UFO event in Norway

[brainpanhandler]

This is pretty crude and relies on a number of assumptions:



If the Rex Features photo was shot from skjervoy and the photographer was facing east (edit: /southeast) and those are the sawback mountains in the background (which I think they most certainly are) and I've correctly identified the sawback mountains on google maps then the missile, if it was a missle, must have been fired from roughly somewhere within the cone I've drawn. That squares with the russian missle test from somewhere within the white sea which is where they apparently test their submarine missile systems. Furthermore, and still assuming everything above, the missile had to have been fired in a north easterly direction. The arrow indicates the rough trajectory if it was fired from the white sea.

This at least makes it more understandable why there are no other photos from different angles.

[brainpanhandler]

David Wilcock claims
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFWI0kbsiK8

I believe Wilcock is wrong and Hoagland is wrong. EISCAT is not behind the sawback mountains relative to the REX features photo and it would have to be if a beam from there was creating the spiral. Since (edit: I believe) they're both flat wrong on that, and claiming to be absolutely right, I'm not inclined to take anything else they say seriously.

[brainpanhandler]

besides it seems to be more like a projection from some kind of big projector on the other side of that mountain range, like from the antenna station just on the other side which,

Wait, what? Which photo or video are you talking about? And how do you know exactly where it was taken and what mountain range is in it?

Well?

[2012 Countdown]

You guys are doing some excellent detective work.

Here is a composite analysis of the most recent photos posted...

[2012 Countdown]

And, fwiw, another composite using a different photo of that location...

[brainpanhandler]

there appears to live a man by the name of Jan Petter Jørgensen in or near Skjervoy: he is (or has been) active at the local sports club, Skjervoy IK. I even have his phone number here, if someone wants to call him to find out if he is the same guy...

Man, I'm not calling that guy.

Thanks for finding that thread at GLP. I think SHR is likely correct about the location of the photographer. He's definitely correct about the identification of the sawback mountains in the rex features photo.

No offense Smiles but that youtube interview of Wilcock you posted uses this image which is taken from the GLP thread by SHR.



Which makes no sense, not least of which because the eiscat facility Wilcock is talking about is well south and to the west of what I believe to be the sawback mountains, as well as skjervoy at the least, but also for the simple fact that the "mountain" pointed to in that google maps screen capture are to the west of the fishing bay at skjervoy where the rex features photo and the other photos from that location were almost certainly taken and those photos had to have been taken facing east. It's a fundamental error and I believe the rest of his theory breaks down after that. Plus his annoying tone of authoritarian certainty pisses me off.

[brainpanhandler]

So to come back to this photo and the issue of the seeming two dimensionality of the white spiral -



Does it make sense to say that if this is a missile we are looking down the throat of a funnel?

[barracuda]

I don't believe so. It would seem to be just the opposite: that is to say, the center of the spiral is being created as the object moves towards you very slightly, causing the entire spiral to assume a shallow conical shape projected at the viewer.



You can see more clearly in the inverted image at the right how the layers of the spiral rest on top of one another, which, of course, in the inversion appears just the reverse of that.

It looks as if the flight path of the object is in the general direction of the viewer, rather than away from him.



A conical archimedean spiral is illustrated on the left above.

[brainpanhandler]

It looks as if the flight path of the object is in the general direction of the viewer, rather than away from him.

Hm. Maybe. I was assuming that because the blue spiral appeared to be in front of the white spiral that a missle would be traveling away and to the northeast of the photographer of the rex features photo. But of course it could be that the white spiral is transparent enough that the blue spiral can be seen so clearly through it that it cannot be ascertained whether the presumed missile is coming toward or going away from the viewer.

Not to mention that the ruskies would presumably point this "screwy" thing away from populated areas rather than at them given it's dicey track record.

[barracuda]

The blue spiral appears larger as it approaches the viewer. It would be counterintuitive to assume that it appeared larger the further away from you it got.

[brainpanhandler]

The blue spiral appears larger as it approaches the viewer. It would be counterintuitive to assume that it appeared larger the further away from you it got.

That's true, but if whatever was leaking to produce the blue spiral got progressively worse then the sprial would appear to expand even as it was going away from you.

[psynapz]

besides it seems to be more like a projection from some kind of big projector on the other side of that mountain range, like from the antenna station just on the other side which,

Wait, what? Which photo or video are you talking about?

Just this one:

And how do you know exactly where it was taken and what mountain range is in it?

I didn't know any more than anybody else. Maybe you heard more news or tone of authority than I intended when I wrote it, but I was just saying it looks from that faint cone of light like it's being projected from somewhere on the other side of that mountain, and since the sun's apparently due to rise over that mountain, then the photo was taken towards the east. Has it not been verified to have been shot in Tromso?

Well?

This is an asynchronous communications medium, so let's not get into the habit of rushing each other to respond as though it's a face-to-face roundtable in the Name-of-Local-River Room at the airport Hilton. Most of us have families or at least barmates to keep up with.

Does it make sense to say that if this is a missile we are looking down the throat of a funnel?

Certainly. What data is left unexplained by this missile theory? Can anyone confirm that posting about how solid rocket fuel spewing aluminum would look like that?

[Dradin Kastell]

Man, I'm not calling that guy.

Have it your way.

Thanks for finding that thread at GLP. I think SHR is likely correct about the location of the photographer. He's definitely correct about the identification of the sawback mountains in the rex features photo.

You're welcome. There is, BTW, a Dampskipskaia ("steam ship quay") in Skjervoy. There appears to be one in most Norwegian ports (whether capitalized or not), as far as I can see the word is a traditional term for the part of the harbour that used to service bigger ships. The term is so commonplace that it is not necessarily marked on any map.

Something to think about: I took your crude map and added, as crudely, the approx. location where the Swedish photo was taken from:

[Wombaticus Rex]

Probably one of the awesomest threads Ive read here.

[barracuda]

The blue spiral appears larger as it approaches the viewer. It would be counterintuitive to assume that it appeared larger the further away from you it got.

That's true, but if whatever was leaking to produce the blue spiral got progressively worse then the sprial would appear to expand even as it was going away from you.

But in order for that assumption to make sense, you have to add information that you do not actually possess (worsening leakage), something which I'd tend to advise against in this situation. There are already enough unknown variables at work here that reversing the normal understanding of the rules of visual perspective seems to be a leap not worth taking unless there is some great benefit in doing so, which, as yet, I don't really see. Under any normal understanding of perspective, objects appear larger as they approach the viewer.

I don't see any reason whatsoever to assume the blue spiral is in front of the white one. The particles being illuminated by the sun are widely dispersed in the atmosphere, and to a huge distance. I think were it not for the lucky timing and position of this thing, with the sun hidden behind the horizon, yet lighting it up from behind, the display would obviously have been far less impressive.

Again, I don't understand the need to point the travel vector away from the viewer in your scenario.