Spiral Light Show over Norway

[Lavazza]

Needless to say I'm a little disappointed with David's production. I could not bring myself to read it in depth yet. But I've scanned through it. He's considering all the things I have asked myself and consequently explained as proof beyond doubt that it cannot be a missile. His research was mediocre at best.

Yes. One thing I noticed about David after watching many of his videos and listening to hours of his audio is that he will very consistently explain anything and everything with the most 'far out' explanation possible, dismissing any less fantastic explanation as silly. This is the same type of investigative error that many people make, it is simple close mindedness. If you go in to something with a preset belief in place it is very unlikely that you will find anything else. Oddly, this usually happens on the complete opposite end of the spectrum with so called 'skepical' reporters. But, true skepticism is true open mindedness, not willing to believe anything until having gathered sufficient evidence. Most people that identify themselves as 'skeptics' are in fact cynics.

Bashar explores this in a very poignant youtube video. Please follow this link if you think it will be of value (I certainly do!), but bear in mind that it has nothing to do with The Law of One and lets please not discuss the video specifically here so as to stay inside forum guidelines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiQvO5WfcZE

....but I also know that you put no value in astrology which i have studied and practiced for 20 years and this makes me reluctant to trust in your statements...since i suspect you have not studied astrology in any depth you cannot just dismiss it just like that, you have to study it at least for one year and then come back to discuss the validity of this anscient art with me...

That the display was caused by a rocket and that the display has higher meaning in astrology can both be true. One need not dismiss the other. Our reality is illusory and thus everything takes on meaning, usually in a symbolic fashion. The real question about the spiral light show over Norway is not what or how it was, but why it was.

[Monica]

I have explained this.

Oops, sorry! I didn't mean to demean your explanation. I did read it, but not carefully - it went over my head. For me, it has to do with possibility vs plausibility. But I don't have enough technical understanding to even discuss it, so I'll defer to you. Thank you for pointing out that a well-crafted, scientific-sounding explanation on either side of the argument may have its flaws.

Needless to say I'm a little disappointed with David's production. I could not bring myself to read it in depth yet. But I've scanned through it. He's considering all the things I have asked myself and consequently explained as proof beyond doubt that it cannot be a missile. His research was mediocre at best.

Well, in all fairness to David, he's not actually a scientist, right? Maybe you are expecting a scientist's explanation from someone who is a great compiler/analyzer of info but not an actual scientist.

I thought he made some very good points, but I'm not qualified to analyze the scientific aspects. Perhaps if you did read the whole article, and were able to set aside expectations that he meet scientific rigor, you might find some useful points.

I'm much more interested in Hoagland's and Haramein's opinions, but I'm not sure whether they have addressed the issue in depth.

Fortunately he did drop the "Infra Red" evidence.

Maybe the error was pointed out to him.

I'm wondering if I should answer David's post point by point explaining how everything he considers so impossible could actually happen within the laws of physics and within comfortable margins of probability. But I'm half cynically expecting that I won't be allowed to post this on the DC forum anyway.

Don't they have a similar discussion over at DC? If we're discussing it here, I'm sure they're discussing it there too.

If you do decide to take it on, I'd be interested in reading it. I love point-by-point rebuttals (as opposed to generalizations that are often done in debates and don't address key points made).

I had not seen him make these types of blatant errors before. And the feeling of disappointment is quite profound.

He's human!

[Peregrinus]

I have to laugh. Ali, being an INTJ like myself, has personally concluded that this was most definitely a missile, while I have personally concluded it was definitely not. How is it that two masterminds can come up with two completely opposite conclusions?

Like I previously explained, the animation that was released was not physics correct, nor are what are explained to be the remainder of physics. My work for the last nineteen years has been in physics, fluids, and chemistry, and this is why I see the incorrectness in the medias physics. If I were able to make 3D animations like that, I could conclusively prove it was not missile. Alas, I am not, so Ali will keep his opinion and I will keep mine. Until these physical bodies become unviable, I doubt there will be a resolution, so I simply agree to disagree and remain friends with my bull headed INTJ friend

[Monica]

If you go in to something with a preset belief in place it is very unlikely that you will find anything else. Oddly, this usually happens on the complete opposite end of the spectrum with so called 'skepical' reporters. But, true skepticism is true open mindedness, not willing to believe anything until having gathered sufficient evidence. Most people that identify themselves as 'skeptics' are in fact cynics.

Bashar explores this in a very poignant youtube video.

Well said! And the Bashar video is excellent - thanks for sharing that!

That the display was caused by a rocket and that the display has higher meaning in astrology can both be true. One need not dismiss the other. Our reality is illusory and thus everything takes on meaning, usually in a symbolic fashion. The real question about the spiral light show over Norway is not what or how it was, but why it was.

Again, well said!

[pksmith]

Ali, and anyone else who is interested-
I'd encourage you to do a more in-depth read of David Wilcock's article, particularly the section pertaining to the Norway spiral. While he may dismiss the rocket hypothesis in a somewhat crude way, his concept of what led to the incident and why and how it happened is interesting to say the least. He ties in so many disparate sources of data into his argument, yet it all seems to fit in in the end.
I can certainly understand the general reluctance around here to really dive into David's site. One of his downfalls seems to be that he is so convinced that his train of thought is true, through his own synchronicities and dreams, that he has trouble explaining his understanding in a clear and specific manner. He also seems to get frustrated that people aren't "getting" what he's talking about, and this leads to a sometimes dismissive and needlessly argumentative tone. Lately I've noticed a negative tone on his site that I think is needless.
All that being said, I'm often impressed by the quality of David's research, not as a scientist, but as a compiler and dot-connector. I read through the whole article, and while parts of it bored me, and other parts were hard to accept, it really did lead to a clearer understanding of the political significance of the Norway spiral, as well as a few possibilities for what it may have actually been.

[ayadew]

Ah, David is a wonderful person, and he's very honest and open with himself. This openness is easily used against him I'm afraid, even both by those deeming themselves light workers or otherwise. He's been taking a lot of abuse for this openness he has, and perhaps it's taken his toll in the negativity you detect pksmith.
He really believes in what he do, and think it's right. So I say, let him, even though we may not agree. With gifts such as his, it's likely extremely hard to not get a little full of himself. But that's his lessons in this life.

[Questioner]

Please follow this link if you think it will be of value (I certainly do!), but bear in mind that it has nothing to do with The Law of One

I find Bashar's style delightful and I certainly see the relevance of the excerpt you posted. In that talk he points out that gullibility and cynicism have the same root: a refusal to consider evidence that might contradict one's preconceived conclusions. I think it is worthwhile to explore here what meaning we assign to evidence, logic, faith or conclusions. Our response to the spiral light provides us with yet another opportunity to consider these themes.

One point of similarity I see from Bashar and the L/L Research materials. If I understand correctly, they both say that we will not, in this lifetime, get evidence that takes away from us our right and responsibility to choose our own faith and beliefs.

---

I can certainly understand the general reluctance around here to really dive into David's site.

I'm not reluctant. In fact, in the past I've sometimes spent a lot of time following through all the details of David's presentations. Currently I feel I need to limit my time online to the forums that are most productive for my current growth and interests. That's in-depth use of this forum and two business forums, and a quick stop at a silly timewaster forum.

This is why I keep asking if someone here could summarize David's presentation. I expect it's very, very detailed and comprehensive. I'm interested enough in his opinion of this phenomenon to want to read a summary. But I'm not interested enough to follow all the ins and outs of his entire explanation process. My current time allotment for discussion in depth of spiritual matters goes to this forum.

I agree that David's strength is in his knack to synthesize a wide range of research and spiritual materials. And I agree that his weakness is sometimes not finding a clear way to summarize, then getting frustrated when people can't follow all of what he said. I have some of the same strength and weakness myself so I can certainly sympathize.

---

I have to laugh. Ali, being an INTJ like myself, has personally concluded that this was most definitely a missile, while I have personally concluded it was definitely not. How is it that two masterminds can come up with two completely opposite conclusions?

Because the essence of INTJ energy is to reach a definite conclusion (J) through a process of rational thought (T) based on intuitive perception of one's own inner states (IN). Starting with differing inner states and intuitive processes, of course the rational conclusions would wind up different. If you each had the same inner-life experiences, such as reaching the same states through meditation, I believe you'd then use comparable analytical models to reach matching conclusions about the matter.

---

Ah, David is a wonderful person....He really believes in what he do, and think it's right.

I agree.

Perigrenus, I meant to write a post asking if you could give some kind of explanation or maybe a simple diagram of your point of view of the rocket theory, given your chemistry expertise.

For those with the astrology background: what astrological significance is there in the timing and location of the event, other than the Nobel Prize connection?

[transiten]

Questioner thanks!

I'm too eager though to correct the misunderstanding with my astrologycomment to wait until i have "mastered the quotationbutton".

I actually referred to a post where Ali compared astrology with superstition and i don't even remember in which post so this has nothing to do with the Norway Spiral..I only used it to mirror my total ignorance of rocketscience and that i cannot argue against anyone in this field and i cannot get to a true understanding even if Ali explained everything about this to me.

I also think that one cannot debunk astrology if one has note studied the art for a long time and observed the synchronistic correspondences to one's own life and the world at large. It is an utterly unscientific approach to debunk something you have not studied yourself in depth.

I would point to the fact though that the mercury retrogradation
synchronicity is at full play here in this thread: misunderstandings, information missing, difficulties to come to an agreement (among other things, anyone met an old friend from long ago?)

Deep water scorpio transiten

[pksmith]

Okay, I've got some free time on my hands, so I'll do the best I can to summarize David's points, which are pretty complex. Doing this will also probably help me to integrate what he's really trying to say. Also, I may not be able do this in the most organized way, so forgive me if it seems a little scattered. I'll start with a couple of details about the norway spiral, and then try to put it in historical/political context.

So First, if you trace the blue tail of the spiral to its source, it lands on the EISCAT base in Norway. The white sea, where the rocket was shot off, is too far away for the spiral to be seen in Norway, and nobody in Russia reported seeing the spiral. This is something I think Hoagland figured out. There is a photo on divinecosmos and on Hoagland's site showing this eiscat base. It is a field of high-powered antennae. When you look at records of power usage for that day, the eiscat base is operating at full power-one gigawatt, at the same time that the spiral manifests, and the tequila sunrise experiment is scheduled for that same time. In addition, someone calculated that the arms of the spiral were continuously moving at a speed too quick for it to be rocket exhaust. it was faster than the sound barrier-and we would have heard a sonic boom.
David's insider sources tell him that the spiral is exactly what "bluebeam" looks like- bluebeam, which I think may be interchangeable with HAARP, is a technology that heats up the ions in the air, and can be used to modify weather and potentially create a shield against airborne weapons. There is also speculation that this technology can create holographic images in the sky. There was a news report in India a couple of years ago about HAARP, saying that when tests were done it created a spiraling bulls-eye shape in the air. These results were seen at facilities using around 3 megawatts of power. There are openly available records of power usage at the EISCAT facility for the morning of the spiral, showing that they were operating at full power-1 gigawatt, for the 10 mins. when the spiral manifested. If they were indeed using HAARP, we would theoretically see a much bigger and more powerful version of the experiments written about in the Indian press, which depict spiraling light in the sky. One more thing- Up north there is a greater density of particles in the air, hence the Aurora borealis phenomenon. On Dec. 9 the air was supposed to have more particles than any other day of the year, which is why they chose to conduct the experiment then.

There was a also a sighting of a blurry tetrahedral ufo above the Kremlin on the same day, and David thinks this was created using a holographic technology that works best when the air is full of particles- which is why they would have done that on the same day as the spiral.

Apparently Russia and Norway are playing for the same team. The bulva missile is shot off in Russia around the same time may have been a test of the effectiveness of haarp technology in disabling rockets.

Now-there is more significance to this than simply Russians trying out their new toys, and this is where it ties into the Nobel ceremony.

There are 3 major forces that have been fighting for world power: the Rockefeller/neocon/republican/big corperations faction, the Rothschild/Bolshevik/Zionist faction, and a new international group who are trying to overthrow these two "negative" groups. This new group includes the Chinese, Japanese, Northern Europeans, and is centered in Russia. It developed in Russia many years ago when the Bolsheviks were thrown out of power. This new group believes that we are part of a large universe with many extraterrestrial species that are highly spiritually advanced, and that man's only option for survival is to work together to create a peaceful, spiritually grounded, non-warring planet. They are trying to wrest control away from the rockefellers and rothschilds who have been controlling the planet for so long. They believe that the important first step is disclosure of UFO info. Obama, because of his now widely accepted position in the world is the man for the job, yet the white house has not yet made a public announcement. These displays in Norway and Russia are meant to push the process along- get the disclosure to happen. Get more people around the world asking questions.

There were a bunch of crop circles flagging the date 8/16/08 as an important date. Nothing significant seemed to happen that day, although this was the day that the conflict between Russia and Georgia ended. We later find out that on this day, US forces fled Georgia in a hurry, leaving behind a few vans full of highly classified cia documents. These documents get into the hands of the Russians, and thus this new positive international coalition. The documents probably include all sorts of technological information- including bluebeam, hologram technology, and who knows what else.

The December 9th display is like the guys fighting to free us all saying "we know what you know, we are now more powerful than you, and if you don't surrender and tell the world about ETs and new technologies, we will do it for you."

So in summary, this seems to be a sign that we will soon be freed from the control of the negative powers that try to enslave us through poverty and fear, and will soon be introduced to our larger galactic community.


I think this is kind of the core of what Wilcock is saying, and I'm obviously not able to mention, or even remember, everything that He talks about.

hope this helps!

These things can get pretty complicated, but amidst the complexity we are always one, and I love you all!
Peace!
Phil

[Ali Quadir]

You are so persistent and i don't have any knowledge in this rocketmissile field that i almost begin to think you might be right....

Persistence only indicates my conviction, whether I'm right depends on my argument. I hope you won't accept my argument if it's only because of persistence.

....but I also know that you put no value in astrology which i have studied and practiced for 20 years and this makes me reluctant to trust in your statements...since i suspect you have not studied astrology in any depth you cannot just dismiss it just like that, you have to study it at least for one year and then come back to discuss the validity of this anscient art with me...

I am afraid you've misunderstood something somewhere. I'm not a student of astrology. But I'm not opposed to it. I do put value in it. I just have too little knowledge to use it or to judge it. One of my close friends studies it, he's drawn my chart and explained some things it was definitely insightful... If at any point I seemed dismissive towards astrology it's more a matter of ignorance than not having faith in it.

..if it actually is a missile since you've got the scientific knowledge and proof it is, YOU MUST BE RIGHT..and since i have studied and practiced astrology for 20 years I ALSO MUST BE RIGHT....right

I value your insights. I am not opposed to astrology, I've seen enough of it to be impressed, but I've seen too little of it to use it in practical situations. And when you guys start talking planets houses and squares you lose me pretty quickly. Perhaps you picked this up, please don't mistake my ignorance for opposition.

During mercury retrograde, i'm willing to change my views, information is missing, desinformation is rampant, delays, computors crashing, difficulties in reaching conclusions...

Mercury IS retrograde isn't it? I've used this as an argument, so I damn well hope I didn't misread the charts. I looked up a few charts 3 days ago. Both for personal issues, and to check this mercury retrograde rumor I was hearing.

Maybe it was just intended as a potentiator for those on the path or beginning to realize the path.

I think this is correct. The amount of synchronicities to me indicate it is a spiritual event, no matter it's physical components.

Needless to say I'm a little disappointed with David's production. I could not bring myself to read it in depth yet. But I've scanned through it. He's considering all the things I have asked myself and consequently explained as proof beyond doubt that it cannot be a missile. His research was mediocre at best.

Yes. One thing I noticed about David after watching many of his videos and listening to hours of his audio is that he will very consistently explain anything and everything with the most 'far out' explanation possible, dismissing any less fantastic explanation as silly. This is the same type of investigative error that many people make, it is simple close mindedness. If you go in to something with a preset belief in place it is very unlikely that you will find anything else. Oddly, this usually happens on the complete opposite end of the spectrum with so called 'skepical' reporters. But, true skepticism is true open mindedness, not willing to believe anything until having gathered sufficient evidence. Most people that identify themselves as 'skeptics' are in fact cynics.

Good point Lavazza, I agree with your views on skepticism. I usually call this pseudo skepticism. It's people who act skeptically but do so on gut feeling or intuition more than on rational arguments.

I will check your Bashar vid. Incidentally... Bashar is awesome.. Good morning this morning of your time!!! I can't now, someone is killing dragons on the same internet connection.

The real question about the spiral light show over Norway is not what or how it was, but why it was.

That is exactly the question. My worry is that if it's believed to be anything else than an apparent accident, we'll read the NWO into it, while in my opinion the agent is the Gaian social memory complex. It's been awake for a while now... It's just not fully rubbed the stars from it's sleepy eyes yet. But it's done a few things like this.

This end of the world stuff was relevant 10 years ago. Most people were not awake then.. The conspiracy crowd those days barely reached the news. And we went through the eye of the needle. Something happened that caused earthlings to massively awaken that was not instigated by our ET friends or any faction of people. This "agent" for lack of a better term acts more and more regularly. Sometimes we call it our ET friends. But something even bigger than them is on our side.

Our understanding of the situation of the world, calling these things ET's is simply our understanding of what this means. They're no more et's than they're angels or demons. They're part of a world that contains concepts that we have no words for.

Anyone ever wondered why the whole universe is sitting front row on this one? What's happening here is a little bigger than earth going into 4d. People go into 4d on a daily basis in this universe.

@Monica
Don't feel like I feel hurt because of you. It's actually that I just wanted to point out that the impossible alternative is very explainable. There is a discussion at DC, I'm there, but I'm getting the feeling that I'm only turning myself into a persona non grata. At a certain point if people want to believe and made up their minds. It's not only not my job but it'd be bad form for me to badger them.

I don't care that David makes errors. Well I do, but I won't allow myself to be upset by that... The problem is that science is a very strict doctrine. It's a set of rules and agreements on when to accept something as true or as not true. Scientific truth is not the same as literal/absolute truth. It's often wrong. But the point is that it's a protocol of agreements which means that if we call something a scientific truth it holds up to some standards it means something more than just someone thinks its a truth. Calling something scientific truth or scientific impossibility when it's not is the same as calling someone from india a native inuit. Our personal perceptions are not important, we ignore the agreements and pretend there is no reality bigger than ourselves. We may be all there is in the end, but the real world is still bigger than our 3d incarnations.

It might seem a little anal of me to put so much value in this. The point is that David, the guy whom I admire and love has just opened himself to being struck down by the closest skeptic (pseudo or otherwise) with a scientific dictionary. It's like playing chess with a pool cue... You don't win that way...

This error is big not because it's an error but because it's sold as flawless scientific logic.

I have to laugh. Ali, being an INTJ like myself, has personally concluded that this was most definitely a missile, while I have personally concluded it was definitely not. How is it that two masterminds can come up with two completely opposite conclusions?

I had to laugh at this too But the INTJ is a personality type. We have the same way of dealing with this, it doesn't mean we'll invariantly come up with the correct answers. We'll probably both have our off days.. INTJ isn't evidence for reliability, it's simply a way of dealing with questions that's rational with an intuitive inner guide. We're as likely as anyone else to make mistakes.

Besides, if we were the same, there'd be no point in keeping two of us around

Like I previously explained, the animation that was released was not physics correct, nor are what are explained to be the remainder of physics.

You are correct... The animation did not even look like the spiral. The assumption of leaking fuel is nonsensical because fuel burns.. The animation while it intended to prove it was a rocket has done more harm to the rocket theory than good. People who do think about this thing have to reject the animation. I did too.

It's only after we reject this animation that the rocket theory begins to make sense.

My work for the last nineteen years has been in physics, fluids, and chemistry, and this is why I see the incorrectness in the medias physics. If I were able to make 3D animations like that, I could conclusively prove it was not missile. Alas, I am not, so Ali will keep his opinion and I will keep mine. Until these physical bodies become unviable, I doubt there will be a resolution, so I simply agree to disagree and remain friends with my bull headed INTJ friend

I appreciate it, including the bull headed remark, I deserve that one. I'm only a lowly psychologist. Although I've been following all forms of science since I was 8 years old and even spent a few months studying physics in university before figuring out it's not my precise point of interest. I believe in the "Homo Universalis" I think these days we almost all need to be one.

I don't mind disagreeing but I would like you to disagree with what I actually believe Please read the following attentively, afterwards we'll still disagree, but at least we'll disagree with each other as opposed to our understanding of each other

I do not support the animation. I follow a theory where there is no leaking fuel.. But the engine exhaust got dent or broken in the third stage separation causing it to be at an angle, sending the rocket into a spin but essentially still allowing the engine close to full power. However, the dent exhaust pipe partly is engulfed by the exhaust flame and evaporates causing the smaller spiral by slowing down the exhaust and coloring it blue by releasing aluminum oxide. So the reason the small spiral is small is because the exhaust fumes are slowed down. I fully agree with you that the animation of the spinning rocket in the media is flawed.

David assumes it has to do with the wind somehow, his claim that there is no wind moving at that speed is pointless since the object is above the atmosphere. Atmospheric effects are totally irrelevant outside of the atmosphere. The engine ejects the fumes, they speed off in a direction and never slow down or change direction. The typical behavior of a rocket exhaust in a vacuum. As a physicist with extra insight in fluid dynamics you'd have to agree with me on this one right?

David suggests that the wind is somehow responsible for moving the fumes about. His lowest guess for the spiral size is 10 miles, the rocket exhaust would take 3 to 4 seconds to travel that distance yet he calls that size impossible. My guess is closer to 150 miles where it takes a minute and is very possible. My guess is due to both the calculated size of the object and it is supported by the people who saw it vanish in that time which is exactly how a rocket in a vacuum behaves.

Also remember my conclusion earlier that finnish people did not see it? This is apparently not true, they saw it in the north of finland... In the east... It was not a local event. It was visible in a 500 mile radius possibly even twice that range.

@pksmith
I think your suggestion to ignore the physical aspect is wise, there is a larger picture, it is far more important what this does on the whole than being right about the physical component.

Other wise I might end up like the guy who sets off to invent the wheel, but fails year after year because he can't figure out what color he wants it to be.

[Peregrinus]

I notice you account for two spirals. How do you account for the third spiral? There are two white and one blue if you look at the photos.
Secondly, what about it spinning for 15 minutes? This rocket would have had to maintain a straight trajectory for that long in order for the spirals to remain concentric as they were. I would think that a rocket which had energy/force in three directions... might alter course?

[transiten]

Hi

Just to add some more fuel to the debate: Go to the comments at the end of the E-book and read nr 13; the one from tspell...

..and Ali i must have mercuryretrogrademisunderstood you , i'm oversensitive from pple debunking astrology...

transiten

[Monica]

@Monica
Don't feel like I feel hurt because of you. It's actually that I just wanted to point out that the impossible alternative is very explainable.

OK! We're cool. I just didn't want you to think I dismissed your analysis.

This error is big not because it's an error but because it's sold as flawless scientific logic.

Ah, yes, I understand your point.

[Questioner]

Questioner thanks!

I'm too eager though to correct the misunderstanding with my astrologycomment to wait until i have "mastered the quotationbutton".

Mercury retrograde seems to really hit you hard this time around, so maybe you should just type up your opinion for now and learn the new software once Mercury's direct.

---

Okay, I've got some free time on my hands, so I'll do the best I can to summarize David's points, which are pretty complex....

hope this helps!

That's wonderfully helpful, Phil, thank you so much for the report!

As usual David pulls together several interesting threads into a colorful tapestry.

Whether the tapestry is an accurate picture of reality is quite the topic for discussion. But first I like to sit back and admire the craftsmanship for a while.

[transiten]

Ha ha Questioner

I'm not the only one having problems with quotations...Ali Quadir quotaded this:

"The real question about the spiral show over Norway is not what or how it was but why is was" ...stating it was mine but it wasn't, although i think it's an exquisit quote..

..and mercury retrograde is an excellent time to finally learn something you've been thinking of for a loooong time...also doing things over and over again...and old friend popping up and you might find lost items.... and media will focus more on things that happened a long time ago like f.i. they now discovered that man consumed cereals 80.000 years earlier than one thought after new findings in Africa...not that we're surprised on this forum

transiten

---

Hi

Go to http://divinecosmos.com/forums/showthrea...945&page=3
and read RayneboWolfs post; an interview with Björn Andreassen the Director of Stockholm University Space Research Center. I read the original link but don't remember where..

...he says it's a crashed UFO and that scientists in this researchfield from all aver the world landed in Norway that same day....

transiten

[Peregrinus]

And continue reading and someone said they searched for this Björn Andreassen the Director of Stockholm University Space Research Center.
At Stockholm University there was a Björn Andreassen, but he was a medical doctor, and
There is no Stockholm University Space Research Center.

[ayadew]

I looked around for that guy in searches with swedish words, and nope.

[transiten]

I just LOOOOOOVE astrolgy proving itself...talking about desinformation!
Well the Bible says there will be many false prophets in the End times..

This is Hilarious, i just feel like laughing all day...Just imagine us all together including David just laughing our butts off, not even the social memory complexes can escape this mercury retrogradation it seems

And you know what! Mars is also retro, until may adding to the backwards/inwardstendencies...I just LOOOVE astrology especially uranus f.i. that will tell us that you just can expect the unexpected when uranus is prominent the new/change and the old/established structure; Saturn went into opposition with Uranus the very same day Obama=the change was elected...
...guess if the Rockefellers/Rotshileds=the staus quo were "surprised"

transiten

[Monica]

I just LOOOOOOVE astrolgy proving itself...

I would be curious to know what causes the glitches and communication errors when Mercury isn't Retrograde...? But that would take this thread off-topic. Would you like to start another thread about Astrology? Then we can discuss it more there.

---

And continue reading and someone said they searched for this Björn Andreassen the Director of Stockholm University Space Research Center.
At Stockholm University there was a Björn Andreassen, but he was a medical doctor, and
There is no Stockholm University Space Research Center.

Bummer. That 'interview' was fun reading.

Shhhh...if we're all very quiet we can hear the sound of bubbles bursting.

[Ali Quadir]

I notice you account for two spirals. How do you account for the third spiral? There are two white and one blue if you look at the photos.
Secondly, what about it spinning for 15 minutes? This rocket would have had to maintain a straight trajectory for that long in order for the spirals to remain concentric as they were. I would think that a rocket which had energy/force in three directions... might alter course?

It only has force in one direction in this case the blue spiral does not produce much thrust. And you say 3 spirals, but I only count 2. Can you refer me to an image where there are three spirals?

If the two white spirals are very close and not at an 180 degrees angle it might actually support the idea that part of the engine got stuck inside the beam splitting it in two, deflecting it in two directions as opposed to just bent where I was working from. However, if the angle of separation is close to 180 degrees then that's becoming unlikely.

Just to add some more fuel to the debate: Go to the comments at the end of the E-book and read nr 13; the one from tspell...

Hah, I had located Skjervoy myself and used it to calculate distance and size It's not actually hard since the original news articles literally named the place. (My Norwegian geography is not THAT good ) The lesersbild image comes from a harbor in Skjervoy. Unfortunately google maps shows little detail for the area, but the mountain in the photograph is visible. The direction of the spiral is exactly the direction of the white sea.

..and Ali i must have mercuryretrogrademisunderstood you , i'm oversensitive from pple debunking astrology..

It was not my intention to do so transiten. I must be more clear in the future.

For the record, Mercury IS retrograde right now isn't it?

[Monica]

Astrology-related posts have been moved to their own thread.

[transiten]

Astrology-related posts have been moved to their own thread.

Thanks monica

Feels great to have aspecial thread...only i suspect not many will be very interested

Never mind, i'm used to that

transiten

---

I was wrong, there was some serious interest

transiten

[Peregrinus]

It only has force in one direction in this case the blue spiral does not produce much thrust. And you say 3 spirals, but I only count 2. Can you refer me to an image where there are three spirals?

If the two white spirals are very close and not at an 180 degrees angle it might actually support the idea that part of the engine got stuck inside the beam splitting it in two, deflecting it in two directions as opposed to just bent where I was working from. However, if the angle of separation is close to 180 degrees then that's becoming unlikely.

Dearest Ali Quadir,

Please see the picture I have attached. Each spiral is color coordinated and numbered, 1) as the one which has the highest force (thrust) exerted, 2) as the secondary and lesser force (thrust) exerted, and 3) the blue "release of gas" which you say exerted little or no force (thrust).

The two white "thrust" spirals are almost at a 180 degree angle, meaning one would have to come from the front or near front of the rocket. Unless the third stage was at the cone, some sort of new direction changing rocket...

The secondary white spiral is almost as large as the first, and looks to have caused at least 1/3 the force (thrust), based upon the distance the spiral goes as the two fan out, of the larger white spiral.

Whether one, two, or three generated forces (thrust), a rocket will simply not keep a straight trajectory when there is any kind of wobble (which would be absolutely indicated by the blue trailing "gas" spiral). The trajectory will become more and more irregular. This spiral kept its place for fifteen minutes, despite three different acting releases of energy (thrust).

Next... being that the blue spiral is seen as right to left proves that this was not taken directly from a rear (tail) position, and this makes it even more impossible to explain. Should not the spirals center point have been seen moving from right to left also? If you can show me any rocket in history that is visible in one spot for 15 minutes from a side angle, I will tip my hat to you, but I know you will not and can not.

Another point on the angle; if this "rocket" was launched from the South East, and flew to the North West, why was the blue "trailing gas" seen to have come from the South West? If the "blue trailing gas" were to have followed the rocket, it would be behind the white spirals, not in front of them.

Furthermore, how does one account that the further away the "rocket" gets, the tighter the blue spirals get? The white spirals move outward, yet why does the blue "gas" spiral not do so? And why does the blue "gas" spiral not dissipate? The white spirals do. Granted you say that the blue spiral did not exert enough energy (thrust) to have an effect, yet the blue spiral did move outward for some time, but then moved inward "tightening up" the father from the rocket this "release of gas" got. Unless there was some special "weather anomaly" which closed in on this "gas" in perfect concentric circles and stopped it from dissipating while at the same time keeping the form of the original spirals...

Absolutely, irrefutably... and there are so many more things I could point out; far more than I mention here. This was without a doubt not a rocket.

Whether it was ground based or space based is the only question that I may see arise. My first instinct was that it was ground based, and although I really would like to think of it as space based, it most likely was ground based.

Until we understand (if we ever do) the capabilities of what HAARP and EISCAT can do, this leaves us in the dark on that aspect. Being that the EISCAT facilty had a test (Tequila Sunrise) scheduled, ran that test using a GigaWatt of power at the exact time of the spiral show, and looked to visually be at the place of origin of the blue spiral, this simply does add up to be the most likely cause.

---

Astrology-related posts have been moved to their own thread.

Thanks monica

Feels great to have aspecial thread...only i suspect not many will be very interested

Never mind, i'm used to that

transiten

---

I was wrong, there was some serious interest

transiten

I'm interested. Just keep it in grade 1 astrology terms so I can understand!

[peelstreetguy]

Thank you Peregrinus. Nicely done! I also believe EISCAT is the #1 suspect at this point in our "Bring4th" investigation!

[transiten]

Peregrinus!

The wooden button with a spiral burned into it and a small hole in the middle letting the light through that i synchronistically found on the sidewalk after reading Davids E-mailbook and the New Kremlins in connection with the Norwegain Spiral, followed by listening to the "Musical Spaceshow" on swedish radio with the russian female astronaut, David Bowies spaceman, music from Spaceodyssey 2001 etc. fits exactly into the spiral you posted:exclamation:

And somehow it ended up with my post also

transiten

[transiten]

Goodevening

http://www.enterprisemission.com/Norway-Message.htm

http://www.enterprisemission.com/Norway-Message2.htm

Something for the more scientifically advanced to chew. I'm too tired to read it all through just now.

Goodnight from transiten

[transiten]

Goodevening

Latest news on the Norway spiral phenomenon. Is this the final proof?

http:www.viewzone2.com/haarp-russia.jpg

transiten

---

http://www.viewzone.com/haarp-russia.jpg

transiten

---

Goodevening

Latest news on the Norway spiral phenomenon. Is this the final proof?

http:www.viewzone2.com/haarp-russia.jpg

transiten

---

http://www.viewzone.com/haarp-russia.jpg

transiten

Just go to www.viewzone.com and the article will show up to the left.

---

....no, to the right....

[transiten]

Gosh what a relief it will be when mercury has catched up speed in a few days. I've had enough of doing things over and over again.

By the way, if i want to "eliminate" a post of mine, how do i proceed??

Anyway here's the direct link for the third time:

http://www.viewzone2.com/haarp-russia.jpg

tr

---

I can't believe it! it did not work

OK. Just go to http://www.viewzone.com as i already posted once, and the article will show up to the right!

transiten

[transiten]

Hi

Seems the interest for the Norway spiral has decreased
"Maybe it's because i'm a Gothenburger that i like Norway spirals". (Gothenburgh is very close to Norway

Anyway here's another paradoxical perspective!

http://www.treurniet.ca/spirals/norwayspiral.htm

transiten

[Lorna]

i'm liking your links transiten but am lurking.... thanks for posting