Tuesday, December 15, 2009

OK, What Was it?


A few days ago, the interweb news nodes went nuts over a bizarre spiral formation which appeared in the skies over Norway. At first, I was impressed; it looked like for all the world like hyperdimensional weapon or even some kind of rail gun device going off. It didn’t take long for Richard Hoagland and lots of others in the UFO community to comment on it, and point out all of the reasons why it had to be aliens or some kind of Star Wars weapons test, and on the eve of Barack Hussein Obama’s (laughable) Nobel Peace Prize award no less! Adding to all the intrigue was the fact that this “cosmic pulse ray” seemed to be coming from the southwest, right in the direction of a HAARP-like device (called EISCAT) which was run by a consortium of European countries.


I decided to sit back and not comment on this for a number of reasons, but primarily because I figured there would be some kind of official explanation coming along quickly. At first, the Russians denied that it was a missile test that they had conducted, as would be customary if they got caught testing weapons over another country, but then they quickly reversed themselves and said, "yeah, it was ours." Of course, numerous UFO spokesman immediately cried foul, and claimed that we were seeing another Phoenix Lights type of cover-up, where the US military claimed that a massive boomerang shaped craft which flew slowly over that city in 1997 was actually flares from a weapons testing range over a hundred miles away.

However, in looking now at the video, I have to say that the claim of an errant Russian missile makes the most sense to me. Notice that there is a darker, bluish coil of exhaust behind the spiral; this implies to me that we are seeing the thrust cloud of a missile or rocket which has either been spun for stabilization\control purposes or is in fact spiraling out of control.



Note also how in some images the blue pulse is very tight, but then it rapidly diffuses until it is just a puffy plume of smoke or exhaust. This is exactly what I would expect to see if this is simply illuminated rocket exhaust.

Now, as to the tight, glowing spiral itself, again, this looks to me to be a rocket stage venting gas of some kind as it spins. The illumination is coming from the rocket exhaust at the back of the stage, creating the tight spiral effect. Also realizing that this is Norway and there are likely to be lots and lots of ice droplets in the upper atmosphere (if not the lower), the effect is even more dramatic. The ice droplets act like a million tiny mirrors, refracting the light and amplifying and emphasizing the glow. Now, if the fuel or whatever was being vented had ignited, we would certainly have seen a far more dramatic finish to the whole affair. As it is, we got a pretty dramatic “black hole” forming at the center of the spiral, but again, I think there is a perfectly logical explanation for this.


The mysterious “black hole” which appears in the center of the spiral as it dissipates also fits what I’d expect to see from a rocket stage burning out. Once the rocket has exhausted its fuel, the brilliant white spiral is going to lose its primary light source, and the result will logically be a dark spot which rapidly expands (from the distant viewers eye) and consumes the spiral.


So I don’t think this is a hyperdimensional weapons test or an alien device or at all. I think it’s a rocket that got out of control, was venting gas, and simply got caught on camera. And it all happened under some fairly unique weather conditions, which created the spiral effect.

Alternatively, this may very well have been a political statement on the part of the Russians. Barack Huessein Obama is (at best) the political reincarnation of the weak Jimmy Carter, and the Russians may have just been firing a shot across the bow to make a political point. But to decide it is a new weapons test without any real evidence is farther than I am willing to go. The Russians in fact do have some very sophisticated weaponry – ask Tom Bearden – but I doubt very seriously they were demonstrating it for all the world to see.


Having said that, it is plausible that this was in fact a staged event designed to get people buzzing about what it was. They could certainly have used a conventional rocket to create an event that appeared to be other-worldy, much like the recent Independence Day events in Moscow and elsewhere. But that plays into a wholly different kind of conspiracy – one that has a lot more to do with 2012 than it does with Obama’s absurd Nobel Prize.

Related Links:

Video from UK Mail Online
UK Mail Online Story
http://www.enterprisemission.com/Norway-Message.htm
David Wilcock's View

61 comments:

marsandro said...

The uniformity of the spiral
is remarkable.

The duality of the spiral is
also remarkable.

The color differentiation is extremely remarkable.

Hmph. A rocket.

Fits right in with the crystal towers....

:-)

Hathor -- her two cents AND mine...

;-)

P.S.: So...why can't any rocket debris be found
at the end of the blue spiral trail?

Last I heard...there ain't any....

:-))))

Spiritsplice said...

You disappoint me Mike.

1 We are supposed to believe that a foreign country does an unannounced and unauthorized missile test over Norway and nobody is even the least bit upset about it?

2 If you look at the lower right side of the photos you can see that the "projection" originates from the mountain or just behind it. You can see the higher brightness of the "source".

3 The entire pattern is turning as a coherent whole which is impossible if it were simply an emission of fuel left floating in the sky.

4 There are two spirals of equal intensity joined in the center moving out from the eye of this thing. Are we to believe that it sprung two leaks of equal size at the same time?

5 The near instant speed at which a computer simulation was made to spoon feed the missile story to the public.

6 The black hole that opens at the end is clearly not from it running out of fuel and leaving an empty space.

7 Where is the downward trail of smoke smoke from it crashing to the ground?

8 The spiral arms are far too coherent and well spaced to be diffusion of fuel.

9 As the hole opens, why are the edges still glowing? And why does the entire pattern not fall downward under the force of gravity when the fuel runs out?

10 No missile is even hinted at in any of the videos.

11 Hoagland said on Coast that when they do test missiles they fire them in the opposite direction, not Oover Norway.

MaxtheKnife said...

Mike, you've managed to completely shatter my hopes there might actually be a plan to initiate some sort of a cohesive effort to bring ALL of this stuff into the mainstream.

Like M.E. Mastrantonio said in The Abyss, "Who thinks that was a Russian water tentacle?"

I guess it's a water tentacle, then.

Ridiculous.

Good job.

I give up.

marsandro said...

If this was something done
with an EM type device...

Then it is interesting that there was a "pinwheel"
type of spiral...

...as that suggests a dynamic rotation of the wave
polarization...

...which, if done using two or more frequencies...

...would result in particle phase shifting (since
spin actually is a phasor, and not a scalar, as
most physics people currently believe)...

...which in turn suggests INTERDIMENSIONALITY in play here...

...since spin phasing is what separates the various
universes in the multiverse.

(Google "Overhauser Effect" and "Hutchison Effect.")

(Google "virtual particle" in quotes.)

(Research "gravitor" on KeelyNet.)


BRIEF EXPLANATION:

There are six particle properties (in the current
paradigm): mass, charge, spin, hypercharge, isospin, and baryon number.

Spin is a phasor. It has magnitude and phase angle.
This means that it "starts" at different times for
different particles, i.e.---

A "real particle" has a phase angle of zero.

A "virtual particle" has a non-zero phase angle.

(The extent to which particles have their spins
"in phase" determines to what extent they can
interact.)

The sort of "stirring effect" observed in this
spiral would be seen by an effort to open a portal
to another universe using EM technology. This
would be a "side effect" of the effort.

That is, IF that's what it was....

This *is* what I see going on here...

...I think....

(This is torsion physics at work. The couplings
involved for the atmosphereic particles would be
not unlike in mechanical engineering, where a net
torque on a free body can be applied at any point,
although what changes is the center of rotation.
First you would have the EM couplings and the
action of the Lorentz force on the ions, followed
by gas particle collision factors. Result? The
observed spiral phenomenon, or something very
much like it, with a suitable driving wave, such as
might be produced using---yes, you guessed it---
a HAARP-type apparatus.)

:-)

Hathor -- hitting the books again...

;-)

P.S.: This thing DOES resemble a portal I've seen
opened, at least in certain respects.

There are differences, however.

Now...if somebody *was* trying to open a portal
to another universe...

WHAT ARE WE IN FOR?!

I don't even want to think about it.

P.P.S.: "I saw Satan as lightning fall from heaven...."

Uh - oh....

:-)

Mike Bara said...

Guys, uh... for one thing, there are not 2 spirals, only one.

And yes Spiritsplice, there are always protests over this kind of thing, but they are usually handled behind the scenes through diplomatic channels. I'm sure the Norweigians weren't happy about it, but what are they going to do? Declare war on a nuclear superpower?

Look, the bottom line here is that not everything that appears to be otherworldly or a conspiracy IS otherworldy or a conspiracy. As much as I hate to agree with a douche like Phil Plait, I have to unless I see some evidence to convince me otherwise. Just like 9/11, I'd be willing to believe a conspiracy, I just don't see any good evidence of one yet.

marsandro said...

Okay Mike, so...

The rocket debris is...

...where, exactly?

:-)

Hathor -- patiently awaiting enlightenment....

;-)

P.S.: This would have to be the first case EVER
of the Russians making absolutely NO attempt
whatsover to recover their lost hardware.

Or, for that matter, of not even MENTIONING
their desire to recover it.

Unless somebody here can refresh me on the last
such example?

I may be the Spring Chicken of the group, but I'm
still a member in good standing of the "Duck and
Cover Generation."

I remember when Kruschev came to power as
Premier of the USSR...shoe and all....

:-))))

Adrian said...

why call it a conspiracy...Eiscat was running an experiment at the time...look it up at their website...

MaxtheKnife said...

Mike, you just made a classic strawman (Which you brilliantly prefix w/ a condescending "Guys, uh" to give yourself the appearance of authority): "Guys, uh... for one thing, there are not 2 spirals, only one."

While I'm not sure I'm interpreting Spiritsplice's statement correctly, I count TWO DISTINCT spirals: http://www.maxtheknife.com/2spirals4mikeb%20copy.jpg

But that's not really what makes your arguement a strawman, is it, Mike? What makes it a strawman is the fact he made TEN other VALID OBSERVATIONS which you choose to ignore.

Instead, you choose to cling to your 'special atmospheric conditions' which MIGHT make an OUT OF CONTROL missle APPEAR to behave in such a COHERENT and ORGANIZED way.

You then follow up your strawman with a nice non-sequitur, MB: "Look, the bottom line here is that not everything that appears to be otherworldly or a conspiracy IS otherworldy or a conspiracy."

REALLY, Mike? Exactly how does this one phenomena constitute "everything"?

A thinly veiled non-sequitur worthy of expat and I can't believe it was just made by YOU.

That said, I'll tell YOU what the REAL bottom line is... The visual evidence this was some sort of HD experiment is supported by EVERYTHING the Message of Cydonia implies is possible through the implementation of fused SPINNING systems.

I can't believe what I'm reading from you.

I can't believe I put my faith in you.

I'm SO disappointed in you.

JimO said...

I'm gonna sit this one out and see if you can talk sense into your fan club, Mike.

telstar1 said...

I have to say I still can't fathom your take on 9/11. There are hard facts that question the official "government" story. Ask Barry Jennings if he thinks a boiler explosion and fire brought down #7, or better yet, why the 9/11 commission didn't bother to investigate it.

marsandro said...

Good post, Adrian.

Right on target.

:-)

Hathor -- on the web...

;-)

P.S.: For those who didn't follow the connection
to the Overhauser Effect, the point was this:

Rotating polarization of the microwave radiators
serves in lieu of having a magnetic field at the
target, as with a normal Overhauser lab hookup.

So...since there was no magnet in the sky....
(Such as would be needed, anyway....)

:-))))

Mike Bara said...

Thanks Jim... I think.

marsandro said...

"Okay, Jimmy boy..."
(shades of Finnegan)

Define "sense"....

(insert maniacal Finnegan laughter here)

:-)

Hathor -- once again patiently awaiting enlightenment....

;-)

Mike Bara said...

Ok, quick comments:

Adrian: Got a link?

Debris? It depends on the altitude and direction of the rocket. It could (and probably is) way out at sea. Any recovery efforts would be kept quiet, if they even bothered. Salvage missions are expensive and the type of missle used may be old technology anyway. If anybody finds any stories about a recovery mission, I'd be interested.

Spiritsplice:

1 We are supposed to believe that a foreign country does an unannounced and unauthorized missile test over Norway and nobody is even the least bit upset about it?

A - answered that one

2 If you look at the lower right side of the photos you can see that the "projection" originates from the mountain or just behind it. You can see the higher brightness of the "source".

A - Haven't seen that one. Got a link?


3 The entire pattern is turning as a coherent whole which is impossible if it were simply an emission of fuel left floating in the sky.

A - Not really. The fuel or what ever it is would spew out in a pattern like that for a while before it began to dissipate, although that does give me pause. Just not enough to win me over.

4 There are two spirals of equal intensity joined in the center moving out from the eye of this thing. Are we to believe that it sprung two leaks of equal size at the same time?

A - Again, I see one, primarily.

5 The near instant speed at which a computer simulation was made to spoon feed the missile story to the public.

A - Haven't seen it. Got a link? But if true, it reminds me of the absurd CIA video of TWA-800's break up. Again, weird but not enough to convince me they aren't just covering up something more mundane than a Hyperdimensional physics test.

6 The black hole that opens at the end is clearly not from it running out of fuel and leaving an empty space.

A - Okaaay... you conclude this based on what?

7 Where is the downward trail of smoke smoke from it crashing to the ground?

A - If the fuel was used up\vented, there wouldn't be any more exhaust to create one, and if it was far away, at high altitude, and dark, you wouldn't see it anyway.

8 The spiral arms are far too coherent and well spaced to be diffusion of fuel.

A - OK. Why?

9 As the hole opens, why are the edges still glowing? And why does the entire pattern not fall downward under the force of gravity when the fuel runs out?

A - Not sure if this is the case, I'll have to watch the video again.

10 No missile is even hinted at in any of the videos.

A - Except for everything I said in this post, I'd agree with you. But we are discussing what I put in this post.

11 Hoagland said on Coast that when they do test missiles they fire them in the opposite direction, not Oover Norway.

A - OK, assuming The Hoagy is right, so what? If they were firing off a missile to make a point to Obama - as I speculated in my post - doesn't it make more sense to shoot it AT HIM?

Guys, again, I'm prespared to believe this is something else, I just want to see the evidence.

Mike Bara said...

And as long as we're on the subject, no I don't believe every conspiracy theory that comes along. I require evidence. Let's go down the list:

1 - We never went to the Moon - Absurd. Idiotic.

2 - TWA-800 - A missile. Indisputably.

3 - Oklahoma City - Absolutely. "John Doe #2" is the spitting image of Jose Padilla.

4 - 9\11 - Please. It was a plane that hit the Pentagon. George W. Bush did not fly planes into the Trade Centers. As to the 20 dollar bills? Interesting. Not conclusive.

5 - Flight 527 - Yes. Amazing how the NTSB can ignore the eyewitness testimony of dozens of people who saw an explosion in front of the wing, an engine tear off and take the tail off, but they still managed to decide less than an hour after the incident that there was no terrorist involvement. Translation: Shoe bomber #1

6 - JFK Assassination - See Chapter 4, Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA

marsandro said...

Point taken, Mike.

As to Adrian & Spiritsplice:

1 - I went.

2 - I googled.

3 - I looked.

4 - They're right.

But you're right too.

Guys, post the links HERE, please.

Thanks.

On your side.

(No, Mike, I meant THEIR side. Sorry.)

:-)

Hathor -- fixing to open one of those infamous
cans of "W/A"....

;-)

P.S.: My comments mostly would reference
textbooks, but if you insist, I'll quote chapter
and verse, and give the ISBNs....

(* sigh *)

:-))))

P.P.S.: Good heavens. I just realized I may have
been duped by JimO's use of a divide-and-conquer
strategy.

And you don't believe in conspiracies....

Well, I'll fix THIS situation---

Okay Mike, I'm on YOUR side too.

But only up to a point....

Take THAT, JimO!
:-))))

Finnegan said...

Well, now!

Look who's here!

marsandro said...

Oh good lord....

:-)

Hathor -- speak of the devil...

;-)

Heru said...

Mike,

Dark Mission 2 is for when ?

JimO said...

To keep the pot stirred up, and sidestep my first promise -- I've seen enough reports, and drawings, of spirals in the NW Russian sky over the past 25+ years to believe this, too, was a missile -- but NOT that the spiral was an indicator of the claimed failure in the 3rd stage. I suspect the spiral is a manifestation of some warhead anti-ABM protection scheme. It may be a 'feature', not a 'malfunction' -- look how cleanly the double effluent flow stops [from BOTH sources] to then create the clean black background sky (the illusion of a 'black hole'). It also helps to realize that the missile is moving AWAY from Norway, towards the east-northeast from the White Sea, aimed at Kamchatka -- that explains the backlighting from the sun not yet risen in Norway. IR wx pix show the rest of the region was clouded in -- hence no need to be baffled by lack of eyewitness accounts from elsewhere. All in all, a powerful learning experience for serious researchers and a springboard into weightless boundless phantasmification for dedicated imagineers (we need them too).

Spiritsplice said...

OMG. Where do I start....

Perhaps with, "the lie is different at every level." Perhaps you recall that?

When you ignore clear evidence of lies and deciet it makes you look like you are part of the in crowd pretending to be one of us.

1 No, they wouldn't declare war on a superpower but they would condemn it and so on like Governments always do in the papers, call it a potential act of war, etc. They would not just ignore it. I have also heard from people living there and NOTHING has been said about it at all. Not even calling it a missile.

2 The projection point is clearly seen in most of the pictures. You can see the projection is also directional.

http://picasaweb.google.com/spiritsplice/Norway#5416351675827544098

3 That pause is your conscience IMO. "or whatever it was.." What else could it be if the missile story were true? Confetti?

4 One? or One primarily? Which is it? If you look at the video you can see the two being made in different directions simultaneously. Here is a crop from the IR image.

http://picasaweb.google.com/spiritsplice/Norway#5416359423572847410

Here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRKfLYwX-q0 you can see both of them at 0:23.

5 This showed up the same day. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx8i5EfmYU4 Coments were conveniently disabled. It is also worth noting that like Climategate, the google search suggestion for "norway spiral" has been removed from the search engine.

We also have this debunking hit piece from MSNBC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRKfLYwX-q0

6 Because if it simply were something such as fuel left behind it would have no reason to simply disappear from the inside out. The freshest material would be on the INSIDE of the spiral and therefore would stay the longest. The fact that it disappears from the inside out (at a rather alarming rate I might add) is clear evidence the cover story is bogus.

8 Continued diffusion and gravity would destroy the nice pattern we see displayed in seconds. There is no way it could hold such nice coherency even under ideal weather conditions.

9 It is the case. Check it out.

11 If it had landed on his hotel then fine, otherwise it is a pretty lame demonstration. I also don't buy that they can't get their missiles to work.

Another point I should add is the "feeling" once gets on an intuitive level when watching the entire footage, especially when the black hole opens. Anyone even remotely sensitive to energy will get a very odd feeling when paying close attention to this thing.

Spiritsplice said...

Now onto 9-11.

Mike, there is more evidence that the whole thing was preplanned by people inside our gov and made to happen than there is in all of Dark Mission. Shall I run the "short" list?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

-Building 7's obvious implosion when no plane struck it.

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

-If a plane hit the Pentagon, where is the wreckage?



http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

http://onepennysheet.com/2009/11/air-force-vet-breaks-silence-on-what-hit-pentagon-on-9-11-%C2%AB-speak-truth-2-power/

Why was it described repeatedly as a missile?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcWT2lQszEE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX01twhfUK4

Why has no video confirming a plane ever been released? All the security cam vids were confiscated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Om9_Lbco6A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwrIsq4XaQg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg

Of course Bush didn't order it, that imbecile never decided anything. But he DID know it was coming. Not only do we have his gaffe that he "saw the first impact on TV" which is a lie because there was no footage of it at the time and because he was busy at the school pretending he could read. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlWSv0NZBRw

Secondly, when the second plan strikes and he is told about it he doesn't even seem to think it might be an emergency. Nor do the secret service who DID NOT immediately rush him to safety during an impending terrorist attack?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR_rFXXz_44

-You can see the demolition charges blowing out the sides as the building comes down,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cvjBViV7g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv2ck2qsiGA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io

-The damage in Penn. was already there years before the crash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-59kouBgO_s

http://killtown.911review.org/htb2.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99rcYiG_Syw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypi_J4E7IFM

Must I also mention Operation Northwoods?

I could go on but if this doesn't make you start looking with earnest nothing will.

When you deny something so obvious it either makes you look too lazy to look into it or like a shill. We both know you aren't stupid.

BTW, what's your take on Climategate?

Spiritsplice said...

I would be remiss if I didn't include this one as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdn0AOC76s4

Mike Bara said...

As of now, Dark Mission II is dead in the water. A very generous offer has been made to Mr. Hoagland, which has not been responded to. He has until the end of 2009, at which point I will be moving on. I have obtained representation for my novel Lightbringer, which will shopped to publishers in early 2009. I am about 10,000 words into my next non-fiction project, which will be 2012 themed and which will support a documentary film I am making. I have an R-rated comedy script submitted to a new start-up production company which should be going public in early 2009. I have a lot on my plate, and the clock is running out on DM-II, I'm afraid.

Also, I may as well tell you now that this blog will be going away at the end of the year along with Dark Mission II. It will be replaced with a new blog that will allow me to cover more topics than just the stuff this blog covers. I'm not leaving the conspiracy wars, I just wish to branch out and have more freedom to address other issues I am passionate about.

Spiritsplice said...

That's horrible news. If he doesn't want to do the book then you ought to figure out a way to do it yourself.

I mean its either important or it isn't. And if if was important enough to do once...

JimO said...

Spiritsplice: "6 -- Because if it simply were something such as fuel left behind it would have no reason to simply disappear from the inside out. The freshest material would be on the INSIDE of the spiral and therefore would stay the longest. The fact that it disappears from the inside out (at a rather alarming rate I might add) is clear evidence the cover story is bogus."

I think the material is being spewed out from the object at a constant radially rate, and the concentration grows dimmer and thinner as it moves out radially. The spiral is being painted by the rotation of the dispenser. I think you have overlooked the radial velocity of the white (sunlit!) material.

Spiritsplice said...

New link in case previous pic links to Norway pics aren't working.

http://picasaweb.google.com/spiritsplice/Norway#

Adrian said...

in answer

http://www.eiscat.se/raw/schedule/comment.cgi?fileName=200912099145&Start=0700&End=1000

Sphinx said...

No doubt a HAARP experiment!
Here is an amazing video from Russia! If this is not a fake one...well, this is....beyond everything that I ever saw!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuanP2P41_I&feature=player_embedded

Valkyrie Ice said...

I am staying out of this one due to lack of knowledge. Hope no-one minds XD

Aiwass said...

Greetings. If there is not to be a "next book," would you kindly ask Mr. Hoagland to correct the erroneous mathematics of "Von Braun's Secret" on the web site without further delay? Thanks.

Finnegan said...

Well, Jimmy boy!

It looks as if some of the
fellas got in a lick or two
ahead of me.

Must be Irishmen!

(IMFLH)

Mighty consistent that spinnin' bit o' junk you
say was a rocket. Perfect circles it forms, now,
does it?

With mathematical precision, no less.

And a blatherskite like yourself would explain this
how? Luck of the Irish?

I thought ye said it was Russian.

Maybe it was the Faerie Queen.

RUBBISH!

And the flight path was what? Perpendicular to
the spiral?

Aye, turns on a dime it does. Right fancy those
new Russian playtoys. Learned a lot since the
wall came down, haven't they.

MORE RUBBISH!

And so, it just put on the old brakes, and the lift
vector was what, now? While the rest of it
went on its way, on course and on schedule?

STILL MORE RUBBISH!

And I see yer havin' a bit o' trouble deciding
which particular part o' the thing went blewy.

Make up your mind, will you!

RUBBISH, ALL OF IT!

Salutations to m'fellow Irishmen, Spiritsplice and
Adrian.

Give 'em hell, lads!

Yer good at it!

(IMFLH)

The Fool said...

Sword says:

I stated that the whole big issue with 2012 was the return of the star of craossing and all teh "fortold" things to come listed in the bible - most notable of course where the bible entries in Matthew.
I'm fairly certain that over the course of the three "CHRIST-MASS" bloggs I get into the meat of the issue.
I also stated years ago that we should be able to "see" this return. Still no evaluation of that ifrared item linked from google sky that for some reason was "blacked" out...
...come to think of it - Bara and company have revisted this "Star of Crossing" recently - still pushing the "brown dwarf" angle...
tsk-tsk... ...they know better


What say you?

DK said...

Thanks, this is really interesting! What will be the outcome? Or will we never know?

Mike Bara said...

SS:

Now onto 9-11.

-Building 7's obvious implosion when no plane struck it.

Uh, yeah. No plane struck it. I just had 2 110 story buildings fall on it, that's all. According to numerous reports, it had a huge crease in it plus a fire, and an unusual design that led to the collapse.

But all of the building 7 crap never addresses this question: Why "implode" building 7 hours after the collapse of the twin towers? I mean, why bother? What's the psychological advantage of doing so? How could it have been more dramatic than the TT collapse? What's the reason to go to all that trouble? Until I have an answer to that one, I'll hold out.



-If a plane hit the Pentagon, where is the wreckage?

Uh, all over the place. How about here: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/debris/landinggear002.jpg

And here: http://www.rense.com/1.imagesD/hullpart.jpg

And here: http://www.rense.com/general32/Damage9.jpg (that's a 757 body frame, BTW. I worked on them at Boeing).

And here:
http://www.rense.com/general32/fuselagefragment_MVC-027S.jpg

And here:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/pentagon/pentagon-wheel-01.jpg

I mean, how much do expect to remain when a flimsy pressurized tin can hits a steel reinforced concrete building @ 400 miles an hour? Seriously?



Why was it described repeatedly as a missile?


Because the nitwitness news types making the reports were talking to people who hadn't actually seen the plane?


Why has no video confirming a plane ever been released? All the security cam vids were confiscated.


Uh, gee, maybe they "confiscated" the video as part of the 9/11 investigation? Nah, that can't be it...

And I've seen the security cam video. It was a plane.


Of course Bush didn't order it, that imbecile never decided anything. But he DID know it was coming. Not only do we have his gaffe that he "saw the first impact on TV" which is a lie because there was no footage of it at the time and because he was busy at the school pretending he could read.


Oh yes, this the George W. Bush who is so stupid he was able to get and MBA from Harvard, get himself elected governor of Texas and President of the United States twice, all just so he could pull off the most diabolically clever scheme in the history of the country. But he's also an imbecile.

Make up your mind; which is he?


Secondly, when the second plan strikes and he is told about it he doesn't even seem to think it might be an emergency. Nor do the secret service who DID NOT immediately rush him to safety during an impending terrorist attack?


Uh, maybe because he didn't want to alarm the children he was reading to at the time? Nah, that can't be it...

-You can see the demolition charges blowing out the sides as the building comes down,


That's a leading pressure wave caused by the collapsing structure above coming down.


I could go on but if this doesn't make you start looking with earnest nothing will.

When you deny something so obvious it either makes you look too lazy to look into it or like a shill. We both know you aren't stupid.


When people make movies without knowing anything about

A) airplanes
B) Physics
C) Architechture

It makes them give good conspiracies like ours a bad name.


BTW, what's your take on Climategate?

LOL, global warming is a scam designed to exert more control over our lives. Ever notice how the solution to "GW" is always more socialism? Hmm...

Finnegan said...

Let's stick to this thread,
now shall we lads?

Well, Jimmy boy, are ye game to stand up and
answer Finnegan?

Or am I too much for you?

(IMFLH)

There's this spinnin' junkpile up in the sky
over Norway, hoverin' pretty as ye please, held
up by what? Antigravity?

Aye, I've heard the Russians were workin' on it,
but I'd call that a bit of an odd way to give us
all a demonstration!

RUBBISH!

So, maybe it was held up by faeries. And where
did it fall when they let it go?

Did they toss it off to the sea to join the rest
of it? Or did it fall straight down like a Blarney
Stone From The Sky to kiss the sands of Norway?

No? And why not? Tell us, JimO, if ye know so
much about it!

MORE RUBBISH!

And did ye decide which stage it was, either the
second or the third, was it now?

Let's say it's the second. How'd the third stage
know when to clear off, and go on it's way to
the sea? Could it have? Or did it?

So why's the spiral so nice and neat?

Ought to be cockeyed, like your explanation of
the spiral!

STILL MORE RUBBISH!

And if the third stage is hangin' on to the second,
what landed in the sea? The FOURTH stage?

How many in God's name are there?

Five? Ten? Twenty?

I've heard the Russians build 'em big, but this is
gettin' ridiculous now. Kind of like the British
Army comin' back to Belfast for another go.

RUBBISH, ALL OF IT!

And while we're at it, what happened to that
oversized housecat?

Where'd HE go?

You'd think he'd be in the fray someplace, but
no, he leaves it to Finnegan to do his fightin'
for him!

Well, I'll toast the real Irishmen here, Spiritsplice
and Adrian!

Here's to ye, lads!

(IMFLH)

marsandro said...

Are you refering to me?

:-)

Hathor -- all ears...

;-)

Finnegan said...

Aye, ye flea-bitten furbag.

Where have you been?

Did you expect ol' Finnegan to make mincemeat
of JimO, and then bring you the kibbles?

Now isn't that just like a housecat to sit on his
big furry tail and watch while somebody else
takes down the prey.

Hungry now?

Here, kitty-kitty!

(IMFLH)

marsandro said...

(*sigh*)

It's a cat's life....

Actually, Finnegan, I thought your take on the
spinning stage just hovering in the sky with
no obvious means of support was pretty good.
I should have thought of that myself.

I guess it takes an Irishman, huh?

(*wink*)

:-)

Hathor -- secretly admiring this newcomer...

;-)

marsandro said...

Come to think of it...

If the spinning section is a
booster...

The payload never would have reached the sea. Either---

(1) the payload was still attached to the booster,
in which case the spiral should indeed be in
some sense asymmetric, or

(2) even a detached upper stage did not receive
its needed boost, as the fuel required was
being sprayed all over the sky to create the
spiral.

In either case, JimO's "explanation" makes no
engineering sense whatsoever.

:-)

Hathor -- seeing the light....

;-)

P.S.: Unless I'm missing something here, the
spiral was OVER LAND.

So where's the wreckage?

There has to be SOMETHING....

:-)

JimO said...

marsandro: "P.S.: Unless I'm missing something here, the
spiral was OVER LAND."

It is always helpful to 'show all your steps' in the reasoning process so that missteps can be identified and corrected. Thanks for the detailed post which allows exactly this remedial process.

As we all know from the UFO phenomenon, jumping to a wrong conclusion about range to an apparition can lead to subsequent missteps in estimating size, motion, and illumination conditions.

The standard launch profile for SLBMs out of the White Sea is eastwards towards the Kamchatka impact zone. Rare occasions have seen launches towards Novaya Zemlya but that would have provided a fast moving profile of the staging sequences, inconsistent with the Tromso reports.

Previous SLBM tests have been seen at other points along the standard trajectory, such as Arkhangelsk and Murmansk. This time, those sites were clouded over and too close to sunrise for seeing any celestial apparition behind a too-bright pre-sunrise sky.

Airborne witnesses have also seen and described phenomena of the SLBM-launch genre, the most famous being the September 1984 ("exactly 4:10 AM") classic Soviet-era UFO. I would expect planes in the air over NW Russia and Scandinavia predawn on December 9 ought to have gotten views of the apparition, potentially from better angles farther south -- unless a too-bright sky washed out the visibility even when above the widespread cloud cover.

Most intriguing to me is the frequency with which these earlier witnesses (1980s and 1990s) also saw and sketched SPIRAL shapes [no camcorder records of such previous spirals exist, to my knowledge, which is not surprising considering the level of video tools available to the general public in those decades). These spirals, described as rapidly expanding radially from a central point, were seen during observations of different types of rockets, including some missions which successfully placed payloads into orbit. This is suggestive, in my view, of a hypothesis that the spiral, then and now, is not a 'bug' (a consequence of a failure) but a 'feature' (result of a deliberate action on the upper stage).

The geometry of the line of sight from Tromso can be approximated using ICBM ascent profiles, perhaps with tweaking for the Bulava which advertises a much higher-G climb out and a 'depressed' trajectory -- two features deliberately engineered into the vehicle to make it more resistant to US boost-phase ABM weapons.

Such a trajectory is consistent with the Tromso videos showing a very low white cloud zig-zag (a classic ICBM smoke trail distorted by wind shears, backlit by the pre-dawn sun) followed by a hazy expanding arching line showing the track of rocket nozzle ejecta impacting the thin lower ionosphere (I've seen such chemoluminescent glow during full-dark rocket launchings from both Florida and California), a haze that would easily hang for several minutes before dispersing and also being overcome by growing dawn glare.

(to be continued)

JimO said...

(continued)


The spiral is a magnificent phenomenon for which jump-to explanations -- and the requisite evidence-shaping and selecting that ANY too-premature conclusion forces on a researcher -- need to be avoided. I note that the spin rate of the ejector object, as close as I could measure it, appears to be constant [please make independent verifications of this], and the motion of any released quantum of spiral-marker also appears to be purely radial outwards from the dispenser, at an angular rate that seemed constant within measurement uncertainty.

That angular rate should be expected to vary, assuming the absolute dispersal velocity remained constant. For any significant change in absolute range over the period of spiral formation, that might be expected to create a change in angular velocity, which if measurable would provide an indication of actual range and sense of motion. But my own attempted measurements were not fine enough to differentiate different potential geometrical/motion models. I invite serious investigators to try harder and report back.

The material comprising the spiral trail came from two separate points on the dispersal object, hence the double trail. And both dispersals are observed to terminate simultaneously and instantly. They do not tail off, or sputter, which I interpret as an indication that the dispersal, and its termination, was deliberately engineered for reasons not yet clear.

Considering the very high departure velocity of the ICBM at this stage and its still being on an ascent path, the spiral seeming to hang 'motionless' in the sky is an entirely reasonable consequence of its actual ballistic motion and the geometry of the observer's location.

Mike Bara said...

Somehwere in Hell, Satan is reaching for his parka....

marsandro said...

Come to think of it...

Spiritsplice already made the
point that no missle was observed in any of the
videos made of the spiral.

In fact, there was no report of the observation
of a missle by anyone at any time.

Any claims relating to a missle of any kind would
seem to be irrelevant.

Personally, I'm sticking by the concept of an
Eiscat test of some sort, or something similar.

Two points, Adrian!

:-)

Hathor -- plenty of ammunition to spare...

;-)

Spiritsplice said...

Maybe I was wrong when I said you weren't stupid.

Mike Bara said...

SpiritSplice:

I've tried to be polite here, but the bottom line is all these 9/11 claims have been made by morons who don't know anything about airplanes, architecture, simple physics. And when you get to the end of all these videos, the accusation is always the same: "the jews did it." Most of these sites have been started by the larouchies who let's face it are a bunch of nutbags. You can believe it if you want to, but the bottom line on 9\11 is that a bunch of pissed off muslims flew hijacked airplanes into buildings.

Here 'ya go...

http://www.southparkstudios.com/show/display_episode.php?season=10&id1=1009&id2=152

Spiritsplice said...

Simple physics shows that buildings don't come down at freefall speed unless they have been imploded.

If the story was what we are told it is, why all the lies and inconsistencies? It reaks of coverup.

Are we to believe its just coincidence that the invasion of afganistan was already planned out the summer before 9/11 without there being any pretense for doing so before the so called attacks.


I'm beginning to suspect the worst of you Mike.

Mike Bara said...

"Simple physics?" Give me a break. What evidence is there that buildings don't come down at "freefall speed" unless they've been imploded? Please refer me to the scientific papers which prove such a conclusion, along with the proof that the towers came down at "freefall speed," whatever that is. Oh, and please provide me the studies that were done on buildings designed like the Twin Towers that had commercial jetliners fly into them at 400 miles an hour.

And where is the coincidental "evidence" that there was an invasion of Afgahnistan planned before 9\11? And that this wasn't just one of hundreds of contingencey plans the US military makes up every year? And that it wasn't already in place under the Clinton Administration before Bush even came along?

Also, while your at it, could you provide me with some photographs of the oil pipeline that Haliburton built there after the war? I mean, that was why we REALLY allowed 9/11 to happen, right? Wait, it was never built? So much for that one.

The only lies and inconsistencies I know about 9\11 is Bill Clinton claiming he was never offered Osama Bin Laden's head on a platter in 1998, that he never told CIA to back off when they had him dead in thier sights in 1998, and that Sandy Burgler didn't stuff classified documents down his pants that had Clinton's hand written notes next to four seperate proposals on how to capture or kill Bin Laden on them. And BTW, those notes read "No, no, no, and no." And that Burgler subsequently denied he burned the documents.

Yeah, those are pretty much the lies and inconsistencies I'm aware of. Got any more?

I'm beginning to have doubts about you too, SS. I'm beginning to think you actually believe the stuff that Michael Moore puts in his movies.

MaxtheKnife said...

I'm beginning to think you're the moron, Mike.

The real 'bottom line' here is... You sound JUST like you're buddy expat.

There's no POSSIBLE way THIS IMAGE: http://www.maxtheknife.com/finalmessage/08200902.gif

could POSSIBLY translate into the so-called "pancake effect" that everyone is being forced to swallow.

BASIC geometry & force says... no way

And... There's no way in HELL that was a missle test.

You, of all people, should bloody well know better on BOTH counts.

Like I said here: http://www.maxtheknife.com/finalmessage/finalmessage.htm , so many months ago... figure out HOW the two towers fell, and the rest will take care of itself.

Pfft... 'bottom line', my ass.
Better pull your head outta yours before you start drawing 'bottom lines', expat, er... I mean, Mike.

Ps... Spot on, SpiritSplice with your last point on freefall. (Made while I was typing this response.) That point PLUS the above image says it all... the planes had help... inescapable 'bottom line'.

And THAT, Mike B.... is how one draws a straight & true 'bottom line'.

Mike Bara said...

Oh yeah, 'cause you can see inside the structure of that building so well from that photograph, right?

This is a prime example of the failure of our current education system. Allow me to fill in the gap.

Airplanes and some race cars (F-1, Indycars) use what is called a "monocoque" design. Simply put, what this means is that the skin itself (i.e. the pressurized fuselage of a jetliner, for example) is a stressed member of overall structure. The Twin Towers were essentially such a design, with the external lattice work supporting a considerable amount of the weight of the overall building. That's how they were able to build them so high, for one thing.

Now, once that monocoque is pierced, i.e. the airplane skin ruptures or the coke can is punctured, the overall stiffness of the remaining structure is dramatically weakened.

So here you have 2 massive top heavy buildings which have just lost maybe 25% of their exterior support structure (and actually more. The planes were flown in at an angle, so the wings cut through more floors, thereby weakening even more of the exterior lattice work on more floors. They also exited out the other side [see your linked photo], which created a huge gash almost halfway through the structure. The guys that flew these planes knew what they were doing). Add to that a fire which is bound to weaken the internal supports, and thousands of tons of steel and concrete above it are going to come down. It's just a matter of time.

So that's how the Towers fell.

Period.

Prove me wrong. But please, at least cite something other than your knowledge of the Laws of Physics.

MaxtheKnife said...

Period, eh, expat?

I can see in the top of the towers JUST FINE.

http://www.maxtheknife.com/wtc/01.jpg
http://www.maxtheknife.com/wtc/02.jpg
http://www.maxtheknife.com/wtc/03.jpg
http://www.maxtheknife.com/wtc/04.jpg

4 steel columns, reapeating steel (incredibly strong) lattice like structure, floors and walls hung on & around... yeah I get it.

What... did you think I posted that on my website without having done any other research or THINKING about it?

I posted that with the hope of getting the real 'morons' thinking critically about the facts. In my darkest dreams I never thought you would be one of them.

Lol... and as far as evidence that the towers fell at the rate of gravity... MARY & JOSEPH, watch any video of the collapse and COUNT for yourSELF.

So... Mike... If I can't cite basic geometry & physics, what can I cite? Should I just proclaim "beause I'm an authority figure and I say so" and then add, "period" for extra effect?

Isn't that the same kind of thinking & attitude that has relegated Cydonia to the status it is now? The same kind of thinking that allowed Oswald to be the patsy for all these years? The same kind of thinking that has suckered people into believing and inventing 'special conditions' that can make an out of control missle produce a PERFECT spiral in the skies over Norway in close proximity to a HAARP installation?

You are turning into a HUGE disappointment, Mike.

HUGE.

That's where the "period" belongs.

Pfft...

JimO said...

To stir things up even further:

OSWALD KILLED JFK.

Elmer said...

And the missing New York seismic records? And all the missing building and street videocam tapes?? And the heavily guarded disappearance and secret burial of the Tower's debris??? The refusal of the House committee to hear credible demolition expert testimony????...And who gave these expert jet certified clowns flying lessons?

Mike Bara said...

Oswald SHOT JFK. It was Tippett on the grassy knoll that killed him.

I thought you read Dark Mission?

marsandro said...

Oswald was in the line
of fire.

Any closer to the limo
and he would have been
hit himself.

I've seen the photo. Bob Katz, formerly of the
Assassination Information Bureau of Boston, MA,
showed it at an assembly I attended back in 1973.

You will NEVER convince ME that Oswald did ANY
shooting that day.

Look at the Zapruder film: Jackie turns sharply
to her right as if startled, just before she
disappears behind the sign.

Why?

OSWALD WAS RIGHT THERE SHOUTING "JACK!",
trying to warn him at the last second.

Oswald was Kennedy's man.

Convince me otherwise. Go on, try.

You'll never do it.

I've seen too much.

:-)

Hathor -- perusing "The Book Of Secrets"...

;-)

crispy said...

Personally, I see the Pentagon as the real smoking gun to all this. That is an even more ridiculous story than the towers. Why confiscate dozens of security tapes from PRIVATE businesses immediately after the attacks?

Also, Dark Mission readers (and writers) should correlate such events with sacred numbers and dates, in which 9/11/01 definitely was...

Regardless, Mike I'm looking forward to the updated blog. Keep up the good work. I just think some of us are surprised by your denial of conspiracy on an event with as many holes and inconsistencies as the type of things you cover in your book/blog/speeches

marsandro said...

Okay, Mike---

How do you explain the
late Roscoe White making
open confession that HE fired the fatal shot from
behind the picket fence?

And then while you're at it, not OVER it, but
THROUGH it, where some of the boards had been removed.

I went there several times over the years, and
the removed boards lay undisturbed all that time.

They've since been replaced.

And the view angle was perfect, mind you.

So---who in the group has actually BEEN there
and checked out the situation?

And you've got the wrong angle for the kill shot,
Mike. It came from somewhere IN FRONT of JFK,
NOT from the "grassy knoll" where you say it
was Tippett.

Check out the autopsy info as to the entrance
and exit wounds. The grassy knoll as the source
of the kill shot just doesn't work.

The Mob guys involved have all been identified
over the last several years.

And they're all dead.

Murdered, every one of them.

:-)

Hathor -- watching from the shadows...

;-)

Finnegan said...

Hey Mike me lad,

If we're done with the spiral,
I'm goin' to the pub.

Before I go---

Could I interest you in a ruby?

A Jack Ruby, it is. Magical powers it has.

Comes from out of nowhere and kills prime
suspects in presidential assassinations.

I'll give it ye for a song.

Can ye carry a tune?

(IMFLH)

marsandro said...

About 911...much as I
would have prefered to
bat around the spiral
some more---

---being a cat, naturally---

Would this be a good time to mention the
Dancing Israelis?

Or am I the only one who knows anything about
them?

:-)

Hathor -- chasing threads...

;-)

SactoMan01 said...

Mike, is it possible that the "spiral" was caused by a test of the S-500 surface-to-air missile?

Remember, the Russians are developing the successor to the S-400 missile. The S-500, which has anti-ballistic missile capabilities at least as good as that of the RIM-161 Standard Missile 3, will become operational in 2012. It's possible the "spiral" was caused by an S-500 test where the solid fuel upper stage experienced a motor failure and the upper stage is spinning out of control over 100 miles off the ground.

marsandro said...

Hi SanctoMan01,

Please see the umpteen
bazillion reasons listed
above why that explanation just doesn't wash.

Variation on altitude notwithstanding....

:-)

Hathor -- just making sure we're all up to speed...

;-)