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.

 

Norway spiral - Russia accepts blame even though Norway may have been responsible ! !

page: 13
286
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by davesidious
 


I agree

...but if you post a bunch of images and numbers and calculations that are not even close to being accurate but they look fancy, you get 200+ flags and many members who will only agree with you because you sound smart and hold a similar belief.

Ive learned that you don't even have to be correct in order to get 200+ flags, you just have to look correct and agree with the conspiracy and not the truth.




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by tauristercus

Now lets take a look at whats been stated to be proof of a Russian missile launch on that day ... namely the visible exhaust trail.
In the following images, you can clearly see on the horizon what appears to be an exhaust trail and has been taken as evidence of a missile launch ... in this case the launch of a Bulava missile on 9 December.





While you've brought up some very valid points OP I'm not sure why you're completely dismissing the photographic evidence of a missile launch. You make note of the exhaust plume that's clearly visible on the horizon (to the east, towards direction of the White Sea?) and yet you stop short of admitting they're from a missile... (for obvious reasons)

So then what do you attribute the exhaust plumes, which clearly resemble those from other rocket launches, to be from?

Would it be fair to just dismiss that evidence?

Also, for my knowledge, do you know exactly where the images above were taken from?

EDIT TO ADD PIC from minuteman III launch-- am I the only one who sees the resemblance ?




[edit on 14-12-2009 by PhotonEffect]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 





The outer ring expanded to that size due to centrifugal force. When you spin something there is an outward force away from the center of rotation. When the missile was spinning and expelling those gases, the centrifugal force from the spin shot the gases away from the center. So each rotation made a small ring, and the ring slowly expanded bigger and bigger until it was many times larger than its original rotation.


And while doing that it maintained it's shape, in space?

Still, it wouldn't make the spiral in the pic smaller.




This is why at the end, when the missile is self destructed, there is a dark circle that appears to get bigger and bigger. The centrifugal forces shot the white gases out and they are still moving away from the center even after the missile is gone. That then creates a huge circular area with no white gases in the center (dark circle), which is just an empty area of sky.



Was the rocket fueled with white gasses?

edit to add.

[edit on 14-12-2009 by Point of No Return]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhotonEffect

Originally posted by tauristercus

Now lets take a look at whats been stated to be proof of a Russian missile launch on that day ... namely the visible exhaust trail.
In the following images, you can clearly see on the horizon what appears to be an exhaust trail and has been taken as evidence of a missile launch ... in this case the launch of a Bulava missile on 9 December.



This is what I have been saying! The pictures are completely consistent with a missle launch! The only anamoly is the "spiral" time exposure!

-OldDragger

While you've brought up some very valid points OP I'm not sure why you're completely dismissing the photographic evidence of a missile launch. You make note of the exhaust plume that's clearly visible on the horizon (to the east, towards direction of the White Sea?) and yet you stop short of admitting they're from a missile... (for obvious reasons)

So then what do you attribute the exhaust plumes, which clearly resemble those from other rocket launches, to be from?

Would it be fair to just dismiss that evidence?

Also, for my knowledge, do you know exactly where the images above were taken from?



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 

Incorrect.

The effluent is being ejected radially as the missile spins. The effluent itself is not rotating, it cannot be. The only force involved is the force of ejection from the rocket. Once the flow of effluent stops the outer ring continues to move away carried by its own inertia.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return

And while doing that it maintained it's shape, in space?


Well, what was there to disturb the shape?


Was the rocket fueled with white gasses?


no, solid propellant



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


That is what I said Phage.

I never said the affluent itself was spinning. I said it was just ejected by the spin of the missile.

All of the inertia in the affluent was initiated by the spin of the missile. Then the affluent stayed in motion and it's motion wouldn't be effected until acted upon by an outside force.

I think maybe you read me wrong.

[edit on 14-12-2009 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 





Well, what was there to disturb the shape?


A vacuum.

Other posters pointed out that the trails would dissapate.




no, solid propellant


AllisOne, you know the one I was responding to, was talking about white gasses coming out, while others are talking about sunlight hitting the trails.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
After reading ATS for years, I have decided we have come to the tipping point!
There are now MORE people involved in covering up and conspiring than those not! Soon, everyone on the planet will be covering up some sinister plot by somebody.
First you guys come up with aliens, wormholes and who knows what. Then it becomes EISCAT, but when EISCAY says they didn't do it then THEY are part of the plot.
It's gone beyond silly, It was a failed missle launch!



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Maybe the fluoride in the water system is making everyone paranoid...




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I want to give a lot of credit to AllisONE and Theagentninteen for putting forward the evidence so well, that it is a rocket and nothing else.

For me it's quite ridiculous that this is an ongoing discussion. There's gazillions of experts around the world, on this very subject, don't you non-believers of the rocket-truth understand that if this was something else a lot of scientists would have said so and it would be in the news all over the place.

AllisOne clearly shows this evidence very clearly, yet man of you still live in denial that this is something else.

The OP states that this should have been seen from Sweden and Finland too. Have the OP been in Sweden or Finland in these areas it "would've been seen from"? The reason for this is that not many people live up there. It's not more complicated than that.

Also about the photographs. I can validate that AllisOne is correct about this being a photographer myself. It's extremely easy to see that the photographer has used a slow shutter speed to achieve this effect in his pictures.

The reality is that what most people saw that night was more like in the videos, a smaller spiral and less colour and light everywhere.

It's a bit tragic that many people just can¨t accept the truth when it presented so well, but I guess we wouldn't have this forum if it always was like that so in some degree its good.

People should always question authorities and experts but also learn to open your eyes for whats really a truthful scientific explanation when all the evidence point to that truth, a failed rocket.



[edit on 14-12-2009 by Sambell]

[edit on 14-12-2009 by Sambell]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
And while doing that it maintained it's shape, in space?


Maintained it's shape? No.... it all maintained it's trajectory. The gases were ejected by the spin, and put in motion in a certain trajectory. The gases maintained their trajectory because there was no outside forces to really change the trajectory of said gases. Since the gases were ejected radially, and the trajectories were maintained, the shape didn't change but the size of the shape did. The size of the shape grew.



Originally posted by Point of No Return
Was the rocket fueled with white gasses?


No, and you know that is not what I meant (I hope). I was just describing the color of the gases in the picture. The only reason the gases appear white is because they are reflecting light from the Sun at a certain wavelength.

...but thanks for trying to exploit semantics.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Firstly I am a very long time lurker, but having read the posts on this topic, especially this one I had to join up and reply.

Great respect to the OP to putting the time and effort in, this topic is fascinating and has got me hooked.

For those who care here is what i think...

1 - Without a question of a doubt it is some kind of rocket test that has gone catastrophically wrong, there is just too much evidence and other footage/pictures that are very similar.

2 - Over the years I have done many courses on photography and although I do not class myself as an expert i agree 110% with the poster ALLis0NE. The obvious for want of a better word 'over the top' spiral picture is nothing more than slow shutter speed.

I am as frustrated as the next person about all the sh*t we are told, all the cover ups etc......

I really would love to believe THIS ONE was 'THE ONE', the one big f*Ck up they couldnt cover up.

But sadly I think it is just a rocket.




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I would like to post some more pics of the "anomaly" taken by different people in different locations around the area. We now have more data to examine and discuss. Here goes nothing,.....





































































I can't remember the Norwegian news site I screen captured these from but I will dig it up and post the source shortly



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   
If the shutter speed was that long, why is the light in the center of the spiral, the rocket exhaust, not smeared all over the spiral?



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
How come no one has used any other photographs to examine the anomaly? I posted some above for examination. Everyone keeps talking about the long exposure on the TWO pictures in the original OP. What about all of the other pictures?



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 





Maintained it's shape? No.... it all maintained it's trajectory. The gases were ejected by the spin, and put in motion in a certain trajectory. The gases maintained their trajectory because there was no outside forces to really change the trajectory of said gases.


I asked this, cause other posters(Fenrir, HankMCCoy) were saying that the dissapation of gasses, caused the appearance of the "black hole", and the outward emanating light.

Now you say these gasses didn't dissapate. Who to believe?




No, and you know that is not what I meant (I hope).


Just checking if you also think it was sunlight bouncing of.




[edit on 14-12-2009 by Point of No Return]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 

I did misunderstand. I think it was your use of centrifugal force that threw me off.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pwrthtbe
 


Hadn't seen those yet. Good post!

Look how big it is in those pics.

Again, looks way too big.

edit to add, some of those pics are definately not taken with long shutters.

So no excuses as to why the spiral appears so big and perfect.


[edit on 14-12-2009 by Point of No Return]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Maybe the Russians are in on the HAARP like installation. Maybe they benefit from it? Excellent post by the way!



new topics

top topics



 
286
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join