23 Dec UFO in Russia, 5 different videos posted.

Originally posted by ConspiracyTruth

And there are great shows that debunk UFOs. Yes TV shows are sensational and stuff, by nature, but that doesn't mean there aren't worthwhile investigations and research done in them, too.

It's helpful to keep in mind the underlying cynical motivation of the producers of such shows. It's to sell commercial message time. And how does this influence editorial slant? The most desirable target audience for any commercial customer, trying to sell products to viewers, is one composed of viewers who will believe anything, the more credulous the better. So a show designed to attract such viewers will also be able to sell a lot of ads.

Does that explain a lot of the shows?

reply to post by JimOberg


Good one, although it does remind me of the theory that the reason all journalists thought the new millennium and century started with the year 2000 even though there was no year zero was that they were hired partly based on how easy it would be to cheat them on their pay.

"A scalar beam can be sent from a transmitter to the target, coupled with another sent from another transmitter and as they cross an explosion can be made. This interference grid method could enable scalar beams to explode the missile before launch, as well as en route with knowing the right coordinates. If the target does manage to launch, what are known as Tesla globes or Tesla hemispheric shields can be sent to envelop a missile or aircraft. These are made of luminous plasma which emanates physically from crossed scalar beams and can be created any size, even over 100 miles across. Initially detected and tracked as it moves on the scalar interference grid, a continuous EMP (electromagnetic pulse) Tesla plasma globe could kill the electronics of the target. More intensely hot Tesla 'fireball' globes could vaporize the missile. Tesla globes could also activate a missile's nuclear warhead en route by creating a violent low order nuclear explosion. Various parts of the flying debris can be subjected to smaller more intense Tesla globes where the energy density to destroy is more powerful than the larger globe first encountered. This can be done in pulse mode with any remaining debris given maximum continuous heating to vaporize metals and materials. If anything still rains down on Russia or America, either could have already made a Tesla shield over the targeted area to block it from entering the airspace. "

www.angelfire.com...

We must understand a UFO is just that. An object that is up in the air and we don't know what it is. This means there can be a totally logical explanation for what it is and not aliens from another planet. Or ours for that matter. But all of you already know this.
As large as that thing was and as long at it was visible... thousands and thousands saw it and it only produced AND HALF DOZEN VIDEOS anywhere???
The majority of people would get it on camera and show it. Hell, I don't believe in flying saucers and I would have videoed it and shown it to anyone that wanted to see it, uploaded to YouTube and others and wouldn't care what people thought or being ridiculed. A person does not need to state their belief, just show the video and let people make up their own mind.
Especially now with YouTube and alllll the other anonymous ways people could have shown this event to the masses? They could remain anonymous like I said and still show the video of a UFO.

reply to post by JimOberg


Yes, but a viewer has the ability to decipher what they're watching. I just included a clip where the "cast" recreated a UFO video to a tee by launching a rocket designed to misfire. Could it have been manipulated? Possibly. I'm saying the shows I've watched have supported all the technical rocket/missile analysis I read on these boards.

We live in a capitalist society, and everyone has their own ego - there are motivations for everything. It's best to just discern what you're watching, reading, etc... whether it's on a forum here, or it's on the SyFy or History Channel.

Originally posted by kennvideo

This is not a failed rocket.. I live north of the Cape in FL. and have witnessed a few failed rockets... a failed rocket does not stay on a horizonal path for that long of a time... gravity pulls it down and rather quickly... to have a cloud in the air as this one does, it cannot be up that high... I can explain it, but I also don't believe in flying saucers... Maybe it just was some secert launch of something... MIllions of people live around that city and you mean to tell me for as long as that thing stayed up and visable HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of videos don't exist...people didn't run and get a video cam or just use the one on their cell... I mean, they do have cells in Russia... come on now. CGI... yep possible..

Thanks for your first-person contribution, we need more stuff like this, and less of the pseudo-expert proclamations of what a rocket should or should NOT look like. The subject, and this particular angle on it [launches as possible sources of misperceptions] is knotty enough to deal with even when we are scrupulous about facts. If we are inundated by phony facts, it's hopeless. So excuuuuse ME if I get in -your-face with folks putting themselves forward as trustworthy sources of stuff they just dreamed up somewhere.

Your comment makes sense from where you’re watching it, but let me suggest we may be talking about different phases of the orbital flight. You are seeing from the Cape the initial climb-out and relatively low speeds, and it's reasonable to expect engine failures here to cause a quick fall-back, although what you usually see is the destruct system detonate, and fiery pieces arcing and falling back to Earth.

Much farther up the coast – say, off North Carolina or even New Jersey – the booster is really hauling along horizontally. If it’s 50 to 80 miles high at that point, even if it started falling back to Earth immediately it would take a full minute even to fall ten miles, and in that minute it would have travelled 200-300 miles forward on its momentum alone [do the math], so you can see what the shape of a falling failed rocket’s path would be at THAT point.

Does that make sense?

Again, thanks for the input, and I’m always envious of people who see rockets blast off – even though I’ve seen my fair share [a Saturn-V, several shuttles, Atlases, Deltas, Soyuzes, a ‘Dnepr’, etc – a delightful array].

You say:
Much farther up the coast – say, off North Carolina or even New Jersey – the booster is really hauling along horizontally.

NJ forget it. You don't see it as far north as you think. And in NC. it would not be that big as it was in this Russian video. Even IF you can see a Shuttle IN THE DAY from NC, do you realize how SMALL it would be? And you could ONLY see the fire tail.

And look!!!!! Another exploding orb in Tijuana Mexico... OH NO!!!!!!

deathby1000papercuts.com...

reply to post by kennvideo


And I have to ask, why are there failed rocket launches going off all over the place around the same time? WTF? Coincidence?

reply to post by ConspiracyTruth

All over the place? I know Russia has had some problems lately but where else?

You mean that mexico video? That is not a rocket launch. Maybe you should have a look at this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by ConspiracyTruth


The first was when a new Russian military satellite, called Geo-IK 2, failed to reach its intended orbit after launching into space atop a Rocket booster on Feb. 1. Russian space officials managed to regain contact with the satellite to confirm its wrong orbit.

On March 4, a NASA climate satellite failed to reach orbit due to a flaw in its rocket that prevented the booster's nose cone from separating at the right time.

The Waverider was air-launched over the Pacific Ocean on June 13 and reached nearly Mach 5 before failing to transition to its scramjet engine.

If you want to count a ballistic missile one happened in July 27 at Vandenberg, but never got far off the ground cause the Air Force destroyed the missile using a remote destruct command.

Russia booted one on Aug. 18, when a new $300 million communications satellite called Express-AM4 went silent shortly after launching into orbit.

An experimental Chinese satellite failed to reach orbit on Aug. 18 when its rocket malfunctioned

The Soyuz rocket launched on Aug. 24, but its third-stage engine shut down unexpectedly, plunging the rocket and its attached Progress 44 cargo ship back to Earth.

In September, the Iranian Space Agency reportedly attempted to launch a Rhesus monkey into space atop a Kavoshgar-5 rocket. That failed near the ground.

The last high-profile space failure of the year was Russia's Phobos-Grunt mission, The 14.5-ton Mars probe launched on Nov. 8 but failed to fire its engine to leave Earth orbit and begin the trip to Mars.

And then you the the one in question at the end of December.

So, besides the two in August on the same day... you are full of beans my friend.... investigate before you make a guess as a statement of fact on ATS.

reply to post by kennvideo


www.econsm.com...
forteanswest.com...
www.howtoarchives.com...
www.youtube.com...
rt.com...
www.youtube.com...
ufotodayat.blogspot.com...

& many more like that are available if you search

reply to post by ConspiracyTruth


Did you really listen to any of these things on some of these sites? Some don't even take themselves seriously... especially the China rocket one... with the spooky alien voice…LMAO...
Many of these sites just make it harder for those legit folks that want to discuss subjects like this with a drop of intelligence, logic, and believability. I enjoy reading a responding to many of the people on ATS that show they want to investigate these anomalies and do it in a serious way. So many crazies on here as well and I like to read them… they make me smile. I enjoy hearing them on coast to coast AM with George Noory from time to time along with the shadow people, ghosts, and other things that go bump in the night.

reply to post by kennvideo


Think you're missing my point. There have just been a lot of UFOs of late, especially over last few months, that have been given satellite/rocket explanations. I just think it's a strange uptick. I follow UFO sightings regularly, and I've noticed the rocket/satellite trend has spiked... that's all.

reply to post by ConspiracyTruth


I do see your point. I would believe in that compared to the strange alien believers out there. Just think of how much we ARE NOT told regarding rockets and satellites and other space junk falling to earth. Here's an interesting article:

www.ufodigest.com...

reply to post by kennvideo


I know!!! that's what I'm saying!!! We should be just as concerned about space debris and military crafts gone haywire as we are about alien visitors!

On xmas day I was talking to friends about the ufo sightings that we see here due to clear skies mainly in the canaries, these ufo's dart and zig zag all over the place at very fast speeds, anyway there was a married couple who interupted me saying that they had seen a ufo 30 years ago in gloscester in the uk, they described it as looking like the moon, it was 35 meters above their heads and had a feint whirring sound, they were saying good night to friends who had 2 children who were so scared they ran into the car, I have sent the video to our friend who tell me yes that is the same one, now i have this theory if this was 30 years ago just maybe it started there and took 30 years to get to Russia as the speed of this thing is so slow, i'ts only my imagination, but these days anything is possible

Originally posted by ConspiracyTruth
reply to post by kennvideo

 

I know!!! That’s what I'm saying!!! We should be just as concerned about space debris and military crafts gone haywire as we are about alien visitors!

I agree 100% my friend!!!! We know that there are thousands of things up there!!!!! Since there are no aliens, but we can also get hit by 'blue ice', lol... our concern is just like you say ConTruth... I hope you have a Happy New Year too....

Here's a good article that just came out today:

Man has succeeded in tracking debris of size 10 cm and above numbering about 10,000. However smaller size debris, numbering in millions, are also a great hazard to live satellites and spacecraft as they can puncture them like a bullet. The total weight of debris in space is about 60,000,000 kg... that's 27200 metric tons. It is a big giant shadow in space ready to spark calamities on ground.

www.dnaindia.com...

Originally posted by kennvideo

Originally posted by ConspiracyTruth
reply to post by kennvideo

 

I know!!! That’s what I'm saying!!! We should be just as concerned about space debris and military crafts gone haywire as we are about alien visitors!

I agree 100% my friend!!!! We know that there are thousands of things up there!!!!! Since there are no aliens, but we can also get hit by 'blue ice', lol... our concern is just like you say ConTruth... I hope you have a Happy New Year too....

Here's a good article that just came out today:

Man has succeeded in tracking debris of size 10 cm and above numbering about 10,000. However smaller size debris, numbering in millions, are also a great hazard to live satellites and spacecraft as they can puncture them like a bullet. The total weight of debris in space is about 60,000,000 kg... that's 27200 metric tons. It is a big giant shadow in space ready to spark calamities on ground.

www.dnaindia.com...

Why do you think it's a 'good article'?

The author is an idiot -- he can't even do his sums correctly.

How many metric tons is 60,000,000 kilograms? Isn't it 1000 kg makes ONE metric ton?

Look it up, and tell us how close the author's number is to the correct one.

And where did it come from, that number? How many years have rockets been launched into orbit, and what's their average weight? How many orders of magnitude might that number be off by?

And how does it compare in mass/weight with natural infall of meteoritic material? With accidental fall-to-Earth of airplanes?

Is the artificial infall a thousand times worse, or one thousandth times as bad? Wouldn't that be important to know? Does more 'space junk' hit the ground than airplane junk? Or a lot LESS.

And what does this have to do with UFOs? My own analysis convinces me that NO in-space reports are caused by the swarm of 'space junk', just usually by stuff coming off of the satellite the observation is made from, that decays or evaporates within days. Reentering 'junk' does cause occasional UFO flaps but they seem rare.

I think you are suffering a bad case of 'internet nonsense poisoning', and your inability to operate even a modest baloney-filter seems to seriously affect the soundness of your opinions.

i feel as if this is the real deal, i wonder if obama has seen it

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by kennvideo

Originally posted by ConspiracyTruth
reply to post by kennvideo

 

I know!!! That’s what I'm saying!!! We should be just as concerned about space debris and military crafts gone haywire as we are about alien visitors!

I agree 100% my friend!!!! We know that there are thousands of things up there!!!!! Since there are no aliens, but we can also get hit by 'blue ice', lol... our concern is just like you say ConTruth... I hope you have a Happy New Year too....

Here's a good article that just came out today:

Man has succeeded in tracking debris of size 10 cm and above numbering about 10,000. However smaller size debris, numbering in millions, are also a great hazard to live satellites and spacecraft as they can puncture them like a bullet. The total weight of debris in space is about 60,000,000 kg... that's 27200 metric tons. It is a big giant shadow in space ready to spark calamities on ground.
www.dnaindia.com...

Why do you think it's a 'good article'?

The author is an idiot -- he can't even do his sums correctly.

How many metric tons is 60,000,000 kilograms? Isn't it 1000 kg makes ONE metric ton?

Look it up, and tell us how close the author's number is to the correct one.

And where did it come from, that number? How many years have rockets been launched into orbit, and what's their average weight? How many orders of magnitude might that number be off by?

And how does it compare in mass/weight with natural infall of meteoritic material? With accidental fall-to-Earth of airplanes?

Is the artificial infall a thousand times worse, or one thousandth times as bad? Wouldn't that be important to know? Does more 'space junk' hit the ground than airplane junk? Or a lot LESS.

And what does this have to do with UFOs? My own analysis convinces me that NO in-space reports are caused by the swarm of 'space junk', just usually by stuff coming off of the satellite the observation is made from, that decays or evaporates within days. Reentering 'junk' does cause occasional UFO flaps but they seem rare.

I think you are suffering a bad case of 'internet nonsense poisoning', and your inability to operate even a modest baloney-filter seems to seriously affect the soundness of your opinions.

I cannot deal with the closed and simple minded who think they own the only right answers. And If you would have checked you would find out.. So, there was a misprint...big deal.

60,000,000 kilograms is equivalent to 132000000 pounds and that is 27200 metric tons.

You shouldl be a tenth as smart as this guy:

kumar.grasp.upenn.edu...

alliance.seas.upenn.edu...

Next time don't leave the children's table...