Norway Spiral created by Eiscat (New Evidence)

Originally posted by Point of No Return
It would be nice that if Dave or P comes in, and starts stating as fact that a missile failure was responsible, you stand up and say- hello, this is my research, it disproves that it was a missile failure- that way I don't have to repost and qoute your posts, and plug your thread in order to get that into thick skulls.

Point-

While I agree with some of what T has come up with through his work and research there are still things that I don't agree with and I've mentioned this to him. I for one totally buy the official story because it makes the most sense given the evidence that's available.

I agree with T's triangulation because it coincides quite nicely with other researchers work and that of the "official story" about where the cause of this thing originated from. It all points to the area of the White Sea which would lend credence to the fact that Russia did in fact launch a Bulava that day that was seen from Norway- so they weren't making that up-

What I didn't necessarily agree with is the assumption that the blue spiral was moving straight across our plain of view from right to left- I believe that it travelled in more of a diagonal path from our point of view- so away and to the left--

Also i don't agree with determining the size of the spiral based on still photos alone, especially the long exposures-- these tend to amplify the true size of the spiral IMO-- if you look at video stills from various locations the spiral doesn't appear nearly as large, yet none of these as I can tell have been used

But regardless You MUST consider that a missile was involved here,( which I think you do. )

The clear cut missile plume can not be ignored, it's there, in many photos- The work of T and others has shown this missile plume to have originated in the vicinity of the white sea...

Now, that missile plume surely looks to be connected to the blue trail and ultimately the white spiral- look at the pictures and try to convince me that these 3 aspects of the event are not in some way connected.. Which leads me to conclude that the origin of all these things are one and the same...

Why should I go against what many of the experts have said with regards to this; Why should I believe what you guys are trying to convince me of?

Where are the experts' testimony from your side? And no, this Harvard study doesn't count because no one is completely sure that it's describing what was seen in Norway.

Im willing to believe what you do but I haven't seen enough concrete evidence to make it a consideration. It involves way too much speculating and conspiracy and doesn't make any sense really...

I get it, this is a conspiracy site so my point of view is just noise here... but Ive seen this go from "no way this can't be a missile" to, "ok fine, a missile was involved but with another technology."
So what we're left with is a conspiracy that involves Russia's test missile being shot down by a facility that is not known to do such things, which also happens to reside in a NATO country..

Yes the military has an interest because this technology, in part, has applications in protecting our satellites... This is all in that video Ive posted earlier-

Or goto to EISCAT 3D and learn--

[edit on 26-2-2010 by PhotonEffect]

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

They are the radar stations, something completely different from the ionsopheric heater, which is their only equipment concerned with plasma experiments.

That is explained on that very same site.

At the Tromso location they have a VHF 222.8- 225.4 MHz
! klystron 1.6 MW 1micro to i milli second pump duration,
6 channel, FOUR 30x40 meter STEERABLE PARABOLIC Cylinder Antennas
Line feed -128 crossed dipoles
with a gain of 46 dBi
And a CIRCULAR polorisation
Correct.
Is this not what was operating during the Norway spiral.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


It might have been, but it's not the ionospheric heater, which is the alleged perpetrator of the Norway Spiral, according to Team EISCAT. The ionospheric heater is an array of antennae, not an array of steerable parabolic radar dishes.

I get the feeling you are grasping at straws, trying to shoe-horn anything tangible into your theory, whatever that might be today.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


www.eiscat3d.se...

wow did you see in the video that uhf 32 m steerable parabolic dish
www.ssf.npolar.no...

in how fast it can move

i got my finger and i can swirl swirl look people i can draw i can draw ! 360 all around up and down ! 2 mill watts in the sky microwaving the sky




and i did see this video i posted this exact video in a previous post

EISCAT 3d what can it also actually do ?



ohh by the way look what i found in this pdf people

look at page 24 in this pdf ? holographic radar imaging ? ok

^^^ probably not related to the spiral but interesting is it not ?

for those that say it ( can not ) be seen by the naked eye
well can you throw some paint on the invisible man to see him cant you ?

www.sos.siena.edu...

www.eiscat3d.se...

all i can say a phenomenon happen and someone took the advantage
to keep it going for 12 minutes

reply to post by Wolfenz


We've already shown that those are just normal radar sets used to make measurements in the upper atmosphere. Nothing to do with the ionospheric heater.

Your entire post was conjecture. You saw some specifications and some interesting hardware, and assume it is all connected with the spiral, all with only guesswork tying it together.

This really isn't helping the discussion.

reply to post by reeferman


I am in agreement. There has been no "empirical evidence" that equates the "Norway Spiral" to a rocket.

We have empirical evidence of the spiral, but somehow, there was nothing to indicate a rocket despite all of the cameras, and all of the people who filmed that particular morning.

I have had too many people who are engineers who have claimed that they have never seen a rocket behave in this manner, but, for the sake of all of the information, I have not entirely ruled it out.

At this point, I'm trying my best to be objective, but, its pretty hard when the Harvard research in 1996 pretty much laid things out on the table. So, at this point, I am listening to everyone despite my better judgment.

Originally posted by Wolfenz
reply to post by PhotonEffect

 

www.eiscat3d.se...

wow did you see in the video that uhf 32 m steerable parabolic dish
www.ssf.npolar.no...

in how fast it can move

Yes I believe it takes several minutes to adjust the dish's orientation-- it's not that quick actually

i got my finger and i can swirl swirl look people i can draw i can draw ! 360 all around up and down ! 2 mill watts in the sky microwaving the sky

Huh?

Did you catch the range of coverage? Wolf maybe you can comment on the coverage areas being shown here? It doesn't seem to extend to the White Sea...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7553aa7ab976.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/83494f34220e.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0d11f0cd5049.png[/atsimg]

and i did see this video i posted this exact video in a previous post

EISCAT 3d what can it also actually do ?

Really? And you still think its used to shoot down missiles?

all i can say a phenomenon happen and someone took the advantage
to keep it going for 12 minutes

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


Because the event took place in space. It would be impossible to see. There are dozens of rocket scientists out there who say, categorically, that it was a failed Russian missile. You need to show how they are all wrong, and how all of T's work is invalid.

Your objectivity is fatally flawed.

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by reeferman

 

We have empirical evidence of the spiral, but somehow, there was nothing to indicate a rocket despite all of the cameras, and all of the people who filmed that particular morning.

Are you a dis info agent too?

Nothing to indicate a rocket despite all of the cameras?? Come on EM, this is completely and utterly false and you know it.

What about the exhaust plume that this camera captured?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4b6caeb3e201.jpg[/atsimg]

Or this camera?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fdfd973a2fad.jpg[/atsimg]

Why do you keep saying that there's no indication of a rocket? When its clear as day!

You claim you are trying to find the truth but I really wonder sometimes because you're completely ignoring it....

Oh and I know you keep relying on your engineering friends but since you obliged to contact that astrophysicist- here's his email- you mustve missed it on his homepage

Jonathan McDowell

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]


Please report back-- this thread needs some real opinions

reply to post by davesidious



yes it all guess work ! as no one uphold the truth and your guessing

also conjecture can trigger a search or help some find that piece of the puzzle

ohh by the i like that light show video you posted ive posted the same thing same video if you backtrack the pages

is it a military advance illuminated flare ? that is descending what is it doing making a hologram at the end square >? ok never seen that before
sure put a spin to it for 12 minutes wait could last that long >? what was the spread width of how many miles ? well does look like its waving a pulse

seeing I was in the military ive seen illuminated flares as this sorta look like one for what purpose im not sure

reply to post by Wolfenz


More conjecture. Thanks. Really helping the discussion here.

We've already shown it to be a missile many times over. You have yet to show any reason why it can't be, and why your bizarre EISCAT/flare explanation is the real deal.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - pony up!

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

It might have been, but it's not the ionospheric heater, which is the alleged perpetrator of the Norway Spiral, according to Team EISCAT. The ionospheric heater is an array of antennae, not an array of steerable parabolic radar dishes.

I get the feeling you are grasping at straws, trying to shoe-horn anything tangible into your theory, whatever that might be today.

If the VHF might have been on as you say then you have to say the heaters might have been on like I do.
No two ways about it.
Although I know radar enough to know that if a parabolic beam of a million watts were trained on a missile flying through space that you would get more than a blip on an oscilloscope and it would appear round.
If it was ejaculating metallic or reflective fluid there is a good bet it would be polarized by the energy in the Ionosphere. No one I know said the heaters were necessary. Except guys like you and Phage. That is one of your made up platforms.

Also here is more proof Russia and Norway are co-operative in these things.


NTI: Global Security Newswire - Russia Initiates ...
Dec 24, 2009 ... Russia Initiates Missile-Tracking Radar Station. Thursday, Dec. ... Russia yesterday began use of a new radar station designed to provide ...

gsn.nti.org

Russia yesterday began use of a new radar station designed to provide early warning of incoming enemy missiles, Interfax reported (see GSN, April 7, 2007).

The Voronezh radar, located near St. Petersburg, is set to enter combat duty after receiving a final go-ahead from President Dmitry Medvedev, said Russian space forces commander Maj. Gen. Oleg Ostapenko.

"This is a completely new station, which is capable of tackling its tasks at a very high level," Ostapenko said. "Doubtlessly, similar stations will be built in other regions of the country."

The radar "has already begun fulfilling all of its tasks. All technical nuances have been fine-tuned this year," he said. The station began transmissions in December 2005 and entered testing about a year later.

The site is designed to watch for missiles fired from test sites in Norway and Sweden while also monitoring local air traffic (Interfax, Dec. 23).

/gsn/nw_20091224_4057.php - Similar

reply to post by PhotonEffect


I'm talking about observed evidence of the rocket going up into the air on the date of the spiral. This should not be hard to find as I can google rockets, or I can go to youtube and pick any number of rockets that are seen being launched all the time. Its not like we're talking about a UFO here. But, there is nothing for that date or that time. No one saw a rocket. That doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't one, but, this is the sort of stuff that gets dismissed when there are eye witnesses to UFO events. Then when someone provides video evidence of UFO's then people come forward and say that the video isn't evidence of anything. Now, it would mean a whole lot to me if someone could actually provide me video footage of a rocket/missile going into the air on that particular date. I'm sure you would love to see the same thing.

But, you failed to read the rest of my post on the one that you replied to me about. I am not ruling out anything at this point, but, my better judgment still says Eiscat. I am now open to looking at everything, however, I've been doing that the entire time anyway.



[edit on 26-2-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

reply to post by PhotonEffect


It is done, I have emailed him. Hopefully, I will be getting a response back shortly.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


Did it occur to you that the plume that you're speaking of appears to be heading towards the sunrise? Hence, Ionosphere?

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Do you not remember your point any more? You said those dishes were important because they could be steered. I showed you that the physically-steerable equipment had nothing to do with the ionospheric heater. Now you are saying that these observation devices are somehow something to do with the effect? Made up platforms? What are you talking about with polarised ejecta? Do you even have a point any more, or are you just using random words?

Did you read all that excerpt, or did you just see "Russia" and "Norway" and come to the conclusion that they are somehow in cahoots with the endeavour? If you'd read it closer, you'd see that the Russian radar site is designed to monitor Norwegian missiles, not that they are cooperating.

Wow. Talk about a swing and a miss. You're not making much sense today.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


What does the sunrise have to do with the ionosphere??

The exhaust plume is clearly being affected by the wind, making it squarely in the dense lower atmosphere. The video shows the spiral is moving from right to left across the Norwegian sky (in those photos), so for that plume to have been made from left to right defies the laws of physics and each and every observation made by everyone. The missile would have to have appeared, suddenly, in space, travelled from left to right making the spiral, then turned off its engines, travelled back to the point it first turned its engines on, turn its engines on again, and then travel backwards towards the Earth, moderating its exhaust to make it appear as if it was travelling the other way.

Absolutely ludicrous.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

Do you not remember your point any more? You said those dishes were important because they could be steered. I showed you that the physically-steerable equipment had nothing to do with the ionospheric heater. Now you are saying that these observation devices are somehow something to do with the effect? Made up platforms? What are you talking about with polarised ejecta? Do you even have a point any more, or are you just using random words?

Did you read all that excerpt, or did you just see "Russia" and "Norway" and come to the conclusion that they are somehow in cahoots with the endeavour? If you'd read it closer, you'd see that the Russian radar site is designed to monitor Norwegian missiles, not that they are cooperating.

Wow. Talk about a swing and a miss. You're not making much sense today.

You see if you do not address the quote which is here. then you can say whatever you want so now connect this to a reply.

If the VHF might have been on as you say then you have to say the heaters might have been on like I do.
No two ways about it.
Although I know radar enough to know that if a parabolic beam of a million watts were trained on a missile flying through space that you would get more than a blip on an oscilloscope and it would appear round.
If it was ejaculating metallic or reflective fluid there is a good bet it would be polarized by the energy in the Ionosphere. No one I know said the heaters were necessary. Except guys like you and Phage. That is one of your made up platforms.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


The logs show the ionospheric heater wasn't on at the time of the experiments. And even so, if it was on, you and everyone else on team EISCAT have failed to show how it has the ability to produce the phenomenon we saw. You've just posted some information about optical phenomena invisible to the naked eye, in a different medium, and tried to claim that's evidence.

What the hell does an oscilloscope have to do with this? What does polarisation have to do with this either?

You are all over the place. You are simply not making sense. Get a grip!

Originally posted by PhotonEffect

Originally posted by Wolfenz
reply to post by PhotonEffect

 

www.eiscat3d.se...

wow did you see in the video that uhf 32 m steerable parabolic dish
www.ssf.npolar.no...

in how fast it can move

Yes I believe it takes several minutes to adjust the dish's orientation-- it's not that quick actually

i got my finger and i can swirl swirl look people i can draw i can draw ! 360 all around up and down ! 2 mill watts in the sky microwaving the sky

Huh?

Did you catch the range of coverage? Wolf maybe you can comment on the coverage areas being shown here? It doesn't seem to extend to the White Sea...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7553aa7ab976.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/83494f34220e.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0d11f0cd5049.png[/atsimg]

and i did see this video i posted this exact video in a previous post

EISCAT 3d what can it also actually do ?

Really? And you still think its used to shoot down missiles?

all i can say a phenomenon happen and someone took the advantage
to keep it going for 12 minutes