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: 94
431
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mrlondon
 

Sure. Excuse me for being tardy. I was hungry.
Let's review the description of the event from the OP

Spiral grew steadily larger, until it eventually was significantly greater than both the moon and other things it will be normal to find in the sky.

Bigger than the moon, not covering half the sky. There are images which show the spiral apparently covering a large area of the sky. It would appear that those images are using telescopic lenses as there are other images (and video) which show the spiral as occupying a few degrees at most. I don't think the spiral was hundreds of miles across but it was pretty big. Things spread out easily in space, it doesn't take a lot of material to go a long way (see my post about the CARE experiment).


"Spiral" also walked across the sky, leaving a bright blue track.

The spiral was not stationary.


The whole thing lasted just under one minute and then spiral in the sky collapsed, leaving it in a dark, circular "hole" in the night sky.

The event was short lived.




posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by themuse
 


Well, just right of the spiral is a peak called Tromsdaltiden. Many people likes to photograf it. It can be a beatyfull sight when the lighting is right. Wich it often is this time of year just when its about to be daylight. You should see the colours the sky sometime have.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Last night on the History Ch. a few astronauts came forth about UFO's. One of them, please forgive me as I forget which one, explained exactly how disinformation is done correctly. A little bit of truth is sprinkled into many lies and I think that's what is happening here with this failed rocket explanation.

I don't believe something that perfect --spiral, black hole, a beam, etc., came from something that failed.

Plus, wasn't Obama in Norway accepting his prize shortly after?

There's no way they launch a rocket with the President in the vicinity (even a few hundred miles away). No way.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blender

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mrlondon
 

Because it was in the sky and the world is round.



Ok, so anyone within a 700 mile radius should see every single test done in the upper atmosphere, because the world is round. Good explination! Cheers!


By no means.

Sometimes my area of the world has an aerial phenomenon called

C
L
O
U
D
S

Have you ever heard of them?

By the way, somebody really should check the met reports from places such as Arkhangelsk, down track along the flight path, to see what we might expect from witnesses there -- the poster's original point having some merit after all, and to my shame, my urge to taunt overcoming my good manners...

Also, of course, we should CHECK THE TIME OF SUNRISE there so we can judge whether such a white-cloud apparition would even have been detected in a full-bright sky!

Answer scroll down:












Sunrise at Arkhanglesk was 07:06 GMT, a few minutes after the rocket would have passed in the northern skies. How bright was the sky? Quite possibly too bright for the rocket contrail to be seen even if it had been clear.





[edit on 10-12-2009 by JimOberg]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Wow, I left this morning when this thread was in the thirties.

I'm not going way back there to read the new 60 pages I just want to say that I was just watching Glenn Beck on 5 o'clock Fox news and at the end he showed this spiral in the sky in Norway.

Glenn says some people are saying it was a missile failure but many don't agree so he is going to get a group to look into this and get them on the show. He said check it out...... it is on his site. I don't have the address to his site but I think something like glennbeck.com might work.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mrlondon
 

Sure. Excuse me for being tardy. I was hungry.
Let's review the description of the event from the OP

Spiral grew steadily larger, until it eventually was significantly greater than both the moon and other things it will be normal to find in the sky.

Bigger than the moon, not covering half the sky. There are images which show the spiral apparently covering a large area of the sky. It would appear that those images are using telescopic lenses as there are other images (and video) which show the spiral as occupying a few degrees at most. I don't think the spiral was hundreds of miles across but it was pretty big. Things spread out easily in space, it doesn't take a lot of material to go a long way (see my post about the CARE experiment).


"Spiral" also walked across the sky, leaving a bright blue track.

The spiral was not stationary.


The whole thing lasted just under one minute and then spiral in the sky collapsed, leaving it in a dark, circular "hole" in the night sky.

The event was short lived.





The spiral was about 2-3 times the size of the moon at its biggest.
And it was stationary from point of view, or seemed to be at least.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blender

Originally posted by mrlondon
reply to post by Phage
 


You going to bother to respond to the questions about how much propellant would be needed to produce this effect if it is as big in scale as everyone assumes?



It seems that a few of us here only like to respond to questions that we can come up with an answer to that fits our opinions.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by Blender]


I think it probably was a testing of weapons systems, but I think there was more than just the Russians system involved.

But I would still like to know how if the failure occurred at near orbital altitude and equivalent distance from ground observers in Norway that there was enough unspent propellant to create what we saw?



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cablespider
Can someone confirm this as a 10+ minute event (witnesses claim it swirled for more than 10 minutes; reported early yesterday) or was it just a minute or two?


This is a genuine issue with descriptions of rocket launchings.

Although the dynamic knock-your-socks-off kinds of light shows rarely last more than 2-3 minutes, one visual phenomenon of launchings lasts much longer -- the lower atmosphere smoke trail from first stage operation.

And that trail, becoming zigzagged as hi-alt winds shear the intitially straight smoke trail in different directions, IS visible at the bottom of some scenes. And it does last 10-12 minutes before fully dispersing.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Gromle and I posted at the exact time and his post came right after mine if you didn't read my post please back it up and read.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realtruth
The answer to your question is absolutely 100% no fricken way.


The President of the United States would not be within 2000 miles of a Russian missile test, especially when the Nobel Peace prized was being given.


I am not absolutely sure what you mean, and I apologize if I misunderstand you. But if you are implying that it could not have been a missile launch because Obama was in Norway at the time, you are wrong. I know I have already said this, but perhaps it needs to be repeated:

The failed rocket launch happened Wednesday morning, December 9.

The Nobel Peace Prize ceremony where Obama was given the prize was held TODAY, December 10. Obama was NOT in Norway yesterday. Air Force One landed here in Norway at 08.15 THIS MORNING.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Sorry for bringing this back up but it seems my theory has been drowned out by nonsense. Back to my Original question.

What would be the best way to evade an anti aircraft missile if you where in a zero G craft... Would it not be to spiral? I'm not a scholar so if anyone could clue me in.


~~Yes i do believe the end stage of that missle was spiraling after an alien craft and that this was a rocket launch preventing a first contact, days before a nobel peace prize was awarded, what better place to show up.~~



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Blender
 

Yup that pretty much covers it.
Like this for example:

Reports of UFOs skyrocketed last weekend along the east coast of the US after a NASA launched an experiment to study an unusual phenomenon called noctilucent clouds, or ‘night shining’ clouds.

xenophilius.wordpress.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by '___'omino
 


The Navtex message proves nothing, unless we know who and how it got on the web.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
According to what I just heard it is a rocket that Russia launched and the rocket had a failure. More to come on the failed launch.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Blender

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mrlondon
 

Because it was in the sky and the world is round.



Ok, so anyone within a 700 mile radius should see every single test done in the upper atmosphere, because the world is round. Good explination! Cheers!


By no means.

Sometimes my area of the world has an aerial phenomenon called

C
L
O
U
D
S




You should have directed that at Phage.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Okay im getting mad, what is all this crap. Stop drowning out legit stuff with dumb stuff and squabbles, its making me paranoid.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 



That make no difference at all.

Secret Service, military intelligence and international diplomacy would never allow testing of a missile so close to a world leader arriving nearby.

The reason, could be construed as an act of war, heck we went to war in Iraq for WMD and they were not even there.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Is this thing on?

*taps mic*



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gromle
The spiral was about 2-3 times the size of the moon at its biggest.
And it was stationary from point of view, or seemed to be at least.


The full moon is about 1/2º across. By your description the spiral would have been 1º - 1.5º across. So some of the photos are exaggerating the size.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by '___'omino
 


Okay, this shows that the recent video is a rocket(conveniently, that guy just signed up too.) This shows that the Norway spiral was likely not a rocket, because you don't just launch two rockets within days.



new topics

top topics



 
431
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join