Alex,..I'll take strange lights over Norway for $1000

page: 8
63
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by wtfhuh
 


You had spoken about the energy required, not HF Heater operational specs, sorry for the confusion, I was just offering an idea for power generation "off the grid".




posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Too many people trying to derail the OP and disprove the alleged proposition. I for one, do not believe everything the media portrays as the truth. And I hope everybody on ATS does not either especially after 9/11. The human mind is a very frustrating thing. It operates on such a level to mitigate stress and fear so that your memory and speculation is essentially "dumbed down." Why? Because we would rather the spiral be from a missile than created from a phenomenon that we are not aware/fully understand. It would be much easier to sleep tonight. Imagine if tomorrow your house had no heat. Imagine if tomorrow you couldn't find your toothbrush. Imagine if tomorrow your car would not start. Imagine if you were not able to repeat a pattern replicated by the brain. Imagine you catch sight of something so amazing that previous knowledge that you do have could not describe what you see. Would you know what to do? Or would most people turn to somebody else to fix the problem and stress the occasion instead of providing an answer? Why must the general population of the world be so primitive and misinformed, now that, I know.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 

The only intention I had was to put up what I found. Only claim I made was that this gave a picture describing the phenom in every way it was witnessed even down to the hand of spin and plasma ejection trailing back to the ground(that pigtail blue light). It has been nice to watch people make up the most important mind on their own....
Edit...RAY, not George McGovern ex CIA said that "over 85% of the info gathered by them is public record." Info isn't hidden it just goes by different alias or everyone would want an autograph.

I agree with you sir. Let's Dragnet
"Just the facts mam"...Sgt. Friday



[edit on 29-12-2009 by letthereaderunderstand]



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Paradox.
 


Sweet.. Another armchair-psychiatrist.

This is another theory which hasn't even been explained enough to consider it being a possiblility. The human mind is a very frustrating thing. It operates on such a level to mitigate stress and fear so that your memory and speculation is essentially "dumbed down." Why? Because we would rather the spiral be from aliens/HAARP/insert favourite theory here. Most people seem to accept these theories without using their brains first to think if the tech described actually can produce a phenomena like that or not.
It's the same defence mechanism that you described.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 

p.s. That is you're not sure if one woman pulled the trigger but alas that is another story "hey little sister what have you done?"
"its a nice day for a white wedding" "nice day to start again"



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paradox.
Too many people trying to derail the OP and disprove the alleged proposition.


Um, you derailed the thread by going this direction in your thought process. We were discussing why or why not the OP has merit --- Imagining my toothbrush not in it's place tomorrow morning has nothing to do with a broken missile OR EISCAT/HAARP.

Do you have anything to add towards either theory or just more ramblings regarding your feelings towards what everyone should or should not believe?
The OP has nothing but a patent that uses words that essentially describe what flushing my toilet bowl looks like at night while being lit up by a dim blue flashlight.. a swirly pattern with colors...preeeetty.

There's something abut issues like this that make me think that people should mix the red and blue pill together to get a purple pill instead. You have to balance the possibilities to come up with a reality that makes sense. not a reality you FEEL could POSSIBLY make sense.

Not everything makes immediate sense, of course, and slow careful judgment sprinkled with many questions should be used, but THIS situation has thoroughly been presented with verifiable facts and plausible mathematics that all contribute towards the validity of the mainstream explanation. Several times over... Every facet has been answered that I have seen addressed yet the answers are discarded by people who don't have the expertise to deny them. Yet people still believe the armchair scientists over the real scientists and academics... cmon..

edited to add that you do have a sweet avatar though


b



[edit on 28-12-2009 by Bspiracy]



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Originally posted by lookingup4it
Were there any power bumps, isolated brown outs during the sighting? the amount of current need to generate a magnetic field large enough to create the vortex would cause a substantial spike in the grid load. Any takers?


[edit on 27-12-2009 by lookingup4it]


What makes you think they generate the energy at the time of use at the same time they are releasing it? Could it not be stored in the same fashion that a camera charges it's flash?


do you mean like how static electricity stores it's charge like a capacitor and then dissipates when it finds a ground?



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 


I just saw Sherlock Holmes this weekend. I wish I could remember the exact quote, but he said something like, 'just data, don't cloud your mind with theory, then you will be manipulating data to fit a preconceived notion.' I realize it was just a move. Pretty good in my opinion, but that one sentence stood out for me. If I had treated my brain better in the past, I might have been able to remember it correctly. Does that sound familiar at all? climategate? nope, that isn't it. Oh well.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by TwoPhish
Are there a set of Cliff Notes for this read Alex?
Wait, this occurred exactly 22 years and 2 days from patent? Where's a numerologist when ya need one?

[edit on 27-12-2009 by TwoPhish]


That's a good observation ...on the 222 energies



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   
You and the other OP's that started the other Norway Spiral threads really rock.
Never mind the missile maniacs.
How many times can they say the Russians told me so?
You folks have really worked hard to present your splendid data.
The information you have informed us members with is greatly
appreciated. I think even the spooks owe you guys a tip of their hat.
I would assume that the technology goes way beyond what can be uncovered.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
You and the other OP's that started the other Norway Spiral threads really rock.
Never mind the missile maniacs.
How many times can they say the Russians told me so?
You folks have really worked hard to present your splendid data.
The information you have informed us members with is greatly
appreciated. I think even the spooks owe you guys a tip of their hat.
I would assume that the technology goes way beyond what can be uncovered.


too bad its all untrue
=(

Oh well



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by '___'omino

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
You and the other OP's that started the other Norway Spiral threads really rock.
Never mind the missile maniacs.
How many times can they say the Russians told me so?
You folks have really worked hard to present your splendid data.
The information you have informed us members with is greatly
appreciated. I think even the spooks owe you guys a tip of their hat.
I would assume that the technology goes way beyond what can be uncovered.


too bad its all untrue
=(

Oh well


prove it


put up or shut up . . .. to be blunt



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
it seems like it does the same things as HAARP.

[edit on 28-12-2009 by pauldamo]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 12:29 AM
link   
All so quick to shoot me down. I was merely explaining the situation occurring between the pro-missile and anti-missile theories. It was not arm chair psychiatry. It was basic. The brain functions on patterns. If you try to prove me wrong you will not, because It is true. My point is, of course reasoning will lead you to believe it was a missile failure. But logic and research will get us closer to the truth. I rely heavily on the mathematics behind it. Which has all been proven by tauristercus in earlier threads I have analyzed. I am not here to derail the thread but only to give an explanation on the two sides of this occurrence, and why either parties may lean towards each conclusion.

And if you want my opinion. I will take the "purple pill." My stance on the Norway Spiral is that the Russian missile was directed at the excited plasma (from the patent) to test if it would deflect or disarm it. Data has been produced also explaining that the plasma could create effects comparable to that of a rocket. Please read tauristercus' threads they debunk the missile theory very well.

p.s. thankyou for complimenting my avatar... it is a depiction of phase in the fourth dimension.

[edit on 29-12-2009 by Paradox.]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 


so what would the general consensus be on the cause of this spiral?

I've read numerous different threads here explaining plausible causes, including this, norwegian scientists performing a similar experiment, and stuff about the ufo in Russia being related etc



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by cjhahaha
 

G'day cjhahaha

As I wrote previously in this thread & also in another thread about this case, I believe it was a missile test.

It looked very similar to the several previous videos of spiraling rockets/missiles that were the subjects of previous threads.

I believe the visual differences can be accounted for via the poor contrast resolution in the poor quality videos of this event.

I suspect I am in a small minority in this thread


Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   
For one it wasn't a rocket because an out of control rocket doesn't act like that. And another thing that needs to be answered is the instantaneous black chasm that formed once the spiral stopped. Usual you can see the exhaust either at the place of the rocket flame (when at night) or if theres a full moon or a lighted sky from a light source (like dawn or dusk). What this thing did was not only still showed "exhaust" glowing without a light source but the lighted exhaust dissipated on cue instantaneously from the center to form a black chasm. It's almost as if as soon as the experiment was done the operators turned of the Ionospheric heater mechanism and in turn the area effected dissipated. Also one more thing to note. You saw the spiral "exhaust" coming from the ground perpendicular to the camera (like your looking at it from the side) as if said rocket was going spiraling on the way up. If thats the case that is an impossibility, imagine a rocket taking off from the ground then as we saw on the video go on its side and laterally move upward at the same time its cork screwing laterally. And then when it gets to a certain point in the sky it turns again at 90 degrees while spiraling laterally and decides to go from a tight lateral spiral that turned 90 degrees in midair to a wider one head on to the camera and tighten the spiral again.

Then instead of exploding it disappears and the area of the spiral from the inside out turns off and no more. What I described goes against the physics of propulsion for a rocket or anything with a jet. Because the g forces would have ripped any craft apart. The tighter or quicker an object makes in direction if even possible in this scenario the more stress on the whole craft. Thats why you see small ManPads (shoulder fired anti aircraft rockets) are able to make brutal changes to their direction because of less mass to be effected from the stress of change in direction. But still even physics operate for a small rocket also. Even if the rocket was controlled, it couldn't do the maneuvers that was seen, and this was supposed to be a uncontrolled rocket.

Also the reason why I used old information is because it's still pertinent to the discussion. Because I know enough about science and technology to not be cowed by the data that is being given. The old patent information showed that it was developed, the other information showed that they where doing more research on this and later we find out that there are facilities built to do the exact thing that is in the mid 80's patent. And on top of that a Military document that is done to present to the (the people who give money in the black budget process) top brass and the funders in order to show that it's possible. And then there's HAARP and the other facility in Alaska, the one in Puerto Rico and then the one in the same area that the alleged rocket that went off course.

Also not to be a spoiled sport but I've been with this site since this summer and over the course of the time that I've read and even posted comments on threads, this particular subject has more people trying to disprove this from being one of the Heater installations that can be used to manipulate weather and space weather to a rogue rocket. And many of the comments against the energy manipulation of the Ionosphere are flat. What our information does is to show an ongoing trend with data and completed facilities and white paper saying what they should be able to do with this technology. Also understanding the technology of electronics and physics, the spiral reacted just as it was described in the patent from the instrumentation and the techniques that where being used. The ramp the high current in a spiral coil and aimed it toward the sky. And in so doing they where able to agitate enough the particles to form a low energy aurora borealis concentrated and controlled in a small area. The reason why I say it's a low energy aurora which was controlled is because we today don't have the ability to pump out the amount of energy that would be required to form the northern lights that are getting hit by charged particles from the sun.

And once the machine is turned off, it dissipated (the plasma,which is energized particles sound familiar). This was a test of an energy source and they don't want to tell anybody. Heck it probably is done per treaty, since Europe has a facility US essentially has 3 and the Russians have one.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by hoghead cheese
 


Perhaps the "minority" I'm in is getting even smaller....


But, I still think it was a missile test.

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:18 AM
link   
What has a cyclotron particle accelerator have to do with the shape & colour effects from that day that appear to be a failed rocket test? Nice try, but this is about as pointless as claiming the answer is any patent that has a few fancy physicsy words that can be twisted into an assumption that such a device produces the same spiral effects, and that such a device has been used at this time and location.

There's a computer simulation of what happened, and it matches the characteristics of a failed rocket test with the same tinges. The video of the spiral over Norway is not exact because of the fairly low-resolution camera footage causing the gradual change in contrast between dark and light less obvious.



I lose faith in every conspiracy theory when I see people blaming a particle accelerator for a rocket trail, when nobody can explain how a particle accelerator can produce this spiral effect miraculously just like rocket ejecta. And copying and pasting technical jargon doesn't count! And neither does simply stating it matches the physics and electronics of a weather device, or other device, if the explanation as to how is lacking.

If someone copies and pastes technical jargon for a microwave they might end up convincing some idiot that they have discovered a time-machine!


[edit on 29-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by john124
 


Perhaps this is what you are looking for, John124.


That pretty much proves that it could not have been a missile or rocket.





new topics
top topics
 
63
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join