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.
Originally posted by Hedera Helix
reply to post by tauristercus
When I look at the top photo... the first thing that comes to my mind are ripples... not a spiral. Like ripples that are created by a shock wave... or when a small pebble hits water... or when a sound weapon reverberates after hitting the atmosphere.
Like how it would look if we were in the water looking up at the surface just as a pebble hit... and the rings that were created after the pebble's impact.
If it's an ICBM and travelling at around 10,000kph then I would expect it to ripple. It is bound to follow the course of the missile, as it would be "dragged" along with it. It is bound to move with the dissipation of the spiral.
Originally posted by daddio
Originally posted by Hedera Helix
reply to post by tauristercus
"Also, no one has stated the fact that the "blue hue" EXPANDS with the "hole" when the spiral disipates. WHY? If the blue hue trail is rocket fuel or what have you, why does it MOVE with the disipation of the spiral? Total BS, this was NOT a missile. People need to get over that idea."
Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by tauristercus
Hey Tuaristercus,
In an effort to dig up some info that will show that EM's analysis is faulty, I came across this video that you may want to use, ( that is if you haven't seen it yet)
It looks to be taken in the Tromso area in a similar location as the 10 sec clip you used showing spiral to dissipation. I know you initially tried to determine the speed the spiral was moving across the sky using only that 10 sec clip and perhaps there wasn't enough time (info) for you to go on which may've given you that initial elevated result?...
This clip shows a sequence of 23 seconds from spiral to beginning of dissipation with continuous filming beyond the complete dissipation... a total of 51 sec of continuous filming of this event from the same vantage point...
You also mentioned that in your initial Tromso clip you couldn't see the mountains in the background which made it difficult to triangulate given no discernible reference points.... but you then settled on the catherdral...
In this clip you can clearly make out the mountains AND at the end you'll see the cathedral in the distance.. this looks to be the full version of the clip you used initially or at least its one that was filmed right in the same area...
I'd be curious to see what you'd come up with when analyzing the full clip, if you're up for it
Originally posted by Eatpancakes
Firstly I want to make note that your posts on a particular thread about time travel and time itself are what compelled me to finally register. I've been reading ATS for a year+ now and your posts seem to always be well thought out and informative.
Great work.
Originally posted by tauristercus
Originally posted by Eatpancakes
Firstly I want to make note that your posts on a particular thread about time travel and time itself are what compelled me to finally register. I've been reading ATS for a year+ now and your posts seem to always be well thought out and informative.
Great work.
Glad you enjoyed my attempts at generating threads with some semblance of reasoning and rational thought behind them as I know we have many ATS'ers who do prefer to use their grey matter on thought provoking topics as opposed to the lunacy that many others attempt to inflict on us.
I can't believe this is a serious comment, 'nuff said.
Originally posted by daddio
reply to post by PhotonEffect
Okay, so I just watched your video you posted. I can honestly state that, 1, for it to be 3D you need an X, Y, and Z plane. 2, X would be the spiral plane itself and Y would be the blue "beam" perpendicular to the spiral. 3, Z is a relative because it is neither perpendicular to either X or Y.
Now, seeing the video from this angle it is safe to say that the spiral is in fact flat. It is rotating and it is moving very slowly if at all across the sky and that it is MORE likely to be somewhat perpendicular to the earth's surface than actually IN outer space.
We could debate this all day but the video YOU posted speaks for itself. It can not be a 3D spiral nor a missile traveling at great speed yet producing a spiral as if it "stalled" in mid air and is spinning. Just doesn't make sense.
I also found the comments to the video to be hilarious. Some may be accurate but still funny.
These drifting-orbs continue to puzzle me, since they obviously aren't "failed missile tests" or "sky spirals", or whatever other nonsense people were using for explanations.