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: 19
286
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Hagbard_Celine
 


It looks like most of Scandinavia was cloudy or foggy that morning.





posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
There is a possibility that combined with the faster burn to space times, and early warning targeting systems
jamming. The Russians may be trying to fool and confuse the current tier MDS or anti ballistic missile defense systems. Targeting is on the order of fractions of a second. There are radar arrays (Similar to H.A.A.R.P. and EISCAT systems, among others) that measure the ionospheric scintillation to compensate these deviations from satellites looking down through the ionosphere and send that correction data to the targeting systems.

If the scintillation data could be exaggerated by say,
spraying a barium laden effluent. The early track data could be rendered useless for early kill.

They could also be testing their own early tracking systems?



Here is some old tech notes about (BMD)
I know this is decades old, but it is a good primer
to the systems and challenges of (MDS)
Princeton 1988

Slightly newer but it can be shown on a public forum.
Please use your own formidable reasoning and extrapolation skills to pay this info into the 21st century. I know you guys can do it! ATS'rs
Defense.gov Defense.gov

Yep...Still a Russian rocket launch.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheEndofEvolution
I believe it was man-made, but I do not believe it was a malfunctioned missile. Your telling me a missile goes almost 800K in the wrong direction over a neighboring country and they don't pull the plug before it gets there?


How about reading the thread? It has been debunked over and over.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:25 AM
link   
I'd be incredibly tempted to make another thread on this topic, because I'd probably get a full blue "Flag Contribution" letter out of it. Fortunately, I don't care about such things, and my ATS flag reputation shouldn't be relevant to me or anybody else, right? The information itself, is what should be important. Or at least I'd hope that to be the case.

Site popularity seems to be incredibly important to some people, though. So much that they feel the need to create entirely new threads to add very small tidbits of (information/) opinion to subjects that have already been heavily discussed in other threads.

So now we've got at least 4 threads with people asking the same exact questions about the same exact topic, while almost every single one of them has been answered in the initial post regarding this specific topic.

S&F? No. Not because the information was poor, but because I already read about it when it was posted in the correct thread. Please check the original post before creating redundant threads. This seems to be occurring far more often than it has in the past, almost to the point of becoming habitual for some users. The search feature on ATS is incredibly handy, so try and use it before flag farming with repetitious information.

Intentional or not, it isn't necessary. Regardless, thanks for sharing.



Cheers,
Strype



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


That pic shows that the whole North of Scandinavia wasn't cloudy at all.

North Sweden and North Finalnd should've had a clear line of sight towards the White Sea, in that pic.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Strype
 


these threads are slowly dying.

lack of evidence


take a break

COP15 live



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 

Really? Maybe a little contrast boost will help.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Actually it doesn't.

Assuming the white fluffy stuff are clouds, I see none above North-Scandinavia.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Also,

how can you tell if it was foggy, from that pic?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 

The white is clouds, the grey is fog. Looks like quite a bit of fog in northern Scandinavia. The coastal areas are clear. And guess what, the reports come from coastal areas.


- It looked just like the moon, "went on a spin," writes Peter Vang from Nordreisa.

www.altaposten.no...
Nordresia is 72km ene of EISCAT



- I was completely bewildered

Kathrine S. Willumsen på Sortland filmet lyset. Kathryn S. Willumsen in Sortland filmed light.

www.tv2.no...
Sortland is 180km sw of EISCAT



- It was like a big fireball that went around, with a great light around it again, "said Fred Hansen from Bø in Vesterålen to NRK Nordland.

www.yr.no...
191km sw of EISCAT



Mysterious lysfenomen in Hammerfest

www.nrk.no...
207km nw of EISACT

It was seen over a wide area. A 207 km circle includes parts of Finland and Sweden. If weather conditions permitted, people in those areas would have seen it as well.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


The grey is fog?

So the whole of North-Africa was foggy to that day.

Look at the big map you posted first.

Get out of here Phage.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Also, according to that map then, the spiral couldn't even have been seen from Norway, since it was foggy there to.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Hagbard_Celine
 


It looks like most of Scandinavia was cloudy or foggy that morning.



So the clouds and fog over the other two countries prohibited their ability to see the event but in Norway who would have to look OVER the other countries to see the event has some unique ability to look through clouds?

Or are you suggesting that the clouds parted in just the right manner that one nation could see the event but the other two couldn't...wow this weather control thing is starting to build up speed isn't it?

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Hagbard_Celine]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hagbard_Celine
 


Well if it was a rocket, it would've been well above the cloud cover, at 500 km, you would be able to see it from a side angle.

edit: You would have a clear line of sight, I really can't say you would be able to actually see it.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Point of No Return]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Dear Phage:

Some rules if indeed you have the necessity to test your new SLBM (ICBM) missile. First of all, you ignite the fuse and escapes and after, if you do not want to make to burst a third atomic conflict:

You cannot make the test of a missile over an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile near the borders of an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile above a Country of the NATO.

If you lose the control of the missile you must self-destroy it within the borders of your Country.

If you lose the control of the missile you must absolutely recover wreckages (all the wreckages) within least time.

If you make the test of a missile over an other Country, this is a deliberated threat.

If you make the test over a country of the NATO, you risks an immediate act of retaliation.

Phage, A friendly advice: you must hold the children far from fireworks next christmas!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imagir
reply to post by Phage
 


Dear Phage:

Some rules if indeed you have the necessity to test your new SLBM (ICBM) missile. First of all, you ignite the fuse and escapes and after, if you do not want to make to burst a third atomic conflict:

You cannot make the test of a missile over an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile near the borders of an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile above a Country of the NATO.

If you lose the control of the missile you must self-destroy it within the borders of your Country.

If you lose the control of the missile you must absolutely recover wreckages (all the wreckages) within least time.

If you make the test of a missile over an other Country, this is a deliberated threat.

If you make the test over a country of the NATO, you risks an immediate act of retaliation.

Phage, A friendly advice: you must hold the children far from fireworks next christmas!


The missile was newer of Norway.

Russians has tested missiles in the White Sea since the dawn of ages.
Theres nothing unsual about this case, apart from the stunning failure.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gromle

Originally posted by Imagir
reply to post by Phage
 


Dear Phage:

Some rules if indeed you have the necessity to test your new SLBM (ICBM) missile. First of all, you ignite the fuse and escapes and after, if you do not want to make to burst a third atomic conflict:

You cannot make the test of a missile over an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile near the borders of an other Country.

You cannot make the test of a missile above a Country of the NATO.

If you lose the control of the missile you must self-destroy it within the borders of your Country.

If you lose the control of the missile you must absolutely recover wreckages (all the wreckages) within least time.

If you make the test of a missile over an other Country, this is a deliberated threat.

If you make the test over a country of the NATO, you risks an immediate act of retaliation.

Phage, A friendly advice: you must hold the children far from fireworks next christmas!


The missile was newer of Norway.

Russians has tested missiles in the White Sea since the dawn of ages.
Theres nothing unsual about this case, apart from the stunning failure.


I think that you have really lost something.

Tromso (Nort of Norwey) is to 1,100 km far from the White Sea (Russia).

The same friendly Advice also for you: "you must hold the children far from fireworks next christmas!"



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagir
 


stay cool
It's just a something in the sky.
I mean nobody is dead
not an accident, just an incident

thousands of post for what ?

use the ignore button



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagir
 


OMG! Are you stupid or just acting?
The missile never left Russia's airspace.
It was launched several hundred kilometer's away from Finland's border. It flew away from Scandinavia.


[edit on 16/12/2009 by DGFenrir]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by mixmix
reply to post by Imagir
 


stay cool
It's just a something in the sky.
I mean nobody is dead
not an accident, just an incident

thousands of post for what ?

use the ignore button



Are you crazy?

What if this were indeed some kind of missile?

That would mean, because of the perfection in the spiral, that it WAS ENGINEERED AND INTENDED to spin around and around like that.

In other words, this wasn't a 'failure' but a perfect test.

That means it's some kind of hi-altitude chemical or biological dispersal device.

That does NOT sound to me like something peaceful, especially with the rushed attempts at blame and censorship going on by governments.

Perhaps this was done near a HAARP-type facility, because the missile dispersed something to 'paint' the heavens for some kind of experiment from the ground by the array.

Whatever the case may be, you have NO RIGHT to say forget about it or assume TPTB are not hiding something of great malevolence.



new topics

top topics



 
286
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join