PDA

View Full Version : Norway's crazy light "show"



pwnst*r
December 10th, 2009, 03:38 PM
http://i47.tinypic.com/wrgdue.jpg


The mystery began when a blue light seemed to soar up from behind a mountain in the north of the country. It stopped mid-air, then began to move in circles. Within seconds a giant spiral had covered the entire sky.

Then a green-blue beam of light shot out from its centre - lasting for ten to 12 minutes before disappearing completely.
Onlookers describing it as 'like a big fireball that went around, with a great light around it' and 'a shooting star that spun around and around'.

apparently a failed missile launch, but cool looking nonetheless.

linky (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234430/Mystery-spiral-blue-light-display-hovers-Norway.html)

PuddingKnife
December 10th, 2009, 06:16 PM
A missile did that? wtf are the Russians up to?

RiceMonster
December 10th, 2009, 06:19 PM
Awesome. Looks photoshopped almost.

cariboo
December 10th, 2009, 06:34 PM
It was on GlobalTV news last night, so it has to be true. :)

Hallvor
December 10th, 2009, 06:36 PM
Yes, I saw several videos of it. Looked awesome. And Russian authorities denied everything. :)

Tristam Green
December 10th, 2009, 06:43 PM
You all really know what it was, right?

Al sent Sam on yet *another* leap.

Kimm
December 10th, 2009, 06:45 PM
Awesome. Looks photoshopped almost.

I'm sure that picture was, you can see real photos and video here: http://www.yr.no/nyheter/1.6902555

fatality_uk
December 10th, 2009, 06:49 PM
Russia's answer to Project Aurora?

pwnst*r
December 10th, 2009, 06:52 PM
I'm sure that picture was, you can see real photos and video here: http://www.yr.no/nyheter/1.6902555

so it's not "real" because it's not blurry as hell? OK

Hallvor
December 10th, 2009, 07:20 PM
You all really know what it was, right?


Yes. Confirmed today.

http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/technik/0,1518,666316,00.html

Tristam Green
December 10th, 2009, 07:25 PM
By Understanding Life's Long Sciences Heliocentricity Isn't Theory.

koleoptero
December 10th, 2009, 07:30 PM
This looks as if someone opened a wormhole there.

Tristam Green
December 10th, 2009, 07:33 PM
This looks as if someone opened a wormhole there.

That video of it was freaking creepy.

adeypoop
December 10th, 2009, 10:06 PM
This could usher in the new generation of fireworks displays! could you imagine displays made of these ? woah that would be something else

crimesaucer
December 10th, 2009, 10:22 PM
These are 4 videos that are very interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXMv2kv9a-A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY4f1IwQSSY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McL6QM2IOJQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O00CQF44Iis&feature=related


I don't like to claim anything so definitive like "the destroyer" or "ufo", but at the same time I wouldn't be so quick to jump on board with the Russian missile explanation either (disinformation tactics, perception management, and a track record of lies can't be so trusted).


I watched this story unfold on the internet, and I scanned all of the comments as new developments popped up. What I observed were the same groups of people that are quick to quote pop-culture explanations of 2012, LHC, and Roswell, and their rebuttal groups of the myth-buster types that are so quick to quote any government new source without any thorough fact checking. I choose to keep an open mind and at the same time can't accept the "failed missile" story that creates perfect stationary spirals from various photo angles and locations.

phrostbyte
December 10th, 2009, 10:28 PM
That looks like it could be a real photo, but it's probably overexposed. So it doesn't really reflect reality. :)

Giant Speck
December 10th, 2009, 10:32 PM
Here's a photo of the phenomenon that I found on Yahoo! News:

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20091210/capt.photo_1260465216636-1-0.jpg?x=400&y=259&q=85&sig=JQKR6dbZlQe1x2EB30EbFQ--

It's scary that something intended for destruction can create something so beautiful.

earthpigg
December 10th, 2009, 10:41 PM
some great comments at the English news sits:


From a retired U.S. Air Force Missile Launch Officer: Fear not... It's an out-of-control stage of a missile whose fuel has burst out of the side or burned through the side of the rocket engine. The uncontrolled spewing propellent is causing the rocket to spin, spraying the exhaust into space. The spiral effect is from the propellent being thrown in a circular pattern. The whole "show" is illuminated by the sun which, from the viewers on the ground is just over the horizon beyond the rocket. The rocket is high enough that the sun is hitting it. Very cool. Wish I could have seen it.


You're all wrong. It's GOD welcoming his son Barak who picked up his Nobel today. My, what a large halo you have Barak.

:lolflag:

slumbergod
December 10th, 2009, 10:57 PM
It was a publicity stunt by m$ to promote the pending release of the new version of Office :P

jwbrase
December 10th, 2009, 11:10 PM
These are 4 videos that are very interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXMv2kv9a-A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY4f1IwQSSY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McL6QM2IOJQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O00CQF44Iis&feature=related


I don't like to claim anything so definitive like "the destroyer" or "ufo", but at the same time I wouldn't be so quick to jump on board with the Russian missile explanation either (disinformation tactics, perception management, and a track record of lies can't be so trusted).


I watched this story unfold on the internet, and I scanned all of the comments as new developments popped up. What I observed were the same groups of people that are quick to quote pop-culture explanations of 2012, LHC, and Roswell, and their rebuttal groups of the myth-buster types that are so quick to quote any government new source without any thorough fact checking. I choose to keep an open mind and at the same time can't accept the "failed missile" story.

Really what you more need to accept the "Russian missile story" is a knowledge of physics rather than any special trust for governmental authorities. I first picked up the story on a space flight forum, and the thread in question gives some links to some similar failures at lower altitudes. http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=11550

Also, the still images I've seen generally looks quite photoshopped, but the video footage shows no sign of tampering, and to my eye supports the rocket theory.

Hallvor
December 10th, 2009, 11:27 PM
It is no longer a theory. Even the Russian ministry of defense says that it was a Russian missile with an engine instability.


"Das russische Verteidigungsministerium bestätigt offiziell, dass eine "Instabilität" im Motor der dritten Stufe zum Versagen der Rakete führte."

http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/technik/0,1518,666316,00.html

koleoptero
December 10th, 2009, 11:35 PM
These are 4 videos that are very interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXMv2kv9a-A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY4f1IwQSSY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McL6QM2IOJQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O00CQF44Iis&feature=related


I'm not meaning this as a comment to upset you but those videos take bulls**t to quite another level. For example that thing happened at night, and the first video claims it was towards the sun.
And the destroyer?

In the famous words once more:

what the hell

Ylon
December 10th, 2009, 11:44 PM
Vodoo and Blender?
Something more cheap or more expensive?

pwnst*r
December 10th, 2009, 11:47 PM
In the famous words once more:


^^i approve of this message.

RATM_Owns
December 10th, 2009, 11:53 PM
These are 4 videos that are very interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXMv2kv9a-A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY4f1IwQSSY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McL6QM2IOJQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O00CQF44Iis&feature=related


I don't like to claim anything so definitive like "the destroyer" or "ufo", but at the same time I wouldn't be so quick to jump on board with the Russian missile explanation either (disinformation tactics, perception management, and a track record of lies can't be so trusted).


I watched this story unfold on the internet, and I scanned all of the comments as new developments popped up. What I observed were the same groups of people that are quick to quote pop-culture explanations of 2012, LHC, and Roswell, and their rebuttal groups of the myth-buster types that are so quick to quote any government new source without any thorough fact checking. I choose to keep an open mind and at the same time can't accept the "failed missile" story that creates perfect stationary spirals from various photo angles and locations.
Even though those videos are complete bull, the second and fourth ones contain a Rage Against the Machine song. Which really makes up for the stupid video.

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 01:44 AM
Really what you more need to accept the "Russian missile story" is a knowledge of physics rather than any special trust for governmental authorities. I first picked up the story on a space flight forum, and the thread in question gives some links to some similar failures at lower altitudes. http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=11550

Also, the still images I've seen generally looks quite photoshopped, but the video footage shows no sign of tampering, and to my eye supports the rocket theory.

If your only argument is possible photoshops and some nautical readout then that's not much more of a leg to stand on than the ufo people's theories:



ZCZC FA79
031230 UTC DEC 09
COASTAL WARNING ARKHANGELSK 94
SOUTHERN PART WHITE SEA
1. ROCKET LAUNCHING 2300 07 DEC TO 0600 08 DEC
09 DEC 0200 TO 0900 10 DEC 0100 TO 0900
NAVIGATION PROHIBITED IN AREA 65-12.6N 036-37.0E
65-37.2N 036-26.0E 66-12.3N 037-19.0E 66-04.0N 037-47.0E
66-03.0N 038-38.0E 66-06.5N 038-55.0E
65-11.0N 037-28.0E 65-12.1N 036-49.5E
THEN COASTAL LINE 65-12.2N 036-47.6E
2. CANCEL THIS MESSAGE 101000 DEC=
NNNN




If you are the physics expert here (and I most definitely am not), then can you please explain to me why the perfect swirls from various angles of live videos are stationary, and don't change as fuel would burn out? Would this be because the missile was out of our atmosphere? And if that is the fact then the boost needed to get a missile out of our atmosphere would surely be seen as a direct trail from ground to space..... and that trail would linger for a while after anybody saw the spiral effect so there would be videos of the trail AFTER the spiral effect.... like 20 minutes of photos and cell phone videos of the remaining trail AFTER the spiraling had stopped.



Or how about the stories of anyone seeing a missile in flight BEFORE the spiral effect? Any sailors or fishermen out in the sea give any reports, or other people at 8:00AM..... I know if I were outside in the pre-dawn light and there was a rocket launching into the clear cloudless sky then I would probably see it before an illuminated spiral happened.



And how about pictures from the different security webcams that captured those long exposures that you call photoshop, then how is it that the spiral effect stays so perfect in nature to the center (without moving, and without the supposed spiral fuel exhaust dissipating into the atmosphere like most fuel trails do from airplanes or rockets). And then how would the spirals remain so tight if it were an out of control missile. And also, how quick would the photoshop experts need to all start making pictures to go along with the breaking news story that so many witnesses just saw with their own eyes. It would seem easier to just link some nautical readout that no one knew about until it just surfaced from some "smart" guy who thought to check for it (before it took off like wild fire through every comment board about this).


From the page you linked, here is a video of a missile being self destructed: http://orbiter-forum.com/showpost.php?p=138061&postcount=32


notice that in that 1 minute and 25 seconds that it shows the Trident II missile spiraling out of control, take notice of all of the smoke and exhaust. It's still visible even on the water from where it was launched a minute and a half earlier. And the exhaust from the missile is thick as it spreads out and lingers in our atmosphere, not to mention the irregular shape that it becomes once it is blown around by the winds..... now where are the pictures and videos of lingering exhaust trails from this supposed missile and anything that would show it was actually in our atmosphere?


And if this were an out of control missile then compare it to the Trident missile and its misshapen irregular exhaust spirals to the perfect spirals seen in most videos and pictures of this. And where is the other debris? Where is the arch of it going up and then coming down.



&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&


I rarely believe youtube videos for how they are pieced together to make their points since they usually come from some serious wingnuts and jessus freaks (like all of those Illuminati videos). But in these types of youtube videos you can sometimes find interesting pieces of information that don't necessarily need to be part of the latest conspiracy theory that is being presented......


And with this said, I only wanted to point out the ancient spirals and how they closely resembled the same spiral patterns, and the strangeness of the NASA SOHO images (which I know nothing about). So, if there are any experts out there that can give links to the exact place these images of the sun came from and why there were dual time stamps as well as why it stopped on December 7th when that large flare up was shown on the edge of the screen then I would love to hear it, or see it debunked.


And if all you guys can come up with is some tired *** "tin foil hat" jokes than you're saying this to the wrong person.

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 01:58 AM
Even though those videos are complete bull, the second and fourth ones contain a Rage Against the Machine song. Which really makes up for the stupid video.

Interesting point, how do you feel about the lyrics of Zack De La Rocha?

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 02:03 AM
apparently a failed missile launch, but cool looking nonetheless.

linky (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234430/Mystery-spiral-blue-light-display-hovers-Norway.html)


I call shenanigans. I am prior Navy and no idiot. There is no way I can even imagine a missal causing a precision spiral in the sky, if it was caused by a missal and clouds. The clouds would distort due to wind in the air. Not to mention the blueish spiral light shooting out from it. At best I can imagine that is was a laser light show or a secret experiment. IDK. I will have to review the information some more.

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 02:12 AM
I call shenanigans. I am prior Navy and no idiot. There is no way I can even imagine a missal causing a precision spiral in the sky, if it was caused by a missal and clouds. The clouds would distort due to wind in the air.

Thank you.

pwnst*r
December 11th, 2009, 02:43 AM
hey now, i didn't SAY it was a missile. i'm siding on that it wasn't, and i'm not some raving UFO/Alien fanatic either. very skeptical.

SunnyRabbiera
December 11th, 2009, 03:10 AM
Sorry but for me this all looks fake, in fact I have seen better fakes then this on the internet...
Like those CGI UFO vids, I can spot a fake pretty well.

pwnst*r
December 11th, 2009, 03:13 AM
so... it's fake to you and no chance of it having anything to do with a rocket or missile of some sort?

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 03:18 AM
For example that thing happened at night, and the first video claims it was towards the sun.

Actually the spiral happened at 8:00AM as the sun was coming up.


Now the first NASA Video#1 starts on December 04th which was 5 days before this spiral. It shows something behind the sun moving to the left at about 12 seconds into the video.

36 seconds into it you can track this to the same point of the screen that Video#3 is about. Plus it leaves a long trail to the sun (from the 12 second point to the 36 second point) and it show this at the 44th second of the video and relates it to the blue trail trajectory from where the sun was rising that morning.


So Video#1 show strange things up until the point of December 05, then Video#3 shows December 07th when the realtime tracking stops completely. (supposedly..... I'm not sure about the facts on this and have been trying to find the same site to view it for myself..... does anybody know where to find these NASA solar images?)


In the 3rd video towards the end of the realtime tracking, it shows an object enter into the screen in the same direction of the area that Video #1 showed at the 36 second to 44 second part.



&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

And as for "Destroyer" I think he is referring to the 2012 planet theory or comet theory..... some sort of cosmic collision course cycle.


And no, I'm not a 2012 believer of this sorts.

red_Marvin
December 11th, 2009, 03:24 AM
What you witnessed was caused by swamp gas ignited by a local thunderstorm. Nothing more. Move along.

Giant Speck
December 11th, 2009, 03:27 AM
so... it's fake to you and no chance of it having anything to do with a rocket or missile of some sort?

SunnyRabbiera is UF's leading authority on Photoshop.

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 04:03 AM
I call shenanigans. I am prior Navy and no idiot. There is no way I can even imagine a missal causing a precision spiral in the sky, if it was caused by a missal and clouds. The clouds would distort due to wind in the air. Not to mention the blueish spiral light shooting out from it. At best I can imagine that is was a laser light show or a secret experiment. IDK. I will have to review the information some more.

Well, first you have to realize that some of the photos out there seem to have been photoshopped. But if you look at some of the videos, the white spiral pattern isn't quite so neat and is a fair bit smaller than in the edited pics.

This was a ballistic missile, and the failure apparently happened on the third stage. By this point the missile would typically be 100 km (60 miles) up or more and there wouldn't be much air for the exhaust to interact with.

The spiral pattern comes from the missile having started to tumble end over end while the engine was still firing. At that altitude, without hardly air in the way, the exhaust would form pretty much the exact pattern we see there. (Think of one of those swirly garden sprinklers).

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 04:16 AM
Sorry but for me this all looks fake, in fact I have seen better fakes then this on the internet...
Like those CGI UFO vids, I can spot a fake pretty well.

Well it depends on what you're referring to. If it's this photo:

http://wiklund.blogg.no/images/304388-6-1260346345610.jpg

Then it has definitely been photoshopped. Probably to make it look like something paranormal, but to me it just looks fake.

But there are shots that look reasonable. And this isn't just something that one crackpot is claiming to have captured. This was seen, filmed, and photographed at multiple locations across northern Norway.

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 04:17 AM
This was a ballistic missile, and the failure apparently happened on the third stage. By this point the missile would typically be 100 km (60 miles) up or more and there wouldn't be much air for the exhaust to interact with.


So where is the exhaust trail from the first and second stage of this missile? I've seen satellites get launched into space from rockets and there was an exhaust trail that went from the ground all the way up to where it left the atmosphere. Then the trail lingered in the sky longer that an airplane's jet stream does.


As for the photoshop claim I would love to see the exact photos that have been found to have used photoshop. Otherwise it's too easy to say photoshop just because some skeptic in some forum claims photoshop. I've seen countless people claim photoshop on pictures that didn't use it.

p_quarles
December 11th, 2009, 04:17 AM
Analysis from an actual astrophysicist: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/12/09/awesomely-bizarre-light-show-freaks-out-norway/

Yes, it's exactly what you'd expect from an out-of-control rocket. And the perfect spiral is an illusion created by the spinning of the rocket and whatever is leaking from it. The rocket itself is not spiraling, but merely emitting some kind of fuel or debris that is lighting up in the upper atmosphere as the rocket's trajectory degrades.

Incredibly weird- and cool-looking? Yes. But it doesn't violate what we know about basic ballistics and the physics involved.

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 04:18 AM
Well, first you have to realize that some of the photos out there seem to have been photoshopped. But if you look at some of the videos, the white spiral pattern isn't quite so neat and is a fair bit smaller than in the edited pics.

This was a ballistic missile, and the failure apparently happened on the third stage. By this point the missile would typically be 100 km (60 miles) up or more and there wouldn't be much air for the exhaust to interact with.

The spiral pattern comes from the missile having started to tumble end over end while the engine was still firing. At that altitude, without hardly air in the way, the exhaust would form pretty much the exact pattern we see there. (Think of one of those swirly garden sprinklers).

I have been reviewing the video footage which is more revealing. I still stand strong that this was not caused by any missal. I have first hand experience in this field and have seen countless missals launched for testing. MISSALS DO NOT SPIN. They all have a guidance systems in them that run them like a jet would be controlled from the **** pit, either by GPS/Satellite or laser guidance.

From my scientific standpoint this must have been caused by a magnetic phenomenon where a high field of gravity has been introduced, then safely removed. Hence the footage in the videos clearly shows this. For what can be up in the air. Dare I say wormhole or particle testing. I do not know. I hate to speculate to in depth and look like a fool when the most obvious answer ends up being the correct answer.


- Exo

p_quarles
December 11th, 2009, 04:27 AM
I have been reviewing the video footage which is more revealing. I still stand strong that this was not caused by any missal. I have first hand experience in this field and have seen countless missals launched for testing.

You may have experienced watching missiles being tested, but how many next-gen ICBMs have you seen in the midst of upper-atmosphere engine failures? Because that is what is alleged to have happened here, not some short-range cruise missile going out-of-control.

Anyway, people with advanced understandings of physics think these images are easily explainable by a missile test gone wrong. Given that, and the fact that Russia has historically tested rockets in this area (even ignoring Russia's statement that this is what happened, after an initial denial), Occam's Razor demands that we look first to the simplest explanation, and disprove it completely before even considering the wilder scenarios.

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 04:27 AM
So where is the exhaust trail from the first and second stage of this missile? I've seen satellites get launched into space from rockets and there was an exhaust trail that went from the ground all the way up to where it left the atmosphere. Then the trail lingered in the sky longer that an airplane's jet stream does.

In many of the photos and videos, the beginning of the exhaust trail is beyond the horizon.

However, in this photo you can see it clearly:

http://gfx.nrk.no/YOYD2X1CgNBSeaPse9LjVwT6ymkkphv7Q7x0aibAWJwg.jpg



As for the photoshop claim I would love to see the exact photos that have been found to have used photoshop. Otherwise it's too easy to say photoshop just because some skeptic in some forum claims photoshop. I've seen countless people claim photoshop on pictures that didn't use it.

The photo in my previous post is one.

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 04:42 AM
I have first hand experience in this field and have seen countless missals launched for testing. MISSALS DO NOT SPIN. They all have a guidance systems in them that run them like a jet would be controlled from the **** pit, either by GPS/Satellite or laser guidance.

*Properly built* missiles do not spin. A missile with a manufacturing defect on one side of an engine nozzle or combustion chamber will basically end up with another nozzle coming out the side when that manufacturing defect rips open. And then it *will* spin, and there won't be a thing the guidance system can do to stop it.

And the Bulava's track record gives us reason to believe that this missile was not properly built.



From my scientific standpoint this must have been caused by a magnetic phenomenon where a high field of gravity has been introduced, then safely removed. Hence the footage in the videos clearly shows this. For what can be up in the air. Dare I say wormhole or particle testing.

That's what a Hollywood wormhole looks like. Real wormholes, assuming they can exist at all, would look much different.

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 04:42 AM
You may have experienced watching missiles being tested, but how many next-gen ICBMs have you seen in the midst of upper-atmosphere engine failures? Because that is what is alleged to have happened here, not some short-range cruise missile going out-of-control.

Anyway, people with advanced understandings of physics think these images are easily explainable by a missile test gone wrong. Given that, and the fact that Russia has historically tested rockets in this area (even ignoring Russia's statement that this is what happened, after an initial denial), Occam's Razor demands that we look first to the simplest explanation, and disprove it completely before even considering the wilder scenarios.

How hard is it to understand that they DO NOT SPIN. In addition it would not cuase a perfect spiral if something did go wrong. How many have I seen tested? The US seldom ever tests these anymore since the end of the cold war. Most have been taken appart (supposedly). Only a handful of select SSBN class subs now carry a select handful of these weapons. I ask you how many you have seen?



In many of the photos and videos, the beginning of the exhaust trail is beyond the horizon.

However, in this photo you can see it clearly:

http://gfx.nrk.no/YOYD2X1CgNBSeaPse9LjVwT6ymkkphv7Q7x0aibAWJwg.jpg



The photo in my previous post is one.

Now this photo is very legit and corresponds to what I have seen many time.

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 04:47 AM
.....
That's what a Hollywood wormhole looks like. Real wormholes, assuming they can exist at all, would look much different.

My educated guess was not based on hollywood scifi as you suggest but on astronomical images taken of space.
Also have you f'n seen a wormhole or are you just trolling. No one here has, it could look like micky ****** mouse for all we know.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/143744main_hubble_spiral_2006.jpg

p_quarles
December 11th, 2009, 04:52 AM
How hard is it to understand that they DO NOT SPIN.
It's easy to understand that you are claiming that. Prove it.


In addition it would not cuase a perfect spiral if something did go wrong. How many have I seen tested? The US seldom ever tests these anymore since the end of the cold war. Most have been taken appart (supposedly). Only a handful of select SSBN class subs now carry a select handful of these weapons.
Right, so you admit that you haven't seen any? Anyway, I linked to Phil Plait's eloquent explanation (well-sourced, by the way) of why those images can be completely explained within our existing understanding of the physics of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Care to dispute his account on a scientific basis? If not, I have no interest in engaging further in this exchange.


I ask you how many you have seen?
None. On the other hand, I have also never personally witnessed a supernova. We are talking about extremely rare (in terms of human time) events, and thus appeals to personal observation have no relevance. Let's talk about physics and the predictive capability of models, instead.

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 05:01 AM
It's easy to understand that you are claiming that. Prove it.
BEHOLD THE POWER OF GOOGLE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_guidance)




Right, so you admit that you haven't seen any? Anyway, I linked to Phil Plait's eloquent explanation (well-sourced, by the way) of why those images can be completely explained within our existing understanding of the physics of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Care to dispute his account on a scientific basis? If not, I have no interest in engaging further in this exchange.No offense but I do not trust most government funded scientist. I have my reasons.



None. On the other hand, I have also never personally witnessed a supernova. We are talking about extremely rare (in terms of human time) events, and thus appeals to personal observation have no relevance. Let's talk about physics and the predictive capability of models, instead.So we can all speculate on speculating. I didnt say it was a wormhole. I only made a quaint observation out of humor that many of you must have directly tuned your eyes and mind to and missed the rest of my post.. /facepalm

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 05:08 AM
Well it depends on what you're referring to. If it's this photo:

http://wiklund.blogg.no/images/304388-6-1260346345610.jpg

Then it has definitely been photoshopped. Probably to make it look like something paranormal, but to me it just looks fake.

But there are shots that look reasonable. And this isn't just something that one crackpot is claiming to have captured. This was seen, filmed, and photographed at multiple locations across northern Norway.


So no chance that it's a long exposure of some sort. I've seen most of the videos and pics and this is pretty much just like the other ones except for a bit clearer with a sort of GIMP quality. (possible photoshop)



In many of the photos and videos, the beginning of the exhaust trail is beyond the horizon.

However, in this photo you can see it clearly:

http://gfx.nrk.no/YOYD2X1CgNBSeaPse9LjVwT6ymkkphv7Q7x0aibAWJwg.jpg

As for the other photo does anybody have other photos like this? (the blue trail and smoke trail). This is the first one that actually looks like it went up.

starcannon
December 11th, 2009, 05:18 AM
http://i47.tinypic.com/wrgdue.jpg


Its a giant death ray sent by The Destroyer (http://www.getacd.org/listen_oY4f1IwQSSY/proof_nasa_is_trying_to_cover_up_the_source_of_the _norway_spiral_the_destroyer_approaches); Sky Captain (http://www.skycaptain.com/) please come to our aide with all due haste!

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 05:26 AM
http://gfx.nrk.no/YOYD2X1CgNBSeaPse9LjVwT6ymkkphv7Q7x0aibAWJwg.jpg

As for the other photo does anybody have other photos like this? (the blue trail and smoke trail). This is the first one that actually looks like it went up.

Never mind, I saw a few others that look the same so forget it. As for the photoshop looking one there are a few videos out there that have the same effect due to bad cameras and bad lighting, so that was my beef with that. But it does look fake compared to most others.


So I'm officially withdrawing myself from this thread due to this photo and a few others cause it shows what I hadn't seen anywhere else, which is an upward trail.

witeshark17
December 11th, 2009, 05:28 AM
Clearly it was Captain Kirk fighting the Klingons and they all just got a little too close to Earth. :popcorn:

starcannon
December 11th, 2009, 05:31 AM
Clearly it was Captain Kirk fighting the Klingons and they all just got a little too close to Earth. :popcorn:
Either that, or it's a failed Bat Signal.
http://elevenmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bat-signal.jpg

Frak
December 11th, 2009, 05:43 AM
My educated guess was not based on hollywood scifi as you suggest but on astronomical images taken of space.
Also have you f'n seen a wormhole or are you just trolling. No one here has, it could look like micky ****** mouse for all we know.

Well, PBS says that you wouldn't see a wormhole, you'd s

pwnst*r
December 11th, 2009, 06:04 AM
lol

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 06:53 AM
Either that, or it's a failed Bat Signal.
http://elevenmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bat-signal.jpg


LMAO,,, Bat signal now has my scientific vote!!!!

iponeverything
December 11th, 2009, 07:19 AM
The fuel release must have been massive. Assuming this spiral formation is at an altitude of between 50 km and 80 km -- and to have a visible foot print that big..

wilee-nilee
December 11th, 2009, 08:31 AM
The Russians now admit it was a submarine launched missile that went awry.

Sand & Mercury
December 11th, 2009, 09:05 AM
You all really know what it was, right?

Al sent Sam on yet *another* leap.
Indeed. If we didn't see those lights, we'd probably all be dead!

pelle.k
December 11th, 2009, 10:56 AM
What you witnessed was caused by swamp gas ignited by a local thunderstorm. Nothing more. Move along.

LOL. Good one.
In case anyone doesn't get that, Dr. J. Allen Hynek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Allen_Hynek) (a former scientific adviser / ufo investigator, to the US Air Force) coined that phrase ("it was swamp gas"), which would haunt him for the rest of his life.

I don't buy the story about a damaged missile though. It looks to "synthetic". If someone can replicate the light show in a controlled environment, than i will consider it.
I'm more willing to belive it was something top secret, possibly malfunctioning.

soni1770
December 11th, 2009, 12:21 PM
the blue light is juist the sun shine reflecting of the string attacted to the tin can com,

we were short of money so we had to use ferris wheel power for are starship

koleoptero
December 11th, 2009, 12:29 PM
Analysis from an actual astrophysicist: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/12/09/awesomely-bizarre-light-show-freaks-out-norway/
Did that guy say Frak?

That's what a Hollywood wormhole looks like. Real wormholes, assuming they can exist at all, would look much different.
Excuse me, but having 2 PhD's in hollywood bullsh*t I'm quite certain that's not what a hollywood wormhole would look like. A hollywood wormhole would at least include thunderclouds streaming in and Harrison Ford.

Either that, or it's a failed Bat Signal.
http://elevenmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bat-signal.jpg
This is even better. (http://www.photodump.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/batman-is-busy.jpg)

Giant Speck
December 11th, 2009, 01:34 PM
It didn't happen. In fact, Norway doesn't even exist. It's a conspiracy.

Excedio
December 11th, 2009, 01:39 PM
It didn't happen. In fact, Norway doesn't even exist. It's a conspiracy.

If I have not been there and seen it....it does not exist. In fact, everyone here is just a bot...

...that or you all just live in Florida. :-D

Giant Speck
December 11th, 2009, 01:43 PM
If I have not been there and seen it....it does not exist. In fact, everyone here is just a bot...

...that or you all just live in Florida. :-D

I'm sorry, but Florida doesn't exist, either. Neither does Spain, Italy, Turkey, Korea, the Yucatan, Arabia, or Malaysia.

The governments WANT us to think that peninsulas exist, but their existence is physically impossible.

Excedio
December 11th, 2009, 01:45 PM
I'm sorry, but Florida doesn't exist, either. Neither does Spain, Italy, Turkey, Korea, the Yucatan, Arabia, or Malaysia.

The governments WANT us to think that peninsulas exist, but their existence is physically impossible.

hmmm....

...guess it's a good thing I'll be moving to Wisconsin! :-D

Giant Speck
December 11th, 2009, 01:49 PM
hmmm....

...guess it's a good thing I'll be moving to Wisconsin! :-D

Just remember that Green Bay is a lie.

alexfish
December 11th, 2009, 02:00 PM
In many of the photos and videos, the beginning of the exhaust trail is beyond the horizon.

However, in this photo you can see it clearly:

http://gfx.nrk.no/YOYD2X1CgNBSeaPse9LjVwT6ymkkphv7Q7x0aibAWJwg.jpg



The photo in my previous post is one.

Tin can Tin can com

You Must Have Dam Good Camera

That Was soni1770 and Me Traveling back at the Speed Of Light on a ferris wheel


The Little Squiggle Well It its Me Bailing out with a Parachute To

To get The Latest Version Of Ubuntu Before The Gates Gang

Tell You What Very Inadvisable To Jump out At That Speed without a

Parachute " The Cheeks of My Pant's Did'nt Half Burn "

soni1770 We need one of those cameras ' and a pair of Pants

PS ;What Shutter Speed Did You Use

EVERY BODY HAS TO SEE THIS ONE HAS A MESSAGE @@@@@@@@

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIg5eczY5Ms

Tristam Green
December 11th, 2009, 02:16 PM
Only a handful of select SSBN class subs now carry a select handful of these weapons. I ask you how many you have seen?

Ahahahahahahaha you're so full of [insert non-CoC approved word].

ALL SSBNs can carry Tridents. That's their friggin function. Only a handful of them have been upfitted into SSGNs, which carry battery upon battery of Tomahawk guided missiles, as well as an entire SEAL team.

(Coming directly from the son of a 27-year Submarine veteran who served tours on -both classes of- Boomers AND Fast Attacks, and the brother of a Submariner currently serving on a Boomer)

Get your facts straight, lest you look silly.


Just remember that Green Bay is a lie.

Well, they dissed Brett Favre enough, they might as well not exist anymore...

Excedio
December 11th, 2009, 02:32 PM
Well, they dissed Brett Favre enough, they might as well not exist anymore...


I really hope you don't actually think that... Favre flip-flopped so many damn times about his retirement....it was rediculous...

Tristam Green
December 11th, 2009, 02:37 PM
I really hope you don't actually think that... Favre flip-flopped so many damn times about his retirement....it was rediculous...


It was way off-topic, but I felt like throwing it out there lol.

Now, back to the thread, brought to you by the planet Nibiru!

Giant Speck
December 11th, 2009, 02:51 PM
It was way off-topic, but I felt like throwing it out there lol.

Now, back to the thread, brought to you by the planet Nibiru!

I almost don't think this thread is worth keeping on topic...

soni1770
December 11th, 2009, 03:32 PM
spiderman!!!

he's the best:popcorn:

pwnst*r
December 11th, 2009, 03:33 PM
I almost don't think this thread is worth keeping on topic...

hey now...

koleoptero
December 11th, 2009, 03:54 PM
hey now...

:lolflag:

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 04:06 PM
excuse me, but having 2 phd's in hollywood bullsh*t i'm quite certain that's not what a hollywood wormhole would look like. A hollywood wormhole would at least include thunderclouds streaming in and harrison ford.


lmao!

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 04:25 PM
I don't buy the story about a damaged missile though. It looks to "synthetic". If someone can replicate the light show in a controlled environment, than i will consider it.
I'm more willing to belive it was something top secret, possibly malfunctioning.

I agree, anyone can punch in some information on a computer and say "this is what a wayward missile would act like." That doesnt make it true, anyone with half *** common sense should be able to see right through that BS. I am not saying it was a doorway above Tarmagant Island. But something kooky is going on.

Hallvor
December 11th, 2009, 05:15 PM
Add a little colour and you get this. :)

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jeLFpJYZuXE/SyDLyzrVMvI/AAAAAAAAAO4/h5JLSo4F164/s800/Norway_debian2.jpg

hockeytux
December 11th, 2009, 05:19 PM
This could usher in the new generation of fireworks displays! could you imagine displays made of these ? woah that would be something else

I would definitely go and watch that. If they can find out WHY the test failed they could recreate it on purpose :D

cascade9
December 11th, 2009, 05:20 PM
i don't buy the story about a damaged missile though. It looks to "synthetic". If someone can replicate the light show in a controlled environment, than i will consider it.
I'm more willing to belive it was something top secret, possibly malfunctioning.

+1.

WIN7GT
December 11th, 2009, 05:24 PM
Why, if you place some strange things, Russia becomes immediately accused in this? Russia has nothing to do here. *looking at my giant spirals generator, lolz*

WIN7GT
December 11th, 2009, 05:26 PM
*cough*That was New Zealanders*cough*

Tristam Green
December 11th, 2009, 05:32 PM
Why, if you place some strange things, Russia becomes immediately accused in this? Russia has nothing to do here. *looking at my giant spirals generator, lolz*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

Just sayin'

pwnst*r
December 11th, 2009, 05:36 PM
Add a little colour and you get this. :)

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jeLFpJYZuXE/SyDLyzrVMvI/AAAAAAAAAO4/h5JLSo4F164/s800/Norway_debian2.jpg

lol nice

WIN7GT
December 11th, 2009, 05:38 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

Just sayin'
Man, that was a comet, not a nuclear (they haven't existed yet) or any other artifical blast. That was a space object.

lykwydchykyn
December 11th, 2009, 05:45 PM
What nobody is taking into account is the amount of lutefisk being eaten in Norway this time of year. Who needs swamp gas?

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 05:46 PM
I agree, anyone can punch in some information on a computer and say "this is what a wayward missile would act like." That doesnt make it true, anyone with half *** common sense should be able to see right through that BS. I am not saying it was a doorway above Tarmagant Island. But something kooky is going on.

You don't need to punch numbers into a computer. All it takes is high-school physics. If you apply a force to an object, and the force vector does not go through the center of mass, the object *will* rotate. Any failure that causes a force on a rocket that does not line up with the center of mass, and that is stronger than what the turning thrusters can counteract, *will* cause the rocket to spin, no matter how good the guidance system. This could include a hole opening up on one side of the engine, or some failure that causes something heavy on board the rocket to shift to one side, or simply a turning thruster getting stuck (which has happened before, including once on a manned space mission (Gemini 8 ), almost killing the crew).

And if you're unwilling to believe simple physics, believe the videos of launches where similar things *have* happened. For instance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z-3fjg4dYY

koleoptero
December 11th, 2009, 06:39 PM
You don't need to punch numbers into a computer. All it takes is high-school physics. If you apply a force to an object, and the force vector does not go through the center of mass, the object *will* rotate. Any failure that causes a force on a rocket that does not line up with the center of mass, and that is stronger than what the turning thrusters can counteract, *will* cause the rocket to spin, no matter how good the guidance system. This could include a hole opening up on one side of the engine, or some failure that causes something heavy on board the rocket to shift to one side, or simply a turning thruster getting stuck (which has happened before, including once on a manned space mission (Gemini 8), almost killing the crew).

And if you're unwilling to believe simple physics, believe the videos of launches where similar things *have* happened. For instance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z-3fjg4dYY

Yes, it's exactly the same as on that video. I wonder how noone saw the similarities. :roll:

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 07:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CTadlvmYig&NR=1

FREAKING EPIC!!! Not the sorta thing you really want to happen, EVER!

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 07:31 PM
You don't need to punch numbers into a computer. All it takes is high-school physics. If you apply a force to an object, and the force vector does not go through the center of mass, the object *will* rotate. Any failure that causes a force on a rocket that does not line up with the center of mass, and that is stronger than what the turning thrusters can counteract, *will* cause the rocket to spin, no matter how good the guidance system. This could include a hole opening up on one side of the engine, or some failure that causes something heavy on board the rocket to shift to one side, or simply a turning thruster getting stuck (which has happened before, including once on a manned space mission (Gemini 8 ), almost killing the crew).

And if you're unwilling to believe simple physics, believe the videos of launches where similar things *have* happened. For instance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z-3fjg4dYY

Simulaterites yes, I have seen missiles spin out of control that way. But this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gDPS_Nq0PM is different.
- The spin out normally happens soon as the rocket is launched.
- Dont see a missile spinning that tight of a pattern that long without tearing its self apart sooner.
- Please dont state high school physics until you have actually been to high school!

whoop
December 11th, 2009, 07:38 PM
Thought it was LHC related :D

crimesaucer
December 11th, 2009, 08:06 PM
What I'm finding the strangest now is that no one reported seeing this failed missile from Finland, Sweden, the Svalbard islands, or any part of Russia that's around the White Sea.


I searched around for any other places besides Northern Norway and I found nothing.


This also totally destroys anybodies theory (like those NASA SOHO youtube videos that I found) of this being something in deep space since it would have been viewable from any of those Northern European areas around Norway.



But I think I know what it was and I have the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI9OcD-dvUY&feature=related#t=4m48s

pelle.k
December 11th, 2009, 09:02 PM
What I'm finding the strangest now is that no one reported seeing this failed missile from Finland, Sweden, the Svalbard islands, or any part of Russia that's around the White Sea.


I searched around for any other places besides Northern Norway and I found nothing.
Well, it was actually reported to be seen from the most northern part of sweden as well - here (http://www.kuriren.nu/lokala/kiruna_artikel.aspx?ArticleId=5182207&place=Kiruna) (it's in swedish though, so it may not be very useful to you all).
Norway does reach a bit more further north, so that's probably why it was most apparent from there.

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 09:23 PM
Simulaterites yes, I have seen missiles spin out of control that way. But this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gDPS_Nq0PM is different.
- The spin out normally happens soon as the rocket is launched.

Quite often, yes. But not always.

Also, bear in mind that this is a multistage rocket and the failure was in the third stage. Each stage is, in effect, a rocket launched from on top of the stage before. So this failure may very well have happened as soon as the third stage "launched". It may even have been a failure directly related to staging.



- Dont see a missile spinning that tight of a pattern that long without tearing its self apart sooner.

Keep in mind, again, that this was the third stage. The missile was many miles above and away from the cameras, so though the pattern looks tight, it is actually very wide. And the missile may very well have torn itself apart. The pattern may have been made by gases from one piece of debris.

Also, keep in mind that when that happens to a missile at low altitude, the air stops the gases really quickly, while at the altitudes that this happened at, there is very little air, so the gases keep moving outwards, which makes the pattern look different.

jwbrase
December 11th, 2009, 09:56 PM
What I'm finding the strangest now is that no one reported seeing this failed missile from Finland, Sweden, the Svalbard islands, or any part of Russia that's around the White Sea.

Well, this was just before sunrise in the areas it was observed, so it may well have been washed out anywhere to the east of there. Also, the viewing angles in such places would have been different, possibly making it not so noticeable.

RATM_Owns
December 11th, 2009, 10:15 PM
But I think I know what it was and I have the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI9OcD-dvUY&feature=related#t=4m48s
Dethklok! :D

But still, you think that other countries, regardless of the time, SOMEONE would've seen it.

earthpigg
December 11th, 2009, 11:09 PM
pic related :D

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 11:32 PM
Quite often, yes. But not always.

Also, bear in mind that this is a multistage rocket and the failure was in the third stage. Each stage is, in effect, a rocket launched from on top of the stage before. So this failure may very well have happened as soon as the third stage "launched". It may even have been a failure directly related to staging.


OK, I can see that. Your argument is sound. It would really helped to see the entire event instead of just a few seconds glimpse though.

Exodist
December 11th, 2009, 11:33 PM
Thought it was LSD related :D

Fixed.. :D

Frak
December 12th, 2009, 01:15 AM
Add a little colour and you get this. :)

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jeLFpJYZuXE/SyDLyzrVMvI/AAAAAAAAAO4/h5JLSo4F164/s800/Norway_debian2.jpg
You broke it.

alexfish
December 13th, 2009, 07:06 AM
You broke it.

http://is.gd/5kmf8

SURE DID ////// You above AAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHH

AND MY BRAND NEW YAMAHA SOUND CARD and MORE

SANTA



YAMAHA SOUND CARD
5.1 Suround sound system

Santa PLEASE come now


Something Wrong With my Monitor NOW

WHERE CAN I GET HELP ABOUT THIS

phrostbyte
December 13th, 2009, 07:10 AM
What nobody is taking into account is the amount of lutefisk being eaten in Norway this time of year. Who needs swamp gas?

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4364/vomitboy01vomitpukesick.gif

Exodist
December 13th, 2009, 08:42 AM
Originally Posted by lykwydchykyn http://ubuntuforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8480262#post8480262)
What nobody is taking into account is the amount of lutefisk being eaten in Norway this time of year. Who needs swamp gas?



Eww.. Even Andrew Zimmern hates pukefish!! Nothing more horrible then fish soaked in ammonia..

Bigtime_Scrub
December 13th, 2009, 09:42 AM
If that was a Russian missile I've never heard of one that looks like a spiral with a lazer beam coming out of the center.