the 70th page.

If this was a cloud, wouldn't a cloud dissipate within a matter of minutes? rather then 10-15.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jordan River
 




I guess it depends on how much air movement there is?

On some clear summer mornings I can go outside and see a nights worth of jet contrails (Let's not start about vapour trails) going back and forth across the sky that are still relatively intact so I suppose with still weather they can certainly persist for a while.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatdeeman
reply to post by Jordan River
 




I guess it depends on how much air movement there is?

On some clear summer mornings I can go outside and see a nights worth of jet contrails (Let's not start about vapour trails) going back and forth across the sky that are still relatively intact so I suppose with still weather they can certainly persist for a while.


The spiral is very mystical looking. I've taken a look at all of the youtube videos and scientific reasonings of a rocket but it just seems too hard to believe. I really wish i got some input from people in Norway. i wonder what they thought it was



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Maybe it's a missile sucess rather then a missile failure....how scary is that?



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
I have some alternative theory on this dilemma.

Heres the first LHC DOORWAY IN/OUT

The LHC compiled it's strongest round that night LHC POWER OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!

how do u get youtube video numbers?


[edit on 12-12-2009 by Jordan River]


Good theory...my question that stems from this is: If this happened as a result of a 2 TeV run, then what will happen when they do the 7 TeV runs?? Link



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WoMaNfIsH
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Maybe it's a missile sucess rather then a missile failure....how scary is that?


It could well be!

That's a more rational explanation than it being a spaceship, or a hologram!

Someone said it was the government practising a hologram machine and that they are going to fool people into believing god has made an appearance as some kind of mind control activity!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
What I am trying to get at, is the technology I reposted about on the previous page would be creating an electromagnetic spiral - which would explain why it was so 'pristine'. Any other 'material' that would be spewing out of a rocket would be subject to atmospheric disturbances.

But electromagnetic waves are not affected by atmosphere. We see light through air all the time, it is not distorted like smoke is by wind. See what I am saying?

Instead of the atmosphere distorting the spiral, the electromagnetic spiral is organizing/distorting the atmosphere into the phenomenon we see.


As a capsule re-enters the atmosphere the air heats up around it due to friction and usually a high-temperature-resistant material is needed to absorb that. A magnetic field is able to deflect the hot atmospheric air away from the vehicle's surface, reducing or eliminating the need for a heat-absorbing material.
A super-conducting coil will generate the magnetic field that would extend out beyond the leading edge of the vehicle. Assessment of the coil is ongoing.


flightglobal.com

But this would potentially mean that the rocket would have left the atmosphere, and was indeed on re-entry. What phase or stage did they say it 'failed' on? was it three? perhaps that is re-entry...



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Yeah...but no...i think what was seen was actually seen, photographed, recorded etc

It was a TRUE event and was orhcestrated to happen, someone pressed some button somewhere to achieve it!

Succesfull missile test, failed missile test, santa claus, aliens, fairies, goblins, whatever?

I've never seen anything like it and i'm more than quallified to say so.

Dr.WoMaNfIsH MD,MA,MDMA,WMD



new topics

top topics



 
431
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join