Norway Spiral : Case reopened - the anatomy of an event

Finding myself at a site for people who discuss actual and possible big-time events and their origins and ramifications from a conspiratorical point of view, this possibility occurred to me:

Maybe some of the people who refuse to take heed to the overwhelming amount of proof that it was indeed a russian missile mishap, and that alone, that caused the phenomenal spiral in the norwegian morning skies, maybe some of those people are actually russian disinformation agents trying to conceal the fact that their weapons program sucks?

And maybe some of the people who produce the evidence that it was a russian rocket that was responsible for the NS are disinformation agents working for EISCAT and/or HAARP, in order to cover up the fact that they harness unfathomable power in the skies, ready to tear away our entire atmosphere at any given moment, at the flick of a couple a switches, causing us to be simultaneously burned, boiled, strangled, radiated, crushed and exploded to death, all at the same time?

It kind of gets you thinking, doesn't it?

Can someone please respond to Timetraveller's interesting theory on page 8? That was the last interesting constructive post I remember reading in this thread before it got taken over by a few people's ego's via arguing. I joined ATS a couple of minutes ago just to make this post.

reply to post by multiblinkey
Hi Multi, and welcome. I agree,
I like to see people posting, but I got cheesed off with the argueing and said so..made no difference though. As for timewalker's? post, not really fair to the OP is it?




[edit on 3-2-2010 by smurfy]

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry



EvolvedMinistry wrote

Why on earth would Russia be testing a missile (an instrument of war) on the day Obama was to accept a prize of peace???

That reasoning is a bit flawed. The Russians provide a time frame window to the US of their strategic missile launches and this includes the impact area. No sides wants such a test launch to trigger an alert of be misinterpreted as a rogue attack. The pre-announcements were an extension of the START/SORT treaty. In some cases the Russians also complied with pre-announcement of nuclear capable out of area strategic bomber missions.

Normally with the Bulava full flight tests the target range is in Kamchatka. The telemetry is also left open under treaty. This window allows the US to prepositon RC-135S Cobra Ball to monitor the telemetry and impact area. Telemetry of the launch would also be monitored from US vessels in the Barents or aircraft pre-positioned in the region.

TJ




[edit on 3-2-2010 by tommyjo]

[edit on 3-2-2010 by tommyjo]

reply to post by tommyjo

I fail to see the flaw in my scrutiny of Russia's non-admittance to their supposed "Missile launch."

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


EvolvedMinistry wrote

And then, why on earth after Russia's initial denial would they decide to change their tune?

It isn't the first time that Russian officials have quickly denied Bulava failures. The 2004 failures were a huge embarrassment as Putin was present during the exercise. The Russian Navy immediately went into denial mode. Eventually the Russian Naval Chiefs had to admit that the missiles launches had failed.

'Russian navy denies missile failure

17/02/2004 18:54

MOSCOW (Reuters) - The Russian navy has denied reports that a planned submarine launch of two ballistic missiles in military exercises in Arctic Russia has failed.

"No unforeseen situations appeared in the course of the exercise," a spokesman for Russia’s Northern Fleet said, according to Interfax news agency.

Earlier, Interfax and Itar-Tass news agencies had reported the failure of a practice launch of the two missiles in exercises attended by President Vladimir Putin.'

www.talktalk.co.uk...

english.people.com.cn...

'A Defense Ministry spokesman refused to comment. And Russian state-run television channels, which are lavishly covering the daily activities of Putin ahead of the election, did not report the failed launch.'

TJ

OUTSTANDING WORK, COLLEAGUE!

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry

 

Thanks EM,

My pointing out that you've been studying HAARP for 13 years should put you in position to inform people that HAARP can't cause these things to happen.

And yes only two links worked. The first one I said made assumptions that I believe were incorrect and the other one was of David Wilcoks take on this whole thing who IMO is full of crap most of the time and does not constitute evidence.

But anyway, you are perfectly in your right to believe what you wish and make opinions about it. I won't try to stop you.

Cheers

Out of curiosity I would love for you to show me where the first link was mathematically incorrect as to the reason why you don't agree with it. Which means, I would like for you to translate his math for me and the errors that you find in the link.

Thank you.

reply to post by tommyjo


Oh...don't get me wrong. I'm not under the impression that the Russians, or any other government for that matter don't deny certain situations...which is the very reason that I don't trust either their denials or their admissions.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


Well, its more some of his assumptions that I didn't agree with than his math. I'm not a mathematician nor do I ever claim to be, so I can't say I'd be in a position to mathematically prove his maths wrong...

But I'll go back and take a look again and will get back to you with the issues I found

Cheers

reply to post by tauristercus

Gee. You work looks EXACTLY like the work of Tony Spell on Richard Hoagland's page enterprisemission.com hmmmmm


edit: took out saying it EISCAT - Hoagland says missile then EISCAT. but why not use tspell username if it's you?

[edit on 4-2-2010 by timewalker]

reply to post by smurfy

How so, I was not trying to derail. I thought it directly went with it, but if you see my post above, I'm not sure who to believe.

I gave up on any response on that post and started my own thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 3-2-2010 by timewalker]

reply to post by timewalker


Tony Spell's conclusion was that its EISCAT?? no

reply to post by PhotonEffect

Take a look on the enterprisemission.com site Norway Spiral part III. So I guess the work looking too close for comfort for me, is just my imagination. I guess he gave R. Hoagland permission to use his work to prove it is EISCAT. Going against his own analysis? Something is not right here.

edit: I guess it does not go against, they both say missile. Just EISCAT sucked up the missile. The main thing is the work is the same.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by timewalker]

All of the pictures of this "spiral" look fake. They're too perfect. It's weird. I don't see how anyone could look at these and believe that something in the sky made these patterns.

tauristercus,

Nice job at copying my previous work and methodology, at least Hoagland gave proper reference to my work. I think in academia this would be considered plagiarism; even down to my figure #37 with the space shuttle and the nearly identical overlays of the Jan-Petter Jørgensen photos. Unbelievable!

Note my paper was first posted on the web on 12/29/2009, it had its own thread many weeks ago:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.spellconsulting.com...
www.scribd.com...

reply to post by tspell

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Something still is not right. Funny how you pop out of nowhere right after I call him out. see above post.

[edit on 4-2-2010 by timewalker]

reply to post by timewalker


I just received an email about this thread a few hours ago, otherwise I would have spoken up much sooner!

Still can't believe it!?! Will talk to the moderator tomorrow.

reply to post by tspell
Well that is just some crazy timing. Godspeed.
2nd

reply to post by glitchinmymatrix


Are you for real? Do you really mean that you think the pictures are fake? Dude, I live in norway, I did not see it due to geographical reasons, but trust me, that s**t was a real as you are. If you're real, that is.
Start by searching for footage of the event by googling it, then push the label that says 'pictures'. Then go to youtube. I can only disagree with you, you're entitled to your own opinion, of course.

edit:minor errors

[edit on 4-2-2010 by brageboogie]