Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 2
67
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
I agree, this "rocket" explanation is ridicules. What I find interesting about the video is that when the black hole appears, why is it that the blue spiral shooting from the ground still remains and not dissipate like the spiral up in the sky? If the fuel, or whatever it is that is supposedly shooting out of the side of the rocket, if that is dissipating why wouldn't the same rate of dissipation be taking place in the blue portion going up to the spiral? Honestly when I first saw the video, I had the impression that this was some kind of holographic projection...and interestingly many witnesses initially said it looked like a computer graphic as well. I also have to ask the question concerning the Russians admitting to a failed rocket launch. Why would they admit to that anyway? All during the cold war they never admitted to failures like this...so why now... if not to cover up what truly happened, by saying it was something plausible like a rocket failure...




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Griffo515
 


The Russians did make a correlation between the two:

Through gritted teeth yesterday, Defence Ministry officials in Moscow admitted that it was instead the exploding trail of the country’s latest intercontinental ballistic missile. The navy’s new high-tech toy, codenamed Bulava, had gone up in smoke.

www.timesonline.co.uk...



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 


Because the 'ionized gases' that form the ring are spun out, the blue gases, or exhaust was shot out the back, not spun out to the sides.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by fatdeeman
 


Its wild that the whole spiral itself was moving almost as a single object. I was assuming people were mistaken on that point. That does not seem to be what air should do. The air should be initially pushed away from the rocket but then rapidly disperse before coming to a stop due to friction. But in this case the air from the rocket seems to ignore friction and hardly disperse at all. Here is an example of how air does not at all continue on a frictionless path:



Rocket exhaust is really hot. Therefore, the portion of smoke going straight down should immediately start to rise, which I would expect to noticeably screw the spiral.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Why was this same effect seen as far back as 1981?

From DoD document number FTD-ID(RS)T-1019-83:

FIRST UFO INCIDENT FOR OUR COUNTRY UFO incident causes sensation throughout half of China

It was a clear, brightly starlit night, on 24 July 1981, in southwest and northwest China as well as a large area of southern and south central China. The Milky Way slanted across the night sky and there was no moon. Suddenly at 2238 hours, a strange star-shaped bright spot was sighted by a large number of people in Sichuan and Yunnan provinces when it appeared in the sky to the north. The glimmer became brighter, began to oscillate and then a cloud-like band of light formed around the circumference of the bright spot. The huge spiral shaped UFO with its bright silver color lighting up the cloudless night sky was an especially striking, magnificent and grand sight in contrast with the star-studded sky. In the brief six or seven minutes from its appearance to its disappearance, some 10,000,000 people simultaneously witnessed this extraordinary sight in thenight sky.

During the inquiry into these matters, three main viewpoints have been formed: "the meteor theory", "the aircraft theory", and "the flying saucer theory".


It goes on...

METEOR THEORY DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT... SPY SATELLITE IS DOUBTFUL... WAS IT A FLYING SAUCER?

With regard to the strange phenomena in these reports, although they cannot be categorically denounced as psychological illusions, in view of the above, it could easily be inferred that they had an alien source, but the proof is apparently lacking. At present, besides a few blurred photos which were taken of the 24 July 1981 UFO there is neither any other physical evidence nor any good record of a signal. Also, researchers abroad still have obtained nothing relative to this kind of UFO or aliens. Nor do they include in their large collection of photos of flying saucers any such type of craft with a very distinct spiral trail.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

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


Sound dissipates quickly. Especially sound over water. Im not that worried about not hearing any sound.


2. DEBRIS- No reports of any being found



Brekke said a fisherman off the coast of Norway has reported seeing a yellow cylinder fall out of the sky and almost hit his boat.



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.


I can debunk this with ONE SITE.. www.cnn.com...


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


Actually, I think we can, considering the LAST time we had a Norwegian Missile Incident it almost ended in WWIII. Russia has no interest in being nuked because they didn't follow proper missile testing procedure.


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


By it's very nature, a failure cannot be perfect, and therefore, no matter how aesthetically pleasing the failed outcome may be, it is NOT the intended result, and as such, is NOT 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??


You have already answered your own question. If '90%' of them actually explode, given your own numbers, then it is safe to assume that 10% of them would not... although..


The phenomenon could be seen all over Norway, with witnesses describing a swirling light filling the sky around 8 a.m. and then seeming to explode.


That is taken from the same CNN news source.

[edit on 13-12-2009 by HankMcCoy]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
this is my first real post here but i think the answer is quite simple. what we are seeing is a projection or a hologram with this image being shown, wether its made by humans or aliens i dont know but it looks kind of obvious in the video footage on youtube.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by truthquest
 


It happened outside of the atmosphere.

There was no air involved.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by HankMcCoy

So how do you answer my question?

Why was this same effect seen as far back as 1981?

Source here



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
reply to post by HankMcCoy

So how do you answer my question?

Why was this same effect seen as far back as 1981?

Source here





Are you under the impression that rockets are a new technology?

I would be more impressed if they were seen as far back as 1881, but alas.


[edit on 13-12-2009 by HankMcCoy]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
The thing that puzzles me ... besides the other points you guys have already made (and am in full agreement with), is this;


'IF' (for the sake of argument) it was a failed rocket launch
the people who favoured this theory in the big thread, went on to state that said rocket had been launched from a submarine in the White Sea ... and this is why no sound was heard by the people in Norway (apparently) !

These same people went to great lengths to explain to us poor simple-minded doubters
that the launch site (White Sea) was approx 400km away from Norway, where the spiral was seen / photographed / videoed ... ok fine !

But if this was the case, why on earth did no-one else ... at any other location along that 400km line of flight, come forward to confirm that a rocket had been seen / photographed / videoed enroute.

And more intriguingly, why did no-one else ... other than the people in this one area of Norway see / photograph / video the damn spiral ... surely something that huge should have been seen for miles around ?


Something is definately not right ... and we are certainly not being told the truth ... the longer this goes on the more convinced I become.

Woody



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Have you guys seen this youtube video explaining a possibility? It made a lot of sense to me, and kibosh-ed my own UFO theory about it.




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwytch
The thing that puzzles me ... besides the other points you guys have already made (and am in full agreement with), is this;


'IF' (for the sake of argument) it was a failed rocket launch
the people who favoured this theory in the big thread, went on to state that said rocket had been launched from a submarine in the White Sea ... and this is why no sound was heard by the people in Norway (apparently) !

These same people went to great lengths to explain to us poor simple-minded doubters
that the launch site (White Sea) was approx 400km away from Norway, where the spiral was seen / photographed / videoed ... ok fine !

But if this was the case, why on earth did no-one else ... at any other location along that 400km line of flight, come forward to confirm that a rocket had been seen / photographed / videoed enroute.

And more intriguingly, why did no-one else ... other than the people in this one area of Norway see / photograph / video the damn spiral ... surely something that huge should have been seen for miles around ?


Something is definately not right ... and we are certainly not being told the truth ... the longer this goes on the more convinced I become.

Woody



There is really nothing else up that way. Not a lot of people live in that part of the world. Also, it was very early in the morning.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by HankMcCoy

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
reply to post by HankMcCoy

So how do you answer my question?

Why was this same effect seen as far back as 1981?

Source here



Are you under the impression that rockets are a new technology?

I would be more impressed if they were seen as far back as 1881, but alas.


[edit on 13-12-2009 by HankMcCoy]


No, I am under the impression that the DoD would investigate spirals as missles/rockets if they thought they were such in the first place. They did not even consider this effect to be related to a rocket launch in 1983... seems curious does it not????

[edit on 13/12/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

No, I am under the impression that the DoD would investigate spirals as missles/rockets if they thought they were such in the first place.


In 1983.. NO COUNTRY is going to investigate a Chinese rocket launch over mainland China.. or at least make those investigation public knowledge.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
So is there anyone out there that can explain the coincidental stone carvings and paintings of history? I could have believed the rocket thing, but it sure is similar. and please unless you are a degreed scholar or of equal value, dont just debunk this cause someone else says so.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Here are the coordinates of the area of the missle launch as provided from a NAVTEX message posted on 7-12-09 warning of the launch and advising all air and maritime traffic to advoid the area:

NAVTEX message warning you not to fly or navigate a ship in that area was
ZCZC FA79
031230 UTC DEC 09
COASTAL WARNING ARKHANGELSK 94
SOUTHERN PART WHITE SEA
1.ROCKET LAUNCHING 2300 07 DEC TO 0600 08 DEC
09 DC 0200 TO 0900 10 DEC 0100 TO 0900
NAVIGATION PROHIBITED IN AREA
65-12.6N 036-37.0E 65-37.2N 036-26.0E
66-12.3N 037-19.0E 66-04.0N 037-47.0E
66-03.0N 038-38.0E 66-06.5N 038-55.0E
65-11.0N 037-28.0E 65-12.1N 036-49.5E
THEN COASTAL LINE 65-12.2N 036-47.6E
2. CANCEL THIS MESSAGE 101000 DEC=

Now here are the coordinates of at least one of the Norway picture takers:


LAT 70 1' 50.339
LON 20 58' 24.439

Each degree of Latitude is approx 69 miles so there was a large distance between the two (I am terriable at math so do your own figures) hence no sound.

[edit on 12/13/2009 by DJMSN]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
So is there anyone out there that can explain the coincidental stone carvings and paintings of history? I could have believed the rocket thing, but it sure is similar. and please unless you are a degreed scholar or of equal value, dont just debunk this cause someone else says so.


There are stone carvings and paintings of a spiral of light over Norway? Please, share your information!



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Griffo515
 


1. Haven't you checked from what distance it was observed?

2. Why would there? There are many missile tests done every year. Have you heard anything about the debris of any of them?

3. Almost directly behind of it. And again check the distances involved. In the videos you can clearly see that the missile is moving along it's designated course. In the videos it's moving to the left.

4. Just because the official explanation confirmed the missile theory doesn't make it a lie. Officialophobia? Paranoia?

5. No comment. Do your own reseach to find out why that picture looks so perfect.

6. A missile failure doesn't mean an exploding missile. My theory is that the missile failed at the point when the spiral stopped. It was maybe leaking the fuel and when it ran out the missile failed.

All of these questions have been answered in the first thread about this spiral.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by HankMcCoy

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

No, I am under the impression that the DoD would investigate spirals as missles/rockets if they thought they were such in the first place.


In 1983.. NO COUNTRY is going to investigate a Chinese rocket launch over mainland China.. or at least make those investigation public knowledge.


So why didn't they even consider the possibility in the DoD report that it was a missle launch?? Read the link I provided... no mention of missles or rockets in the DoD report...





new topics




 
67
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join