Author Topic: Norway Spirals (Read 4744 times)

pike · « **on:** May 16, 2010, 10:47:19 PM »

Pretty good conspiracy to talk about. If you haven't heard about it than you need to catch up. If you believe the official story that it was "A failed Russian missile" than you're an idiot. Clearly not a missile.

This happened the same day Obama went to Europe to accept his bullshit Nobel Peace Prize

Thoughts?

Trim · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2010, 10:59:10 PM »

Quote from: pike on May 16, 2010, 10:47:19 PM

Thoughts?

Video needs more PoetWarrior and/or EMAW.

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:08:40 PM »

A missle

WillieWatanabe · « **Reply #3 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:10:52 PM »

yup, failed missile. Really cool as well.

http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=10&month=12&year=2009

pike · « **Reply #4 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:14:06 PM »

Jeffy · « **Reply #5 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:22:25 PM »

The large hadron collider is going nuts!!

pike · « **Reply #6 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:23:31 PM »

Quote from: Jeffy on May 16, 2010, 11:22:25 PM

The large hadron collider is going nuts!!

HAARP, maybe

DILLIGAF · « **Reply #7 on:** May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM »

No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #8 on:** May 17, 2010, 03:42:03 PM »

Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM

No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

So when a missle fails, the self destruct button keeps working? Why not just make the guidance system etc. out of the same stuff they made the self destruct system out of...then no missle would ever fail.

AzCat · « **Reply #9 on:** May 17, 2010, 04:36:45 PM »

Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM

No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

True story: a number of years back a new European (French IIRC) lauch vehicle self-destructed shortly after launch. Telemetry showed everything was fine and well within spec at the time of the failure but upon further review engineers discovered that the software team had simply ported code straight across from an older smaller vehicle making only minimal revisions. Unfortunately, for the customer whose satellite was atop the launch vehicle at the time it exploded, the software team hadn't bothered to update the allowable operating parameters for the mechanical systems on the newer, larger & more powerful booster. Thus the readings while well within spec for the new system were out of spec for the older system and triggered an unnecessary self-destruct. The moral of that story: software guys never get it right, especially not the first time. Totally believable that the vehicle would spin out of control and there wasn't a damn thing the lauch team could do about it.

DILLIGAF · « **Reply #10 on:** May 19, 2010, 11:18:10 AM »

Quote from: Limestone on May 17, 2010, 03:42:03 PM

Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM
No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

So when a missle fails, the self destruct button keeps working? Why not just make the guidance system etc. out of the same stuff they made the self destruct system out of...then no missle would ever fail.

AZcat clarified your issue quite well, I took the long way around saying that it was not a missile based on the fact there would have been self-destruct methods in place, both on the unit and remotely.

kso_FAN · « **Reply #11 on:** May 19, 2010, 11:58:43 AM »

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #12 on:** May 19, 2010, 02:48:28 PM »

Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 19, 2010, 11:18:10 AM

Quote from: Limestone on May 17, 2010, 03:42:03 PM
Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM
No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

So when a missle fails, the self destruct button keeps working? Why not just make the guidance system etc. out of the same stuff they made the self destruct system out of...then no missle would ever fail.

AZcat clarified your issue quite well, I took the long way around saying that it was not a missile based on the fact there would have been self-destruct methods in place, both on the unit and remotely.

Pretty sure the one on the missle is the only one that needs to malfunction for a missle to not self destruct. I think AZ cat pointed out that engineers screw up all the time and this is quite likely one of those events.

DILLIGAF · « **Reply #13 on:** May 19, 2010, 04:58:04 PM »

mkay, have it your way.

waks · « **Reply #14 on:** May 19, 2010, 05:03:04 PM »

pike · « **Reply #15 on:** May 19, 2010, 05:15:47 PM »

Quote from: DILLIGAF on May 17, 2010, 12:51:36 PM

No way that's a failed missil launch, they'd have hit the self-destruct button the second it started to deviate in the slightest bit. In fact it would have had its own sensors specifically to determine any deviation and blown itself up.

And it, you know, just doesn't look like a damn failed missile.

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #16 on:** May 19, 2010, 07:12:23 PM »

Spiral aliens involved in 9/11!?!

WillieWatanabe · « **Reply #17 on:** May 27, 2010, 07:42:20 AM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20100526/sc_space/mysteryspiralsonmarsfinallyexplained

LickNeckey · « **Reply #18 on:** June 01, 2010, 09:41:32 PM »

socialist martians

jfc

Goldbrick · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2010, 05:24:56 PM »

Most people aren't going to accept 'exotic' explanations.

So the 'it was a missile' explanation is acceptable, even if it seems intuitively absurd.

Which is why I think it would be surprisingly easy to get away with conspiracies even now in the age of information.

pike · « **Reply #20 on:** June 02, 2010, 05:40:23 PM »

Quote from: Goldbrick on June 02, 2010, 05:24:56 PM

Most people aren't going to accept 'exotic' explanations.

So the 'it was a missile' explanation is acceptable, even if it seems intuitively absurd.

Which is why I think it would be surprisingly easy to get away with conspiracies even now in the age of information.

Couldn't agree more

pike · « **Reply #21 on:** June 06, 2010, 04:36:35 PM »

IT HAPPENED AGAIN!!

The title of the video and music is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) but I hope the "It was just a missile" people have some input on it.

WillieWatanabe · « **Reply #22 on:** June 06, 2010, 06:17:58 PM »

Quote from: pike on June 06, 2010, 04:36:35 PM

IT HAPPENED AGAIN!!

The title of the video and music is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) but I hope the "It was just a missile" people have some input on it.

Link

O NOES!!!!

pike · « **Reply #23 on:** June 06, 2010, 07:33:44 PM »

Quote from: WillieWannabe on June 06, 2010, 06:17:58 PM

Quote from: pike on June 06, 2010, 04:36:35 PM
IT HAPPENED AGAIN!!

The title of the video and music is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) but I hope the "It was just a missile" people have some input on it.

Link

O NOES!!!!

lol yeah right. Here we go again.

Cire · « **Reply #24 on:** July 15, 2010, 02:48:44 PM »

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/ufo-over-chinese-airport/20l0xekk