Page 4 of 23
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:13 am
by brainpanhandler
searcher,
Oh, I don't know... I thought part of what we do here is challenge each other's ideas. Maybe I'm a snob and I don't like the board cluttered up with nonsense. If I wanted that I could go sign up for icke's forum. And I'm kind of agin incitements to non-thought.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:32 am
by 8bitagent
brainpanhandler wrote:
You do realize this is hopelessly convoluted gibberish? Don't you? I mean I'm used to interpreting your nonsense because unfortunately we like many of the same topics here, but not even I can really figure out wtf you're asserting here. I started picking apart the grammar of your first paragraph and realized I would spend a lot of time pointing out how flawed your writing is for no good fucking reason at all and abandoned the project. I don't really care about pedantic little details but when your writing is so bad that it actually gets in the way of you making any sense at all it starts to get ridiculous. Even if I could fix your writing and rearrange things so that you at least were not contradicting yourself I'd be left with nonsense. Is English your first language? If it's not I'll leave you alone. Do you have a learning disability? If so I apologize.
These are raw, free form ideas not necessarily confined by tersely fine tooth proofing. Man, you would really be pulling your hair out reading
some of Vonnegut's side work, or any number of works that are not always written in a concisely discernible fashion. Why, I bet we'd all cringe going over the grammar of the hacked CRU climate emails.
My notes were just that, scribbles written in the margins. I was addressing the notion that one can dismiss every single UFO/paranormal/Fortean/high weirdness event as simply "government psyops" or "hallucination" doesn't seem to match with common sense. I apologize if some of my scribblings seem nauseatingly poor in form. Obviously, we can't all write as eloquently as the next person:)
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:37 am
by Searcher08
brainpanhandler wrote:searcher,
Oh, I don't know... I thought part of what we do here is challenge each other's ideas. Maybe I'm a snob and I don't like the board cluttered up with nonsense. If I wanted that I could go sign up for icke's forum. And I'm kind of agin incitements to non-thought.
It's weird bph - I always look forward to reading your stuff except around 8bit
You write like JackR, very 'legally' with a clear 'case' presented. 8bit writes much more randomly but there is a clear pattern presented, not nothing as you think.
My own experience was having to adapt to c2w's style, which I find hard but always make the effort.
I found what he said pretty clear to me, perhaps because it mirrors my own preferred thinking style, much more a map-making, mind mapping approach.
Or as we used to say about my Maths Professor
One persons 'Obviously...' is another persons 'Huh??!!'
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:42 am
by Cosmic Cowbell
justdrew wrote: Very odd. Would like to see a reconstruction diagram of how that would work.
http://gizmodo.com/5422792/this-is-how- ... l-happened
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:51 am
by brainpanhandler
Alright, alright, sigh. 8bit, if you have any clearly redeeming virtue it's that you never seem to get offended and I've never seen you insult anyone. Searcher, I'll take that as a compliment as jack is pretty clearly a better writer than I.
But this isn't the thread to have this conversation (sorry to those that could give a shit about this), because I'm still not really certain what the frick this is:
I mean I just don't get the scale in these images, especially the second one where there is a foreground for reference. Am I mistaken in believing the exhaust fan from an out of control, spinning rocket would have to be enormous to appear like this?
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:55 am
by elfismiles
Yep. As I provided links earlier ... Missile Test. Just like the one from Tomsk in 2006.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2961312148
http://www.google.com/search?q=tomsk+ru ... ssile+test
And 8bit and others ...
- Roswell was NOT the "true UFO pheonomenon" it was most likely the result of AmeriKa's continued Unit-731 experiments (see Nick Redfern's BODYSNATCHERS IN THE DESERT).
- The UFO Battle of Los Angeles was the inspiration for Spielberg's wonderful flop 1941.
... and on and on and on ...
The scale of this thing though ... if it is in low earth orbit it makes a lot of sense.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:56 am
by brainpanhandler
and I'm gonna steal this one before Barracuda gets to it:
...I mean it's not rocket science, oh wait...
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:00 am
by Blue
I have a hard time believing a rocket would spiral so symmetrically. And the colors are so precise - don't see any flame out.
What's with the black hole sun thingy?
[/img]
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:15 am
by brainpanhandler
I'm sold. That's pretty conclusive.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:23 am
by Blue
Okay that looks and sounds like a good explanation. But it's a
computer simulation.
Never seen footage of something spiraling like that in the sky creating absolutely symmetrical rings.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:29 am
by beeline
I am in the 'misfired rocket' camp, as I have seen something like this before, in southern Quebec in July, 1986. What we saw turned out to be a misfired Japanese rocket that blew up over North America. It sort of looked like this:
Except that picture would represent one arm of the four or five arms on the spiral.
Freaked us out, and the only reason I ever knew what it was was because I happened across an article in
Omni a few months later.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:43 pm
by Searcher08
Russians admit it was part of a plan to open wormhole to allow Anti-Christ to march across the 4th Dimension
http://www.barentsobserver.com/?id=4663955&language=en
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:55 pm
by nathan28
brainpanhandler wrote:
I'm sold. That's pretty conclusive.
Have you been watching a lot of controlled demolition youtube posts recently? That's not data. That's a cartoon, 100% free of data. WTF is that, the mythbusters approach to journalism?
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:25 pm
by barracuda
This looks pretty much like just what I'd expect a high powered Catherine Wheel to look like.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:28 pm
by Searcher08
brainpanhandler wrote:and I'm gonna steal this one before Barracuda gets to it:
...I mean it's not rocket science, oh wait...
Are you after an ego
booster 