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.

 

Australian Spiral event : Preliminary analysis

page: 5
99
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
I can answer that. Its because it makes them uncomfortable to feel that there may be an answer outside of their conventional beliefs of reality.


Your telepathic abilities leave me speechless. Naturally, I can't disprove your assertion because any contrary evidence would be explained, in your view, by witnesses lying. What a perfectly-closed and non-debunkable logical construct -- what we in Texas would call a "self-eating watermelon".


Hmmm...I'm not for sure I understand this statement. However, just because I presented this view, does not mean that I automatically hold it as the Ultimate truth. Its just another way of looking at things my friend. I don't pretend to have the answers for this spiral whatsoever, therefore your attack (if that's what it was) was pretty unwarranted.

Nice day to you Oberg.

Much love to all...



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by sylph16
While the OP made an amazing case and analogy...i do not see any resemblance to the Norwegian spiral...these are weak anomalies in the sky, with non whatsoever a comparison to the perfectly formed spiral in Norway...sorry, doesn't do it for me....but good work trying to get to the bottom of it


Maybe the difference in the spirals is because the difference in the rockets.
Were they exactly the same size, shape, weight and burning the same fuel?

We know they were launched from different places..different weather, different payload?

Seems to be a whole lot of variables that could affect the appearance of the spiral.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by sylph16
While the OP made an amazing case and analogy...i do not see any resemblance to the Norwegian spiral...these are weak anomalies in the sky, with non whatsoever a comparison to the perfectly formed spiral in Norway...sorry, doesn't do it for me....but good work trying to get to the bottom of it


I am also in agreement with you on the norway spiral as well. I believe that was a genuine event and the elites knew about it.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   
So is the general consensus that this is indeed unidentified?

That is certainly how I feel. Yes there was a rocket in the area, at the time of the sighting, yes it was spinning in the wrong direction, yes it may have been venting fuel (by the way shouldn't it be coming out directly to the rear of the trajectory of the missile if that is true?)

why is this subject off the front page?

[edit on 8-6-2010 by Project_Exo]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:14 AM
link   
I lost the fibonacci thread on this so thought i would post about vortex mathematics here:


Google Video Link



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Long time lurker but 1st time poster here.

I'm not sure if this has been covered exactly as too many threads and posts to read.

But to say both spirals are caused by one failed missile test going up, and one out of control object coming down seems very unlikely.

As the creater of this thread stated they seem too similar for it to be a coincidence.

Lets take a look at the 2 spirals.

Firstly the Norway Spiral... now focus on the very centre of the spiral. Its a lot brighter than the rest of it, and has a distinct "tadpole" look about it. this isn't a wildly out of control object. this is turning in very accurate and concentric circles.



Now lets look at the Australian spiral... again focus on the centre. You will see it has the exact same "tadpole" look to it. Again it looks like its turning in very accurate and concentric circles.




For me these 2 pictures show a high degree of probability for the same object causing the spirals.

Different air temperatures, moisture etc in the air could account for the Norway spiral being more spectular and for it displaying so many external rings. However if you look at the epicentre of the spirals it just looks like the exact same thing.

Now what is causing these spirals is open to debate, my theory is that by spining an object we are somehow displacing the air infornt or around it which allows it to travel at extreme speeds. However i'm certainly no scientist and this is a just a random theory I have.

I dont have any pictures of the other spirals but if anyone can post a comparision then that would be very interesting. Baically we are looking for the "tadpole" effect at the centre of the spiral.

For me when there is such a similarity between the 2 spirals I just can't see how its possible for the offical explanations to be true.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 06:34 AM
link   
True. While I admire the length the OP went to extrapolate on info supplied by SpaceX, we are all only relying on second hand information.

My gut tells me the Norway Spiral could not have possibly been caused by a mere rocket malfunction, and while the Australian Spiral presents a weaker case, the similarities are undeniable.

I am not putting forth any theories, while the 'debunkers' on here claim absolute truth is on their side. Whereas I think if you will look at these pictures and videos with an open mind and consider the rocket theory, well, to quote Bill Hicks...

"There's NO #ING WAY!!!"



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by tesla9
I am not putting forth any theories, while the 'debunkers' on here claim absolute truth is on their side. Whereas I think if you will look at these pictures and videos with an open mind and consider the rocket theory, well, to quote Bill Hicks...

"There's NO #ING WAY!!!"


Here's the irony. Given the premise of this thread is that preliminary findings heavily suggest it was a rocket, it essentially makes people like yourself the debunkers.

Add to that, the fact that your not willing to put forth a theory. But you are more than willing to just knock it with colorful quotes such as:


"There's NO #ING WAY!!!"


Which are essentially cowardly and meaningless. Yes... it is you that is the debunker with little to no substance!

Man... you types make me laugh! Give up on the conspiracy theories and take up comedy!

IRM


[edit on 8/6/10 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Idiots!
Stop using that overly exposed photo of the Norway spiral as an example of it's perfectness!

And I wish the tards would actually use that thing in their heads, called brain, to come up with theories that make sense instead of yelling:


There's NO #ING WAY!!!



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Project_Exo
So is the general consensus that this is indeed unidentified?

That is certainly how I feel. Yes there was a rocket in the area, at the time of the sighting, yes it was spinning in the wrong direction, yes it may have been venting fuel (by the way shouldn't it be coming out directly to the rear of the trajectory of the missile if that is true?)

why is this subject off the front page?



Exo, your willingness to get specific in your reasoning on this is commendable because it allows us to see just where your logic has gone off the tracks. The prime cause, shared by many others posting here, is you make unwarrented assumptions -- pure guesses -- to back up your intuition, without any verifiable facts to back up the guesses.

You are, like most other humans, extending your wide familiarity with earthside phenomena, into outer space. But outer space is 'unearthly', and the deductive and inductive processes which do serve us well down here will fail us and betray us if we try to apply them to up there.

Example: "by the way shouldn't it be coming out directly to the rear of the trajectory of the missile "

This is indeed reasonable for an aircraft, or even a rocket flying through the atmosphere. So the statement is well founded on a lifetime of perception and interpretation.

But in space, many new factors apply, and one is the near-total vacuum.
This has profound effects on the way things look, effects that your comment suggests you haven't appreciated. You and a few billion others -- it's nothing to be ashamed of.

Stuff sprayed out of a space vehicle goes in the direction it is sprayed, off to the left or right as easily as towards the front or back. And as the object turns the spray paints a spiral -- sometimes sharp if the spray is a narrow beam, sometimes diffuse of the spray is low-speed wide-aperture dumping -- whose tightness depends on the spin rate and ejection speed.

The cloud expands and dissipates, and the molecules eventually impact the very thin air at those altitudes and slowly drop into the upper atmosphere in a few hours. But in the meantime, short-lived weird-looking clouds are created which -- under special illumination and meteorological conditions -- can be visible to ground observers.

It's unearthly, literally. Eerie -- hair-on-back-of-neck raising eerie.

But it's humanuity's first genuinely new environment of activity in millenia -- well, maybe in forever. Expect to be baffled. But then, use your intelligence to figure out what's really appearing. Overcome your earthside mental reflexes. There's a whole universe out there, waiting for our minds to expand to be able to perceive it properly.

This is only an exercise, but it's good practice. The real thing is -- well, it's just awesome.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Absolutely well done to you OP this is clear, concise and straightr to the point. Your thread is an example to all. That said I can't help but feel that Project Bluebeam is just round the corner. Keep watching the skies. Well deserved Star and Flag.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
That was excellent work, OP. Really great read.

On a side note, I understand everyone is entitled to their opinion and all, but why waste so much thought on an event which clearly has an explanation?

Stop seeing what you want to see
.

There are so many things out there that are much more compelling in a UFOlogy sense than this, some with little or no rational explanation.

Yet people are on here bringing up Fibonaci sequences and golden ratios and whatnot. Talk about slapping Occam's Razor in the face, breaking it's neck, and burying it under cement.

I'm not a skeptic in the traditional sense, but I don't believe in injecting conspiracy into easily explainable things.

E.T's out there. But they're not busy hypnotizing us with golden spirals over Australia...


[edit on 8-6-2010 by SaosinEngaged]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaosinEngaged
....I understand everyone is entitled to their opinion and all, but why waste so much thought on an event which clearly has an explanation?


The serious aspect of this particular visual phenonemon -- aside from the envy all of us who did NOT see it have for those who DID -- is that it provides a very useful 'control experiment' in human perception/memory of an unexpected and genuinely baffling apparition.

It is a humbling -- but eye-opening and instructive -- exercise in realizing the degree of unintentional error, distortion, and adhesion of random coincidences that such incidents create as a normal result of ordinary human perception and interpretation.

Apparitions that were undeniable 'space fuel clouds' of various shapes (based on the majority of witnesses and on identification of the actual source) have been seen for decades, have been reported to stall aircraft engines and interfere with radio and radar, to 'chase' ground observers, to respond to signals , and on several notable occasions (e.g., Dan Aykroyd's account) to send telepathic messages.

This is kind of scary when compared with other similar tales for which the prosaic stimulus (if any) cannot be identified -- is it because of the existence of a genuine anomalous event, or just due to perceptual garble?

Either way, the moral is -- watch the skies, perceive carefully (angular size, motion, line-of-sight motion, etc), refrain from jumping to premature interpretations (which colors the way the mind filters specific aspects of the raw perception), remember carefully, refrain from introducing supplemental themes, and share the tales.

Then discuss boisterously, as this thread is a wonderful example of, for which I want to thank everybody who has contributed.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
some more opinions here, on ufo digest and here

how do you guys feel about david willcock? My BS detector goes off every time I read/see him. Is he "respected" around here?


[edit on 8-6-2010 by ceetee]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Norway Spiral - Russian Bulava Missile
China Sprial - German Taurus Missile
Canada Spiral (hoax, actually filmed in Florida) - NASA Rocket
Australia Sprial - SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket

Identified Flying Objects! Case closed.

Nice thread, OP.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ceetee
some more opinions here, on ufo digest

how do you guys feel about david willcock? My BS detector goes off every time I read/see him. Is he "respected" around here?



The Norway Spiral is back -- but this time it's jumping all over the place in the skies of Australia. This is a manmade phenomenon that shows Disclosure is getting closer and closer all the time! The longer the oil spill goes on unchecked, the faster we can expect to see Disclosure really happen.
~ David Wilcock




[edit on 8-6-2010 by FOXMULDER147]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
This analysis, and your norway spiral analysis are some of the reasons i visit ATS. These are examples of the most comprehensive public investigations done about the events.

[edit on 6/8/2010 by above]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


I noticed this at...
usahitman.com...
Post Published: 07 June 2010
Author: conspiracyman
Found in section: Conspiracy Or Not
Is this you also




top topics



 
99
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join