Norway Spiral : Case reopened - the anatomy of an event

Wow man, you have a gift. Seriously, this is one of the most impressive/amazing threads I have ever seen. Thank you!

With members like you ATS will do great for a long time... which means humanity wins, forever.

btw, Listening to Coast right now. I think Richard C has read this thread. lol
www.enterprisemission.com...

[edit on 3-2-2010 by muggl3z]

reply to post by SLaPPiE


i am not debating if it was a missile or not ! have you or any other ATS Members ever seen (youtube ,media , wikipidia etc..... ) a minotaur missile launching in to space at night ! >?www.youtube.com... even better www.youtube.com... or how about this clash www.youtube.com... here's another and cool conspiracy rap music and very interesting vids and stills www.youtube.com...

( Minotaur's are used mostly to launch satellites into orbit )
it has 3 stages it glows in the dark leaving a tracer mark behind somewhat like the nor way or china spiral ! but! there's a problem ! the Minotaur Glowing (plasma >? ) Last's a long time ! the Norway China Spiral does not it disperses rapidly after the black like hole. in both the videos Ive seen China and Norway and a missile does not stay stationary suspended for 5 to 10 mins ! spiraling or not

Prove to me ! there is a video of a failed missile that spirals! Stationary of that long period of time have not found one yet ! IF this is a missile it has been controlled by some other means to have the missile intentionally spiral

Russian rocket? Aliens from zeta reticuli?

Am I the only person who thinks this is a holographic projection generated from earth?

Originally posted by tauristercus

Originally posted by Helmkat

Don't get too excited. Many people are finding his mathematics to be quite incorrect.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

EM can you point out where the math is incorrect?

The "many people" you speak of don't seem to be on this thread and I am sure the OP would love the chance to correct his math.

Thanks in advance

Most definitively I'd be interested to see the results from these "many people" that are being mentioned and how they reached their conclusions that "his mathematics are quite incorrect".

Were you not there when Phage told you that your trajectory was off??? (that's an example of mathematics gone wrong) That was just one example. I could probably do some more digging within this thread and find other examples as well. Personally, I am not a mathematician...But, I can easily tell you this. The Spiral was not a missile, period. Given the fact that I've personally witnessed many missile launches, this would be the first in history to ever behave in this manner which is the reason that the spiral created so much controversy in the first place. No one had ever witnessed anything like this before except for the Spiral seen in China.

Originally posted by bugstomper

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Not this again

Dont you get it was done by HARRP?


I cant believe your still believing the media side version of it.

Sorry even by your so called thread i still cant see this as a missile test.
why jumping the bandwagon with the media version?

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Agent_USA_Supporter]

HAARP is in Alaska! The blue trail does not originate in Alaska!

I almost can't believe that this statement exists.

HAARP is in Alaska??? The blue trail does not originate in Alaska???

Hmmmm...there are so many ways that this statement is incorrect that it almost hurts to respond to it.

First and foremost...Eiscat is in NORWAY. Eiscat acts as a receiver for HAARP, so, it doesn't need to originate in Alaska for HAARP to be effective. Secondly, electromagnetic radiation does not work necessarily from one direct point to the next. The ionosphere encompasses the ENTIRE EARTH. Therefore, point of origin is irrelevant.

JEEZ.

Originally posted by MorpheusUSA
Excellent, don’t lesson to the” bandwagoneers “that talk about alien intervention or whatever they can come up with for their lonely life’s. You used mathematics to give your hypothesis a stable foundation. Bravo.. That is so much better that most on this site. I applaud you. Excellent!!!! Its amazing that some will beat into their heads that its aliens or HARPP and when the evidence is in their face still say “And you offer no evidence to refute.” What do you offer some crack pot idea that someone else put in your mind?? I mean just because Alex Jones says its real does not mean it is. Evidence is truth, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth!!!

Out of curiosity...where do his mathematics prove anything? And tell me, what did those numbers show you that you are applauding him for??? Please, translate his mathematics for me, and not in words...IN MATHEMATICS.

Did you know that back in Nazi Germany, there were professors who supposedly "Proved Mathematically" that any race other than the Aryan race were inferior? As it turned out, they were all a bunch of quacks that pushed an agenda of propaganda that fooled an entire nation based on "very official looking figures." It was especially effective because when the general public sees numbers or statistics to back up statements or theories that they themselves aren't smart enough to translate, they are easily swayed and prone to accept something that is simply...ABOVE THEIR OWN HEADS. Numbers can create just as much of an illusion as an "ALL OUT LIE."

As it were, the Nazis (the supreme Aryan Race) were defeated by a collective world effort that involved all ethnicities, colors and creeds. And ultimately, the supposed "inferior" Jewish banking system broke the backs of the Nazis in less than a decade.

Well, how could this be??? Mathematically, Hitler should have taken over the world and we should all be speaking German. Right??? RIGHT??? They had the superior technology, they had defeated much of Europe, and they had the best scientists (mathematicians) that money could buy. As a matter of fact, we recognized this and snatched them up under "Project Paperclip."
en.wikipedia.org...
This is where we ascertained superior rocket science technology, and without it, we would have never made it to the moon. So...sometimes mathematics is flawed, because if it wasn't, we wouldn't currently be considered the world's "ONLY" superpower. But, as it were...those mathematics aren't really correct either...are they??? It seems to me that if China wanted to, they could sell our stocks on the open market and drain our economy in seconds...thereby making CHINA the only real superpower. Numbers are pretty elusive...aren't they???

Numbers only have the meaning that people ascribe to them, and since the OP's conclusion jives with your predefined belief of this situation, you will use this as your justification to rule out any other theory. I don't claim that aliens or Haarp had anything to do with this spiral, however, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MATHEMATICS/ NUMBERS...YOU'D KNOW THAT HAARP DEFINITELY HAS THE CAPABILITIES TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

And just so you know...the OP was on a different "bandwagon" before.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
If He was wrong once according to his own admission of faulty calculations, THE MATHEMATICAL CHANCES ARE, HE COULD BE WRONG AGAIN.

As I said in my first post on this thread, he's probably going to make a ton more friends supporting the "official story" and increase his MAINSTREAM popularity by conforming to the accepted theory than sticking with his initial stance; of which he also provided "MATHEMATICS." At least he can officially say that he impressed YOU...but, I'm still not convinced.


[edit on 3-2-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

reply to post by brageboogie


Really I have no idea if they are going to the moon or not, but if they could and it was profitable, why wouldn't they? it just seems like this type of aircraft, spaceworthy or not, could cause that spiral....that is if its not some sort of plasma hologram or something like project "Blue beam"
and I'm not saying this can be prooven but its possible....

Also why could it not be both a Funky new missile and a HAARP type defence system. If your going to test a new missile defence system, might as well use the new missiles too.....

reply to post by pyrodin123321


HAARP can not protect against anything. It can only affect the area of the ionosphere almost directly above it, and even then only by heating it slightly with radio waves. That's it. It is not powerful enough to protect against anything.

The Russian Bulava test flight is more than adequate to explain what we saw.

reply to post by pyrodin123321


First of all, I was being an idiot with that moon comment
Second, in all probability, many different factors were involved. If I've understood any of the science I've skimmed through concerning related research even slightly correctly, certain artificial optical emissions (e.g. artificial auroras) in the ionosphere or stratosphere may require a visual carrier agent to be made truly visible. That could be a high density of ice crystals, metal filings, already present meteor dust etc. It seems possible to me that in order to create/observe the kind of astonishing phenomena we witnessed over norway this december, you would require both ionospheric heating (or something like that, I'm NOT an expert, obviously) AND some visual carrier material up in the athmosphere, plus the correct light/darkness conditions. SO. Probably a missile was involved. But I am not at the moment convinced that ONLY a missile was involved. It seems certain members of this forum has difficulty relating to such maybe-logic. 'Either it is THIS or it is NOT-THIS!' Well, just to inform you guys, in order to make bread, you both need flour AND water, and even yeast too! If something as ordinary as bread cannot be explained by the 'THIS or NOT-THIS' logic, then why should cutting edge science conform to such aristotelian simplicity? Where are all the erisians when you need them? (never to be found at the same place, I guess)

reply to post by brageboogie


Ionospheric heating could not produce a light show that bright. HAARP can make optical phenomenon, but they are only visible with fantastically-sensitive equipment.

The illumination was most likely caused by the sun, which was still high enough to illuminate the rocket exhaust (aluminium oxide - sapphire), and the spiral itself. The sun is far more powerful than HAARP, and has the demonstrated ability to be able to illuminate things in space

There is no reason to think that the sun was not capable of causing the light show we saw, with the blue and white elements simply being ejecta from the missile itself. Now, what the white element is is still up for debate - a venting liquid fuel bus in the third (or even second) stage, or some countermeasure, we don't know. We do know, however, that the sun is very capable of producing the illumination we saw, and until someone can show how what we saw could not be created by the sun lighting up the material, that explanation has to stand.

reply to post by davesidious


YO INSIDER! It is obvious from your categorical use of words like 'is', 'are' etc. That you KNOW what you're talking about. You're obviously employed by both the russian airforce AND by HAARP and EISCAT at a top security level, or else it wouldn't be possible for you to KNOW all these things 100%, as you obviously do. And, since we're at a CONSPIRACY forum, it's obvious that your function here is to be a disinformation agent, with the goal of taking attention AWAY from your evil masters' true goal. Well then, time to spill the beans, mister! What is that goal? Now don't you try to talk your way out of this! Your agenda is outed!

reply to post by davesidious


Do you read the posts?

'plus the correct light/darkness conditions'

That would mean electric lightbulbs in the sky? Or the SUN?

reply to post by davesidious


BTW, being employed by such highly resourceful agencies, I thought you were informed that in science, nothing is really ever PROVEN, it is simply not DISproven YET. That is the difference between science and religion.

reply to post by brageboogie


Hey! I'm just using science here, buddy! My government overlords (who are actually some kind of hyper-evolved Brazilian Tree Frogs from Swindon) tell me to not talk about anything else.

Seriously, we know for a fact that HAARP-like ionospheric heaters can't cause what we saw because of the nature of the equipment used. The broadcasting power is well known (and *impossible* to hide, due to the nature of EM radiation), and the make-up of the ionosphere is also well known. There is simply no way the amount of broadcast power from EISCAT or HAARP is enough to cause the fantastically-energetic light show we saw over Norway.

reply to post by brageboogie


Science looks forward. Religion looks backward.

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by tauristercus

Originally posted by Helmkat

Don't get too excited. Many people are finding his mathematics to be quite incorrect.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

EM can you point out where the math is incorrect?

The "many people" you speak of don't seem to be on this thread and I am sure the OP would love the chance to correct his math.

Thanks in advance

Most definitively I'd be interested to see the results from these "many people" that are being mentioned and how they reached their conclusions that "his mathematics are quite incorrect".

Were you not there when Phage told you that your trajectory was off??? (that's an example of mathematics gone wrong) That was just one example. I could probably do some more digging within this thread and find other examples as well. Personally, I am not a mathematician...But, I can easily tell you this. The Spiral was not a missile, period. Given the fact that I've personally witnessed many missile launches, this would be the first in history to ever behave in this manner which is the reason that the spiral created so much controversy in the first place. No one had ever witnessed anything like this before except for the Spiral seen in China.

I'm not sure if Phage calling out a possible miscalculation in the trajectory is a reason to throw out the OPs conclusions or that "many" people in this thread have expressed provable issues with the math. In fact there are many kudos to the ops to the contrary.


However, Thank you for sharing your opinions EM

I may not agree with them at all as the sum of my experiences having seen several missle launches while in the service and studying the data would say the "The spiral was fuel from a missle. Period". However that being said if I were to be proven wrong to my satisfaction my ego is not so large as to not eat some crow and apologize.

reply to post by davesidious


ON A SERIOUS NOTE:
As you might have noticed, I've sort of given up on having a 100% serious discussion with you. So far, it seems to me you've only taken isolated sentences out of context and criticized them, even when your argument is already INCLUDED in the post you criticize. Why do you even try to convince me? Isn't it obvious we have a fundamental disagreement on what we can and cannot KNOW? It's not really a matter of whether or not rockets, god or lizards from outer space were involved in this incident. It's a matter of what, in our respective opinions, constitutes facts, knowledge, evidence and theory. In my world, there exists almost no EVIDENCE of anything. Only indications. If I was a highly educated scientist, being able to conduct experiments for myself, I would indeed have more evidence. But it would only be evidence to ME (having empirically observed and set up the experiment), everybody else would still have to see that evidence as merely indicative.
Obviously, you sit on a lot more evidence than me, but it is only evidence to YOU. To ME it's simply indicative (at best). One indication never annihilates another, especially when they do not exclude one another even when interpreted as FACT.

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by brageboogie]

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Were you not there when Phage told you that your trajectory was off??? (that's an example of mathematics gone wrong) That was just one example. I could probably do some more digging within this thread and find other examples as well. Personally, I am not a mathematician...But, I can easily tell you this. The Spiral was not a missile, period. Given the fact that I've personally witnessed many missile launches, this would be the first in history to ever behave in this manner which is the reason that the spiral created so much controversy in the first place. No one had ever witnessed anything like this before except for the Spiral seen in China.

Hello again EM,

Don't mean to butt in but... you may've missed the part when your one member (phage) corrected himself on the trajectory. You can read it here
post by Phage


You seem to be on the offensive here and I'm confused as to why.

You haven't provided anything (nada!) substantial in the way of evidence that would back your constant chirping about how this spiral was definitely not caused by a rocket. Your only claim is that you've "witnessed many missile launches" and have never, in the history of every rocket launch ever performed since the beginning of the word rocket, seen this type of effect before. So it can't be what we're saying it is?...

So who are you exactly and why should we all stop what we're doing and listen to you? Why should we all take your word for it when all you've offered here are just words and no evidence to support your claims (and no, David Wilcok interviews don't count as evidence).

Your being witness to a handful of rocket launches (as you claim) might prove insightful here to a certain degree, yet you haven't offered any further insight as to the types of missiles you've seen or in what context you've seen them.

These spirals have been seen before- In China as you've mentioned and another one in Russia, both connected to rocket launches, not HAARP stations.

Do you actually believe that there was no rocket launch? At all?

[edit on 3-2-2010 by PhotonEffect]

reply to post by PhotonEffect


Well, that's what butts are for! Please butt in! By all means. I think this thread is becoming quite interesting, if slightly off-topic. But I do believe a discussion of how we process information should take place on EVERY thread at a site like this. It is, I believe, our peculiar way of processing information that makes us liable to frequent sites like this, where the consensus explanation of events is being scrutinized. Strange as it seems, even as gullible as many of us are to fantastic and way-out theories, the fundamental drive of a conspiracy-theorist is that of an eternal skeptic. Isn't that what made us question the official explanations in the first place? However, anything that runs on autopilot loses it's maneuverability, and that includes skepticism. If I am by DEFAULT skeptic of all official explanations, the 'truth' becomes ever more elusive. And, of course, vice versa. (note to self!)

reply to post by Helmkat

Hello Helmkat, I'm always interested in hearing what you have to say and I always appreciate your well thought out comments despite whether we agree or disagree. As I said before, I cannot pretend to know what created this spiral, but I tend to eliminate all the possibilities of what this spiral isn't.

Personal experience tells me that a missile cannot create perfectly illuminated concentric circles. Personal experience also tells me that the blue trail that is witnessed is not created by the exhaust of the missile because if you look at the perspective of the all the pictures involved, the trail leads towards the horizon...not the ground.

If one were to look at all of the pictures thoroughly, it is evident that the trail leads towards either the sunrise, or sunset. If I could figure out how to post pics on ATS, I would provide a number of pictures that demonstrate this fact. If someone knows how to do this, I will send you the pics, or you could U2U me to explain how its done and then I could provide you all a new perspective on the origin of the blue trail.