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.

 

TEQUILAsunrise - AKA Norway Spiral - Proof it was a scientific experiment.

page: 27
182
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by mixmix
I don't see this link before so I post it


Enterprise mission Norway message


Well, for someone trying to enlighten the human race, he hasnt done much research...

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Gromle]




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
MHO... I think the conspiracy is the money that this photographer is probably making off of this photo... Keep the conspiracy and money rolling!


Talk about being in the right place at the right time. Now does he get paid, (If he has a copyright on the photo), everytime this is showed on the news and newspapers?

Instant celebrity status!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Gromle
 


yes I know. little bit easy
Wait for the part 2. Who knows.

did I say I want to enlight the human race ?

do you forget the alien races ?


out of topic
New AFMC Command Chief named



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by danman23
 


Thanks a lot, I read that article and explanations were good enough. Best thing is knowing it wasn't Haarp or similar.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by KathyT
 


The videos showing similar phenomena are all well and good, but not exactly the same for one, and for another don't explain the DISTANCE. Do you understand why i'm having a problem with this video? It says it was made in Santa Barbara, CA which is only a stone throw away from Vandenberg AFB. Now compare that with the distance from Tromsø, Norway and a starting point from somewhere near Archangelsk, Russia. Care to explain? I'm listening.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ph00nknzarrk
 

KathyT seems to be offline. Mind if I jump in?

Things high from the Earth's surface can be see for long distances.

Remember the infamous "urine dump" from the shuttle in September? The one that was seen all over North America? Apparently it left a pretty impressive curved plume. But that's not the only occasion on which such things have been seen.

Here's a little something about another observation. It gives an idea about just how much a visible cloud of effluent can disperse and the distance from which it can be seen.

August 12, 1986, 10 p.m. Hundreds of thousands of people were outside in the eastern half of the United States, looking for Perseid meteors. Many of them had their astronomical instruments and cameras at the ready.
Suddenly a bright, fuzzy spiral, wider than the moon, appeared in the eastern sky, moving from right to left. Sightings occurred from Georgia (Florida was socked in with clouds) to Texas, from Oklahoma City to Quebec, Canada, and all points in between.


Wayne Madea, an amateur astronomer in northern Maine, saw a bright starlike object emit a luminous, rapidly expanding donut-shaped cloud; through a telescope he saw “a pinpoint of light, like a satellite, traveling with the cloud.” In Massachusetts, an amateur astronomer watched the plume perform two full turns in four minutes, painting the spinning spiral as he watched.

What was it?

In the United States and Canada, observers had witnessed a spray of surplus fuel from the used-up third stage of the Japanese rocket. Their altitude was almost a thousand miles (1,500 km), high enough for it to have been sunlit even though the ground below had been dark for more than an hour.

bb.nightskylive.net...

While the Bulava missile did not get exactly that high it wouldn't have to in order to bee seen from a great distance. Remember, all of the images show it close to the horizon. A object far from the observer and at a high altitude appears close to the horizon.


[edit on 12/16/2009 by Phage]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yah, thanks. I'm aware of those things. They just don't seem convincing in this case. Maybe i just "want to believe".



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ph00nknzarrk
reply to post by Phage
 


Yah, thanks. I'm aware of those things. They just don't seem convincing in this case. Maybe i just "want to believe".


Phage is to timid to address my posts. Ask him, if he insists it was a rocket why the rocket wasn't aborted
with a big FREAKIN BANG so it wouldn't crash into his office?
Ask him if the Ruskies are dumb enough to have a failure--Are they dumb enough to not abort it also?
Two freakin flubs on one launch. No wonder no one reached the moon.
No errant guidance system could have caused such a uniform spiral.
Electronics is the only answer.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ph00nknzarrk
reply to post by KathyT
 


The videos showing similar phenomena are all well and good, but not exactly the same for one, and for another don't explain the DISTANCE. Do you understand why i'm having a problem with this video? It says it was made in Santa Barbara, CA which is only a stone throw away from Vandenberg AFB. Now compare that with the distance from Tromsø, Norway and a starting point from somewhere near Archangelsk, Russia. Care to explain? I'm listening.


Well, I don't know how far a "stones throw" is for you, but Vandenberg to Santa Barbara is an hour and a half drive according to Google maps... 65 miles.

I've seen a Fireball meteorite cross skies where I live, people thought it crashed "somewhere", when in reality, it was skipping through the upper atmosphere and continued past Earth, it just went over the horizon. Distances are extremely hard to judge for objects like meteorites and rockets going into low orbit.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by KathyT
 


Even the slowest meteors are way faster than any manmade rocket (that we know of).
Furthermore most of what makes them visible happens way up in the atmosphere. Again, doesn't fit in any way. Sorry, i prefer to stay unconvinced.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by KathyT
 


SoCal Lights

A stones throw huh? You obviously have never seen a launch!
Go to the above and note the many observers in San Diego (280) miles away according to Google maps. These things look like Roman Candles from my house in LA, maybe 150 miles away. They are visible all the way to Mexico and God knows how far at sea. The atmospheric effect last for hours after sunset as they fly so high the are still in bright sunlight.
Too bad you armchair guys have never even seen a real launch, let me tell you it's much different than sitting on your butt searching the internet!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Big deal
Hows about showing a missile that is aborted due to malfunction.
They look more like the first shuttle that had o-ring problems that NASA refused to correct.
Termination due to explosion.
Hows about explaining how a missile that is spiraling around the sky
in a pattern so perfect there has NEVER been any such event ever recorded.
I looked at all the missile photos on all the threads.
Not one resembled the Norway HAARP like phenomena



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Big deal
Hows about showing a missile that is aborted due to malfunction.
They look more like the first shuttle that had o-ring problems that NASA refused to correct.
Termination due to explosion.
Hows about explaining how a missile that is spiraling around the sky
in a pattern so perfect there has NEVER been any such event ever recorded.
I looked at all the missile photos on all the threads.
Not one resembled the Norway HAARP like phenomena


Then please show us all a picture of HAARP shooting a beam that displays something even remotely close to what happened in Norway...

More pictures with similarities to the Norway spiral have been shown to resemble quite a lot what a missile contrail in twilight effect would look like... and while not exact to the Norway effect, similarities are clearly visible. You wont get an exact match everytime because each launch is different, with different weather conditions and launch times...it's completely foolish to think so and rest your entire argument on that.

Stop with this nonsense about it not even coming close.

How would you even know what a particular failure looks like? How do you know that when the Russians abort launches that have progressed into the third stage, they do so by exploding them?

If there is a uniform ejection of material spinning the rocket in a unform manner, then you'll get this nice spiral that was seen in Norway I'd imagine... Now when the sun hits the ejaculate at the right angle, it turns it into a halo with pretty colors sometimes...

All you have to do is a little bit of research man... stop trying so hard to believe that this was something else in the face of the evidence that shows it was a rocket..

It ridiculous already.


[edit on 17-12-2009 by PhotonEffect]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
In answer to your many questions, how the heck should we know?
I'll just e mail the Russian military and ask huh? I'm sure they won't mind since you are an ATS poster after all.
WHY is it incumbent on those of us that have figured out it was nothing more than a missile to explain every minute technical detail? And who know if your questions have an validity anyway. Though many of you imagine yourselves to be experts all of a sudden in this field ( ), I freely admit I'm not!
But I don't need to be to see the obvious, I can add 2 and 2.
It WAS a Russian ICBM



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger
In answer to your many questions, how the heck should we know?
I'll just e mail the Russian military and ask huh? I'm sure they won't mind since you are an ATS poster after all.
WHY is it incumbent on those of us that have figured out it was nothing more than a missile to explain every minute technical detail? And who know if your questions have an validity anyway. Though many of you imagine yourselves to be experts all of a sudden in this field ( ), I freely admit I'm not!
But I don't need to be to see the obvious, I can add 2 and 2.
It WAS a Russian ICBM


Even you (like other "missile theory" supporters) please stay away from fireworks next christmas, or you risk to ignite a nuclear conflict!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Point of No Return
 

I was clarifying the description. The description says the spiral left a track. The "beam" do not go to the spiral as the post I was replying to claimed. It came from the spiral.

Yes, both the "beam" and the spiral came from the missile. Since the spiral was centered on the missile, the "beam" came from the center of the spiral.




That's all I can do. A missile. okay, I will put my head in the sand too I guess. The blue material came "from" the center of the "spiral" how the hell do we know that? Who's to say it isn't producing it? We don't know. The blue material could be anything. Postulate if you like. Could it be ionized matter? Vibratory frequencies can heat things up, Tesla proved that. The higher the frequency the hotter the matter becomes. Do we know exactly what the experiment was? NO.

WE, are not sure what it "could" be, but what it definitely wasn't, like so many people with half a brain here have stated, is a missile. To perfect a spiral with the coil being symetrical and the blue matter does have a twist in it that would "indicate" an electricel type projection causing the spiral. A rocket or missile out of control has no symmetry whatsoever. Simple really.

And to "believe" the Russians? Please.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


I for one trump your opinion then.
I was only one of a hand full that was trained in this technology.
As I had the radio experience.

www.britannica.com/facts/5/520889/AGM-12-Bullpup-as-d...
Facts about AGM-12 Bullpup: air-to-surface missile, as ...
Facts about AGM-12 Bullpup: air-to-surface missile, The United States began to deploy tactical air-to-surface guided missiles as a standard aerial munition ...
The United States began to deploy tactical air-to-surface guided missiles as a standard aerial munition in the late 1950s. The first of these was the AGM-12 (for aerial guided munition) Bullpup, a rocket-powered weapon that employed visual tracking and radio-transmitted command guidance. The pilot controlled the missile by means of a small side-mounted joystick and guided it toward the target...


I know my High Frequency quite well also. VHF is only a cycle away.
I was privileged to have worked on the first SAGE DATA LINK systems as well as air based radar picket systems.
Sure my experience is dated but the principals of electronics haven't changed.
Actually as another member pointed out is could have been a composite operation.
Norwegian HAARP like signal and Russian surface to air seeding.
No way was it a lone rogue rocket.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Okay... did some research on the internet and here is what I found so far...

Reason for the blue... what appeared to be light in the sky:


Liquid hydrogen and oxygen burn clean, leaving a by-product of water vapor.

This is used in a lot of 3 stages on missiles:
Source:
Source: Wikipedia


The Russian defense ministry reported that the first two stages of the rocket worked properly, but a technical failure in the third stage resulted in the launch failure.

Water vapor in the higher parts of the atmosphere would reflect the light from the sun... (That you can't see) and also the blue sky. This is the same reason why you see Noctilucent clouds like in this picture:


Also... Here is this explanation on the Norway Lights:


The Russian Ministry of Defence later reported that the spiral anomaly was caused by a test launch of a Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile from the RFS Dmitriy Donskoy, located in the White Sea, which had failed because of a malfunction of the missile's third stage. Russian defence analyst Pavel Felgenhauer stated to AFP that "Such lights and clouds appear from time to time when a missile fails in the upper layers of the atmosphere and have been reported before ... At least this failed test made some nice fireworks for the Norwegians." [12][13] Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist at the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, suggested that the unusual light display occurred when the missile's third stage nozzle was damaged, causing the exhaust to come out sideways and sending the missile into a spin.[3]

Source: Norway Lights

So... there's an explanation of the what appeared to be a blue light... and the spiral... Well, that's easily explained and has been explained many times on here.

Oh yeah... and it appears that they have found the guys that shot off this missile...



[edit on 12/17/2009 by x2Strongx]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Since it's shielded from EMP and heat... wouldn't your theory be false regarding the radio waves?
Source:

The Russian military developed Bulava to possess advanced defense capabilities making it resistant to missile-defense systems. Among its claimed abilities are evasive maneuvering, mid-course countermeasures and decoys and a warhead fully shielded against both physical and Electromagnetic pulse damage. The Bulava is designed to be capable of surviving a nuclear blast at a minimum distance of 500 meters.[3] Prime minister Vladimir Putin has claimed that Bulava could penetrate any potential anti-missile defence system.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by x2Strongx
 


Phage, the Old Dagger and you fail to address this---- AND this is the big ONE.
Why was there no visual of the termination of the supposed rocket and warhead?
Did the Ruskies suck it into the center of that spiral with a portal or some other wacky disappearance act?




top topics



 
182
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join