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.

 

website with clear picture

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
A5H

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Hi, don't think anyone has posted this before.............
I was just watching a documentary regarding a newly discovered form of lightning.
It is ABOVE clouds, starts high in the atmosphere as more than one 'bolt'. All the strings then combine and produce something around 1 million volts.
It also burns for longer than a normal lightning bolt.
Anyway, the theory was that this phenomonom caused the space shuttle columbia to explode.
There was alot of evidence to support this theory, including pictures and audio.
The audio was picked up on highly sensitive instruments used in detecting nukes from the other side of the world.
I just wondered if anyone had heard of this before.
I will dig up some links.

Regards,
Ash.




posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Columbia was most likely shot down by a scalar interferometer weapon just as Challenger was

Many of us have the evidence of this event.


A5H

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Could you point me in the direction of this evidence please.
I'm not saying this is what happened but it seemed very possible.

Ash



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
That wouldn't match up with the sensor readings or the established facts (such as the heat buildup begining on the wing edge where they showed the damage was.) The shuttle was moving at mach 10 or so -- and would have been out of range in less than a second.

And I'd point out that the shuttle was well-shielded against such things. Florida is the Lightning capitol of the United States, and iNASA isn't going to risk having a very expensive rocket/ship getting damaged by lightning while sitting around on the launch pad or moving to and from the facility.


cma

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
I doubt it. They accuratly make it so the shuttle can land and so it can withstand it. Although, we STILL haven't heard anything official from NASA.


A5H

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Yes they are, it happened on a previous mission.
I must stress this is not normal lightning but thousands of times more powerful & lasts alot longer.

Ash



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   
yea i saw the documentry your talking about, the lightening is related to sprites and are 6 times more powerful than ordenary lightning (aircraft only have protection against one 6th of that + the fact they can last for about 10 secs). I did a google to try and find the pic they showed but unfortunatly couldn't find it
. I also think this form of lightnig is supposed to have a posite charge.

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by Viper85]

o yea forgot to mention that one of the things the shuttle was sent to study was the sprites phenomenon.

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by Viper85]



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by signa
Columbia was most likely shot down by a scalar interferometer weapon just as Challenger was

Many of us have the evidence of this event.


If you have "evidence" why do you say "likely" as well?

Also what the hell is a scalar interferometer weapon? I know what scalar means, and I know what an interferometer is...but how the hell do you make an interferometer into a weapon?

You sound about as sane as the homless guy in DC who told me Bill Clinton stole his testicles using a statlite.


cma

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:40 PM
link   
1. the probably of that is VERY low
2. if all of that was true, alot more plane crashes would be


A5H

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Yes I agree but what are the chances of one of these sprites being recorded in close proximity and not striking a metallic object?

Ash



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:45 PM
link   
your forgetting that the space shuttle would have ionised the air making it a flying lightning rod, also the probability that i think NASA came up with was that a shuttle getting hit would be about once in every 100 flights........this was the 107th.



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I can not get imges to post.. Sorry


[Edited on 27-5-2004 by signa]



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
[Edited on 27-5-2004 by signa]

[Edited on 27-5-2004 by signa]



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Sorry Signa, Maxwell killed the ether theory and Einstein buried it. Tesla spent the last years of his life trying to prove them wrong but he failed.

Scalar weapons dont even count as science fiction any more.



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   
shouldn't we try and get back on topic?

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by Viper85]



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:14 PM
link   


a sprite



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:18 PM
link   
A5H,

What you speak of are called: Blue Jets, Red Sprites, and Elves.

Sprites are massive but weak luminous flashes that appear directly above an active thunderstorm system and are coincident with cloud-to-ground or intracloud lightning strokes. Their spatial structures range from small single or multiple vertically elongated spots, to spots with faint extrusions above and below, to bright groupings which extend from the cloud tops to altitudes up to about 95 km. Sprites are predominantly red. The brightest region lies in the altitude range 65-75 km, above which there is often a faint red glow or wispy structure that extends to about 90 km. Below the bright red region, blue tendril-like filamentary structures often extend downward to as low as 40 km. Sprites rarely appear singly, usually occurring in clusters of two, three or more. Some of the very large events, such as shown in Figure 1, seem to be tightly packed clusters of many individual sprites. Other events are more loosely packed and may extend across horizontal distances of 50 km or more and occupy atmospheric volumes in excess of 10,000 cubic km.



elf.gi.alaska.edu...

umbra.nascom.nasa.gov...



fusionanomaly.net...

Blue jets are a second high altitude optical phenomenon, distinct from sprites and first documented in 1994 (although pilots had earlier reported similar sightings). Blue jets are optical ejections from the top of the electrically active core regions of thunderstorms, but not directly associated with cloud-to-ground lightning. Following their emergence from the top of the thundercloud, they typically propagate at about upward in narrow cones of about 15 degrees, fanning out and disappearing at heights of about 25-30 miles (40-50 km) with a lifetime of a couple of tenths of a second.



www.albany.edu...


cma

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:19 PM
link   
i dobt "blue jets" happened to a space shuttle. think about how much work NASA put into this, unless it was a conspiricy, which this thread is not about.



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   
the photo they showed looked nothing like a blue jet so i'm guessing it's the positive charged version of lightning...........i really should have paid more attention to the documentry lol



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I suggest you keep your comments to yourself until you do some homework and maybe consult the top man in the field in this country...Lt Col Tom Bearden. Tell him your opinion after studying his material thoroughly IF you still are of the same opinion.


twm.co.nz...


www.halexandria.org...

www.hsv.com...

jnaudin.free.fr...

www.zpenergy.com...


34 flaws in Classical EM Theory & more:

www.cheniere.org...

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by signa]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join