Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

still unexplained....still not world news.....






ignore the vid title...




Automatically Appended Next Post:
go to 0:28 for the real wtf.

My 2 cents..

Looks like your standard rocket with a widely dispersed vapor trail from the jets with the light hitting it at just the right (1 in a million ect ect) angle.

The 0:28 to me looks like the object breaking the sound barrier and you physically seeing the shock wave.

Hard to tell though with the crappy music dubbed over it.

I agree with jp400. That is just a standard payload rocket and the shockwave is clearly visible.

Looks to me like it's a Krygyzstan launch to the ISS. lol.

But it probably is something like that. Just a rocket goin somewhere or some weird kind of military jet.

Its clearly a misfired rocket.

As everyone is saying, rocket of some sort maybe leaking fuel.

Weather balloon.

Nothing to see here, folks.

Enjoy full-flavored Chesterfield cigarettes! They could save your life!

Well I am glad you were all working in the base that launched the rocket....jesus christ. you are not experts.

all UFO means is unidentified flying object, and since NONE of you know, and I doubt any one of you have EVER seen a missile/rocket in flight like this in real life, ever, it remains unidentified.

Find me another vid of a rocket/missile like this, that shows VERY specific similar traits.

And even if it was said missile/rocket, it was not China's.

just remember to keep an open mind, you are all just acting out the part of the know it all. The other side being the paranoid tin-foil-hat-wearing beleive-it-all....

they both are idiots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:Its clearly a misfired rocket.

really?....really?.....are you that arrogant?

Clearly you're all talking out your asses. Every televised event I've seen of rockets launching look absolutely nothing like that. Now, am I saying it's some alien craft? Hell no. All I'm saying is that I don't know WHAT it is, and neither do all of you. But, this, coupled with those two "swirls" a few months ago over western Europe, is leading me to believe that there's something going on. Might be something big, might be absolutely nothing. But I'd rather be suspect until hardcore proof is provided than drink the kool-aid of "clearly"s.

What exactly are you trying to say here, urban? Are you playing devil's advocate, or just acting out the part of the refuse-to-believe-anything-at-all? I don't know what it is, but a rocket sounds to my non-expert ears like a reasonable explanation.

DakkaDapper wrote: But, this, coupled with those two "swirls" a few months ago over western Europe, is leading me to believe that there's something going on. Might be something big, might be absolutely nothing. But I'd rather be suspect until hardcore proof is provided than drink the kool-aid of "clearly"s.

Oh you mean this?


Let me break it down to you....

The above was doing this really really fast:


While spraying out liquid fuel. the light then hit it at an odd angle thus produceing what you saw. The blue in the middle was the corkscrew of smoke, and the white the fuel.

Based on that.. and my general knowledge of rockets... Im going to bet that my guess posted above is prolly correct.

What you have, is some type of missile/rocket/booster that is either comming down or going up while leaking fuel... and the "thing" you see is a sonic boom as it breaks the sound barrier.



**EDIT***
Better yet... look here.. it confirms what i've said.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234773/The-answer-mystery-Norways-spiral-light-display-Was-failed-Russian-Bulava-missile-test.html

It is a possibility, one of many. I get pissy when people say things like "clearly a rocket", or something to that effect. I don't know, nobody does, and to make any inclination that you do, makes you sound like a boor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jp400 wrote:

DakkaDapper wrote: But, this, coupled with those two "swirls" a few months ago over western Europe, is leading me to believe that there's something going on. Might be something big, might be absolutely nothing. But I'd rather be suspect until hardcore proof is provided than drink the kool-aid of "clearly"s.

Oh you mean this?


Let me break it down to you....

The above was doing this really really fast:


While spraying out liquid fuel. the light then hit it at an odd angle thus produceing what you saw. The blue in the middle was the corkscrew of smoke, and the white the fuel.

Based on that.. and my general knowledge of rockets... Im going to bet that my guess posted above is prolly correct.

What you have, is some type of missile/rocket/booster that is either comming down or going up while leaking fuel... and the "thing" you see is a sonic boom as it breaks the sound barrier.

lol, sorry, I know enough of photography, and what smoke looks like over a long exposure, to know that the rocket explanation was BS. As far as the shuttle, while similar, PALES in comparison to China's UFO...



fantastic try, though.











people fear what they do not understand...I love watching people RUSH to find the most safe, logical explanation for things.....if you push hard enough, the square peg goes into the round hole....



not enough, sorry.

IG_urban wrote:It is a possibility, one of many. I get pissy when people say things like "clearly a rocket", or something to that effect. I don't know, nobody does, and to make any inclination that you do, makes you sound like a boor.

I'd rather sound like I actually put some thought behind it... then sound like the ramblings of this guy:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also once again.. I point out this site... which disproves everything you are saying.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234773/The-answer-mystery-Norways-spiral-light-display-Was-failed-Russian-Bulava-missile-test.html

once again, I am not saying it's aliens in an alien spaceship made of unobtanium, I just don't know, and neither do you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jp400 wrote:

IG_urban wrote:It is a possibility, one of many. I get pissy when people say things like "clearly a rocket", or something to that effect. I don't know, nobody does, and to make any inclination that you do, makes you sound like a boor.

I'd rather sound like I actually put some thought behind it... then sound like the ramblings of this guy:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also once again.. I point out this site... which disproves everything you are saying.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234773/The-answer-mystery-Norways-spiral-light-display-Was-failed-Russian-Bulava-missile-test.html

yeah it's a decent coverup story....

that does not disprove gak.

let me remind you that the cover up for WHATEVER THE FETH happened at Roswell changed over 8 times. These were 8, official, government, announcements that changed over 8 times, to different situations. This pattern can be seen all throughout UFO case histories, it's documented, and you can look at the official reports from the government anytime you wish.

IG_urban wrote:
all UFO means is unidentified flying object, and since NONE of you know, and I doubt any one of you have EVER seen a missile/rocket in flight like this in real life, ever, it remains unidentified.

I've seen 6 rockets exhibit this behavior when their propellant burns unevenly, or some sort of damage occurs to the exhaust nozzle.

IG_urban wrote:
Find me another vid of a rocket/missile like this, that shows VERY specific similar traits.

No, I won't bother doing that, because you have very clearly indicated that you're more interested in conspiracy theories than probable explanations.

IG_urban wrote:
just remember to keep an open mind, you are all just acting out the part of the know it all.

Its been officially acknowledged as a rocket. It behaves like a malfunctioning rocket in flight. There is no reason to presume it is anything else.

IG_urban wrote:
really?....really?.....are you that arrogant?

No, I'm that knowledgeable.

IG_urban wrote:once again, I am not saying it's aliens in an alien spaceship made of unobtanium, I just don't know, and neither do you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jp400 wrote:

IG_urban wrote:It is a possibility, one of many. I get pissy when people say things like "clearly a rocket", or something to that effect. I don't know, nobody does, and to make any inclination that you do, makes you sound like a boor.

I'd rather sound like I actually put some thought behind it... then sound like the ramblings of this guy:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also once again.. I point out this site... which disproves everything you are saying.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1234773/The-answer-mystery-Norways-spiral-light-display-Was-failed-Russian-Bulava-missile-test.html

yeah it's a decent coverup story....

that does not disprove gak.

let me remind you that the cover up for WHATEVER THE FETH happened at Roswell changed over 8 times. These were 8, official, government, announcements that changed over 8 times, to different situations. This pattern can be seen all throughout UFO case histories, it's documented, and you can look at the official reports from the government anytime you wish.

IG_urban wrote:I just don't know, and neither do you.

If you don't know now, then it is reasonable to assume that you can't know at any point in the future. Given that presumption any serious discussion, the sort of thing that would lead to calling someone arrogant, is impossible.

I'm happy you found an outlet for your inner conspiracy nut, but don't pretend you're doing anything earth-shattering here.

I don't believe I am doing anything earth shattering...I just think it's sad that some people will eat any explanation given to them as fact. And you are very arrogant, sir. It COULD be a missile, it COULD be a lot of things, nobody knows.

I also have seen no story claiming China's multiple UFO sightings that did not show up on radar, and were seen by millions, were rockets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:I just don't know, and neither do you.

If you don't know now, then it is reasonable to assume that you can't know at any point in the future. Given that presumption any serious discussion, the sort of thing that would lead to calling someone arrogant, is impossible.

that is a massive generalization.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
jp400, I also have to apologize, I jumped down your throat a bit, I read your reply, then some of the others, and kind of clumped my post together... I would rather have debated this with you under different circumstances, because you offered your OPINION, as an OPINION, rather than arrogantly stating that you knew exactly what it was.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and that article does no disprove EVERYTHING I have said (going of the fact that the article is, in fact, the truth)

IG_urban wrote:I don't believe I am doing anything earth shattering...I just think it's sad that some people will eat any explanation given to them as fact. And you are very arrogant, sir.

I'm very intelligent, and very well educated. These two things often combine to make me appear arrogant, when I'm simply acting with an appropriate degree of confidence.

IG_urban wrote:
It COULD be a missile, it COULD be a lot of things, nobody knows.

The Chinese have confirmed that there is a military connection to the incident, and it behaves like a malfunctioning rocket. There isn't a lot of room for alternatives there.

IG_urban wrote:
that is a massive generalization.

No, its an accurate assessment of the situation. If an event occurs in the past, and neither you, nor anyone else, is aware of the cause it is reasonable to presume that you will be unable to determine it in the future; at least not with sufficient certainty to overcome your irrational insistence on skepticism.

IG_urban wrote:
I would rather have debated this with you under different circumstances, because you offered your OPINION, as an OPINION, rather than arrogantly stating that you knew exactly what it was.

You must find yourself offended very frequently if you insist that people explicitly label their opinions as such. It isn't hard to determine what is an opinion, and what is not an opinion. If you need someone else to do it for you I recommend that you revisit your English lessons.

At this point in time Ig... I am just going to calmly walk away from this one.

I've already stated what I think it is, and until I hear otherwise from a reliable source, I am going to stick with it.

Have a nice night.

dogma wrote:I'm very intelligent, and very well educated. These two things often combine to make me appear arrogant, when I'm simply acting with an appropriate degree of confidence

Well just in your first seven words you come off with an attitude of superiority. I am very intelligent and well educated too, I don't go about flaunting it. I don't spend the time to make every post of mine grammatically correct, and I am a bit hot headed at times. Like most people that are arrogant, you are talking down to me, you have been since your first comment on the topic. "Clearly a misfired rocket"? That is a very arrogant and presumptuous thing to say.

dogma wrote:The Chinese have confirmed that there is a military connection to the incident, and it behaves like a malfunctioning rocket. There isn't a lot of room for alternatives there

Wouldn't malfunctioning rockets show up on radar, and wouldn't we have previous accounts of rockets behaving in this way? Yes, China has confirmed a military connection, but if it's "clearly" a malfunctioning rocket, they haven't they claimed it to be so? Norway's incident was "explained" within days, and it didn't halt air traffic either.

dogma wrote:No, its an accurate assessment of the situation. If an event occurs in the past, and neither you, nor anyone else, is aware of the cause it is reasonable to presume that you will be unable to determine it in the future; at least not with sufficient certainty to overcome your irrational insistence on skepticism.

Why is my questioning of an internet article's "fact" and "explanation" irrational?

"All authority of any kind, especially in the field of thought and understanding, is the most destructive, evil thing. Leaders destroy the followers and followers destroy the leaders. You have to be your own teacher and your own disciple. You have to question everything that man has accepted as valuable, as necessary."

– J. Krishnamurti, Freedom from the Known, p. 21

dogma wrote:You must find yourself offended very frequently if you insist that people explicitly label their opinions as such. It isn't hard to determine what is an opinion, and what is not an opinion. If you need someone else to do it for you I recommend that you revisit your English lessons.

More talking down, thank you. I did not request people to label their opinions as such, nor did I expect anybody to...it's not what you say man, it's how you say it.

You seem to be making an awfully big deal out of this.

I'm stubborn, and I don't like arrogant know-it-alls....what can I say?

but for serious, I think the video is crazy, if it's a missile, I would be disappointed, but I think it could be something else.

Urban: The main reason people accept the rocket explanation is because they really don't care. This is not a UFO disgorging laser armed warriors into the capital or dishing out free psychic powers; no-one cares about some weird event in the sky unless it benefits/harms them

Frankly, I'm beginning to think you are trolling when you post these kind of threads: You know how most people will react when you post this stuff, then, like dreadnote said, you play the part of the eternal unbeliever calling us stupid for jumping to conclusions we really don't care that much about on a forum dedicated to plastic toys.

J.Black wrote:Urban: The main reason people accept the rocket explanation is because they really don't care. This is not a UFO disgorging laser armed warriors into the capital or dishing out free psychic powers; no-one cares about some weird event in the sky unless it benefits/harms them

could not have said it better myself.

J.Black wrote:Frankly, I'm beginning to think you are trolling when you post these kind of threads: You know how most people will react when you post this stuff, then, like dreadnote said, you play the part of the eternal unbeliever calling us stupid for jumping to conclusions we really don't care that much about on a forum dedicated to plastic toys.

No man, I'm not trolling, I just thought that maybe somebody would want to get into some fun theorizing with me, I mean, feth, its OT, instead I get shot down, and then dogma has to get all up in my jello, kind irked me a bit.

IG_urban wrote:
I don't spend the time to make every post of mine grammatically correct...

It doesn't take me any more time than typing in a grammatically incorrect fashion would.

IG_urban wrote:
Like most people that are arrogant, you are talking down to me, you have been since your first comment on the topic. "Clearly a misfired rocket"? That is a very arrogant and presumptuous thing to say.

Actually, I only just started to talk down to you. Its the natural consequence of the position you're taking, which amount to little more than "Cool picture, I don't know what caused it, and I'm going to badger anyone that has an idea of what did."

IG_urban wrote:
Wouldn't malfunctioning rockets show up on radar...

Yes, but the radar signature wouldn't be very large, and since it wouldn't be the sort of event one would expect it could very easily be missed.

IG_urban wrote:
...and wouldn't we have previous accounts of rockets behaving in this way?

We do.

IG_urban wrote:
Yes, China has confirmed a military connection, but if it's "clearly" a malfunctioning rocket, they haven't they claimed it to be so? Norway's incident was "explained" within days, and it didn't halt air traffic either.

Because its China, a state infamous for secrecy where its military is concerned.

IG_urban wrote:
Why is my questioning of an internet article's "fact" and "explanation" irrational?

Questioning is not by its nature irrational, but continuing to do so when presented with a highly plausible explanation is. It also doesn't help that you basically concluded that images offered in support of that explanation were shopped; following a line of reasoning which you have been highly critical of when used by others.

IG_urban wrote:
"All authority of any kind, especially in the field of thought and understanding, is the most destructive, evil thing. Leaders destroy the followers and followers destroy the leaders. You have to be your own teacher and your own disciple. You have to question everything that man has accepted as valuable, as necessary."

– J. Krishnamurti, Freedom from the Known, p. 21

Yes, but, as my signature attests, the certainty of ignorance is just as destructive as the certainty of knowledge.

IG_urban wrote:
More talking down, thank you. I did not request people to label their opinions as such, nor did I expect anybody to...it's not what you say man, it's how you say it.

The request is the natural implication of your apology to jp400 and your treatment of me. Not to mention the bit in bold.

There's "Hey! Let's have fun theorising!" and there's "UGH YOU DON'T KNOW THAT NOW START THEORISING YOU melon-fethers"

/hyperbole

IG_urban wrote:
No man, I'm not trolling, I just thought that maybe somebody would want to get into some fun theorizing with me, I mean, feth, its OT, instead I get shot down, and then dogma has to get all up in my jello, kind irked me a bit.

So what are your theories? That something has come from a different universe to travel at roughly the speed of sound over a city then disappear? Some hitherto unknown physical phenomena? Don King's hair finally escaped?

This IS OT People will get in your face all the time here, at least when it's Dogma you get rational arguments rather than straight abuse

my theory? Chinese or Korean based testing of a new air/spacecraft. I think it would be neat as hell to find out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Dreadnote wrote:There's "Hey! Let's have fun theorising!" and there's "UGH YOU DON'T KNOW THAT NOW START THEORISING YOU melon-fethers"

/hyperbole

I don't think I went anywhere near that, I got defensive quickly, mainly due to dogma's first post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:
I don't spend the time to make every post of mine grammatically correct...

It doesn't take me any more time than typing in a grammatically incorrect fashion would.

IG_urban wrote:
Like most people that are arrogant, you are talking down to me, you have been since your first comment on the topic. "Clearly a misfired rocket"? That is a very arrogant and presumptuous thing to say.

Actually, I only just started to talk down to you. Its the natural consequence of the position you're taking, which amount to little more than "Cool picture, I don't know what caused it, and I'm going to badger anyone that has an idea of what did."

IG_urban wrote:
Wouldn't malfunctioning rockets show up on radar...

Yes, but the radar signature wouldn't be very large, and since it wouldn't be the sort of event one would expect it could very easily be missed.

IG_urban wrote:
...and wouldn't we have previous accounts of rockets behaving in this way?

We do.

IG_urban wrote:
Yes, China has confirmed a military connection, but if it's "clearly" a malfunctioning rocket, they haven't they claimed it to be so? Norway's incident was "explained" within days, and it didn't halt air traffic either.

Because its China, a state infamous for secrecy where its military is concerned.

IG_urban wrote:
Why is my questioning of an internet article's "fact" and "explanation" irrational?

Questioning is not by its nature irrational, but continuing to do so when presented with a highly plausible explanation is not. It also doesn't help that you basically concluded that images offered in support of that explanation were shopped following a line of reasoning which you have been highly critical of when used by others.

IG_urban wrote:
"All authority of any kind, especially in the field of thought and understanding, is the most destructive, evil thing. Leaders destroy the followers and followers destroy the leaders. You have to be your own teacher and your own disciple. You have to question everything that man has accepted as valuable, as necessary."

– J. Krishnamurti, Freedom from the Known, p. 21

Yes, but, as my signature attests, the certainty of ignorance is just as destructive as the certainty of knowledge.

IG_urban wrote:
More talking down, thank you. I did not request people to label their opinions as such, nor did I expect anybody to...it's not what you say man, it's how you say it.

The request is the natural implication of your apology to jp400 and your treatment of me. Not to mention the bit in bold.

I do not have the patience to separate this into individual replies again.

1. I didn't imply that you did, rather, I was meaning to imply that I often have bad spelling and sometimes grammar.

2. I have heard the rocket theory, there is a boring hum drum theory for EVERY UFO phenomena, and there are plenty of cases where they have been proved wrong.

3. I did not know that, now I do.

4. where?

5. So is America.

6. People will drink any kool aid you give them, Bush's 80+% approval rating following 9/11 is evidence of this. Just because it is reasonable at the time, does not mean it will continue to be so. Do you expect a child who walks in on his parents fething when he is 5, and is told that they are hugging, to continue to believe that as he gets older? Very off beat analogie, I know, but I don't think I ever said that the rocket explanation was wrong, I just got pissy because that is the FIRST thing that everybody started saying....

....America used to think the Iraq "War" was justifiable. Then we started to think for ourselves and question the answers that the powers at be were feeding us, I am doing the same.

7. Read JP's first post, then yours, if you cannot tell the difference in aittutude.....then I don't know what to tell you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am not looking forward to when and if Shuma comes in here....my post count is gonna skyrocket....

Might want to tone it down a touch there, you'll scare away all that fun theorizing you wanted.

Dictionary wrote:
Hyperbole is a figure of speech that uses an exaggerated or extravagant statement to create a strong emotional response. As a figure of speech it is not intended to be taken literally. Hyperbole is frequently used for humour.

I think that it's just a malfunctioning rocket like the others suggested. I doubt it would be something other than that. It's not like they're not working on new air/space craft, but if they were I don't think it would look quite like that.

Now for what this reminded me of.