Norway Lights a Rocket? Don't Make me LOL, Questions For The Supposed De Bunkers

Originally posted by captiva
This photograph, which shows the spiral in almost full size has been taken with a fast F2.8 lens to get the sharp capture. There is no sign of blur so a fast shutter speed was used.

The spiral itself is a sign of blur, motion blur.

There is no camera shake because a tripod was used.

How do you know it was an F/2.8 lens? Unless you have seen the EXIF information that is purely speculation and about as useful as such.


If you are a qualified photographer you're not a very good one and if you're not then you were very foolish to assume that by claiming you were nobody with a small amount of real photographic knowledge would see through your badly informed claims.

Double post1

[edit on 13-12-2009 by OldDragger]

Just like the other days "UFO lands in Barstow" fiasco, I find it interesting that the majority here ignores real evidence and always goes for the FAKE tabloid like stuff! ATS'ers are constantly saying they are not "sheeple' and are open minded etc, yet they prefer to fall for the dumbest stuff simply because they have been conditioned by movies TV and video games! AMAZING!!

and even this !
exopoliticsnews.wordpress.com...


Now we have a mystery wrapped in an enigma ! !

I haven't read through the whole thread, but here is all the evidence I have provided in other threads, I thought I might a well share it all with you all.

First off, the videos and pictures...

Video 1: Note that at the end the Norwegian Military Official says the Russians never announce what they are doing, and if you read this thread I have shown there is no evidence that *anyone* announced this before it actually occurred.


Video 2: How can you watch this and think "Missile!"?!?!


And here are some pictures I've collected, take a look...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9a6ab5d56689.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bbaa45ffd665.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3bb04e7c4173.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0372f9f34d2a.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fa1ae1a26a87.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3e2d6e0f7250.jpg[/atsimg]

And then I have the question of why it didn't self destruct...

Russian Bulava Missile Tests

23 December 2008 Failure Launch from a submerged submarine. The missile malfunctioned during firing of its third stage and
self-destructed on command.
15 July 2009 Failure Launch from a submerged submarine. The missile malfunctioned during firing of its first stage and
self-destructed.
9 December 2009 Failure Launch from a submerged submarine. The missile malfunctioned during firing of its third stage.

Source

Self destructs the last 2 times in prior testing, including a test where it malfunctioned during firing its third stage... how come not this past time?

[edit on 13-12-2009 by highlyoriginal]

Originally posted by captiva
"Some photographs had a long shutter speed" How on earth can you state this without seeing the exif details? That comment is prefabricated and does the rest of your argument no good at all.

Then how on earth can you state that a fast shutter speed was used, that a high ISO was used and then go on to claim you know exactly what aperture was used all WITHOUT the exif data.

Come on now, which is it?

Originally posted by ProRipp
and even this !
exopoliticsnews.wordpress.com...


Now we have a mystery wrapped in an enigma ! !

They seem realy informed:

"Such dismissals of extraterrestrial involvement, however, do not explore an alternative explanation. Did an extraterrestrial intelligence deliberately cause the Russian nuclear missile failure in order to create the resulting light spiral knowing the global impact it would have on the day of Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech? Furthermore did extraterrestrials do so in order to highlight and even endorse the nuclear disarmament that was a critical component of Obama’s acceptance speech."

Like stated many times before, Obama didnt arrive until the nest day.

Originally posted by captiva
reply to post by ALLis0NE

 

"Some photographs had a long shutter speed" How on earth can you state this without seeing the exif details? That comment is prefabricated and does the rest of your argument no good at all.

How? I already told you.... you can compare different pictures of the same event and see the differences... DUH.. I already said that.... you don't need to see exif data to know that some had longer shutter speeds, all you have to see is the trails and excess light.

See this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by captiva
A slow shutter speed used to capture the event from the start till the end of the spiral would only show a large circular blur with no ridges and no depth.

Respects

That is from start to end, I never said from start to end......... Also depending on the shutter speed, it wouldn't be blurry. Obviously though there are many blurry images of this event caused by slow shutter speed.

Don't even try to debunk me, you are going to lose. You already did....




[edit on 13-12-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Originally posted by captiva
reply to post by HankMcCoy

 

"Because, when people do not know about something for themselves, they look to people that DO know about things. The Educated among us have stated TO A PERSON that it was a rocket. I am satisfied."

I like many people have learned to think for myself and not rely on the educated people to a person to do so for me. I am an educated person having 3 degrees and a post graduate in 3 diffirent fields and " TO A PERSON" I disagree with your views. I also note that the one area I mentioned I am qualified in, you did not quote.

Sheeple following the educated among us is as bad as sheeple following anything or anyone else.

Respects

Awesome!

So, I am going to assume that you do all of your own farming, energy production, mechanical maintenance, computer engineering, and health related concerns.

Glad to see that you don't have any time for educated people.

Actually, your very demeanor suggests that you do not even VALUE formal education let alone have even a SINGLE degree, including a high school equivalency.

Also, your seeming lack of understanding about what the phrase "To a person" means belies your ignorance of even SIMPLE concepts.

Have a good time planting those crops next spring!

Originally posted by highlyoriginal


Video 1: Note that at the end the Norwegian Military Official says the Russians never announce what they are doing, and if you read this thread I have shown there is no evidence that *anyone* announced this before it actually occurred.

(click to open player in new window)

Video 2: How can you watch this and think "Missile!"?!?!

(click to open player in new window)

I just want to point out the previews of the two videos above. the first one is a still from a video and was taken with a fast shutter speed , the spiral is small and rather hard edged.

The second is a still image taken with a DSLR, it was taken with a long shutter speed and the spiral is larger and smoother due to motion blur.

These two images clearly show the difference between a fast shutter speed (top) and a slow shutter speed (bottom)

The top image is the one that is representative of what people saw with their own eyes.

This, once again is why the majority of photos cannot be used as a visual reference to what happened.

Originally posted by Meesterjojo

Originally posted by Griffo515
1. SOUND- Rockets make a lot of it...why is there none in the VIDEOS?

2. DEBRIS- No reports of any being found

3. POSITION- Why are there no side on photographs and/or video of the lights? what, everyone filming and taking photos all across Norway just happened to be standing DIRECTLY in front of it to give it THIS spiral effect?...I don't think so.

4. VALIDITY- As always, can we rely on the official report given our governments (especially Russia's) track record?

5. PRECISION- How can a failed rocket launch be so PERFECT

6. ILLUMINATION- If it were a failed rocket...would it not explode like 90% of them? where is the ka-boom! where is the light given off in such an event!...there is none. Which brings us back to our 2nd question, where is the debris??


[edit on 13-12-2009 by Griffo515]

[edit on 13-12-2009 by Griffo515]

[edit on 13-12-2009 by Griffo515]

1- Amateurs always have the best equipment on hand just for your (yes you) personal satisfaction.

2- wasn't the rocket from russia? Could it be that a russian rocket would have debris in russia?

3- I'm not going to explain the basic principles of vision in relation to celestial bodies to you. Wiki is your friend.

4- The only thing you're asking which most people, including myself, could agree with.

5- I'm glad your definition (whatever that may be) is the same as everyone elses in the world.

6- I'm presuming you realize that "rocket" is not synonymous with "explosive" or "warhead". If it were I'm sure the astronauts of the 60s and 70 would've been in for a huge suprise.

You really didn't think your questions through, and you're expecting others to draw out what you should've asked/do work for you.

Thus

7- No.

1.The point op in the thread you quoted from is right
from all the videos we have seen and heard noises from the voices of the people on the ground, there were no missile or any rocket nosies or sounds coming from that point.

Your post doesnt count as fact.

Why? no matter on who or what team has the equipment best or low they should have captured the sound from the so called rocket or missile, but it did? nope.

2.if debris were in russia which i dont so they would be have been long taken by the military trucks which some people might have captured some trucks on the highways in russia no?

also i thought i heard if it was a missile it was fired from white seas.

3.Wiki is your friend? really did you know you shouldnt trust Wiki as source for information? even high school and college teachers are urging there students to stay away from Wiki, so dont force other people to vist that site.

4. Agree with quoted op

6.Rockets or missiles cant do something like we have seen in norway, however they can do something differently.

reply to post by captiva


Sheeple following the educated among us is as bad as sheeple following anything or anyone else.

Try do it yourself dentistry!
I'm sure with your multiple degrees it would be no problem!
Hopefully you will try vocabulary as well, lose the "sheeple" cliche'!

reply to post by fatdeeman


Exactly! Good response.

Unfortunetly you will be ignored because sheep don't like mundane things, they like special things because it tickles their minds. It's like a drug to them.

[edit on 13-12-2009 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by fatdeeman


You are spot on!

And in case anyone was wondering I personally think it was definitely a missile, the shape and appearance of the plume and the way it is illuminated by the rising sun where it is close to sea level make me sure of this.

BUT I don't feel entirely sure it was a failure, the spiral may be intentional, for what reason I am not sure but the way it stopped so suddenly makes me feel it couldn't have been something leaking, something leaking would surely have gradually decreased instead of stopping dead.

I think it's safe to say it was a missile but I also think that raises as many questions as it answers when you start to look into it a lot.

reply to post by XPLodER


Havent they (russia) already got weather changing technology ? On Michael Palins New Europe reshown on BBC Three a few nights back , he was in Russia and mentioned in the old days of the cold war they used to spray ,i think either silver sulphate or silver oxide or silver summat into the atmoshere above red square so that it wouldnt rain on the parades through red square that they used to have ! That nowadays the new russia couldnt AFFORD to do it !

reply to post by Gromle


Not.

reply to post by fatdeeman


I'd have thought a controlled spiral would be a good way of burning off excess fuel, whether it was a failure or not. It's got a 8000km range IIRC.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Gromle

 

Not.

And how can you say that?
Where you there to witness it?

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

Originally posted by bsbray11
I can't help but notice that the rocket failure you posted doesn't look anything like this thing over Norway.

That is because I didn't post a rocket failure, I posted a successful launch. It was to show you the white trail, and then I asked you to imagine it in a spiral, and you get the same thing.

I can imagine all sorts of things, but that doesn't mean they will reflect thermodynamics or entropy, which is what causes hot gases to expand at a different rate, to float upwards in a cooler fluid, things like that.

All I'm asking for, is an example, a video of another rocket, that produces anything like this. If we're so sure this is a rocket failure, then there must be some precedent. Where is it?

Yes, I can. Here is another spiral that happened in 2006 in Russia

That doesn't satisfy me completely but I will admit it is a nicely formed spiral, smaller though it may be and etc.



Btw, Allis0ne, I want you to know that your posting here on the opposite side of the debate has made me take a much humbler approach here, simply because I know you are an intelligent person simply by your username alone. We are one being here at ATS, and I respect you other posters like I respect the cells of my body, and I appreciate it all being here. Because we can have respect and love for one another, it makes our discussion that much more interesting.