Interesting article, this goes deep in political areas.

Well i have to answer this..

The EISCAT toast, your absolutly right.. because its not a rocket failure neither aurora..
Because you can see it spiralizing.. and very sharp.

The facilities EISCAT are just the cause of that things im almost sure..
That thing on the sky might be also related to the secret project blue beam. search for it..

And im afraid their are testing that technology, to someday show a hologram like, UFO event to make people thing we are being in a war with them.. or something...

i cant tell more right now. But thats not a Natural thing! do the maths (distance etc.. and its right near the side of that facility..)

do you know about the Russian Pyramid floating on air, also on that someday if im not wrong? there are videos of it, from different angles, and cameras...

And a rocket never does that blue spiral so perfect and then in a circle that has inner circles in it..

Blue Beam NAsa Project?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkpT-gSSS54

Yeah I know about all of this and things like a plan involving a staged alien threat as final phase to form a government (and laws) as planned. In the end it's just some pieces of information though which you cannot really disprove nor validate. It nevertheless is an interesting topic as e.g. some predicted stages of that "plan" actually were more or less present. Still might have been a lucky guess though...

Concerning the Norway Sprial Phenomenom I actually tend to believe that it was a rocket. This explanation just fits best in my opinion as the big spiral perfectly is possible and that blueish "spiral line" also might be explainable by that. I'm no fuel or rocket export though to say anything about what actually might create that blue color...

Nevertheless I'm still open for any new info so thanks for the video...

And a stone breaking the water surface never makes ripples that perfect, does it?

Not to discourage anything on the side of pro-aliens, but you keep throwing with arguments that have a 50/50 chance of supporting either side. When will you enlighten us with the real stuff?

Bloody hell...
Why is EVERY unexplained event a part of SOMEBODY's conspiracy theory???

Evilsob its not conspiracy ok.. its true facts.. what .. do you think they would tell you that they are using new tech like Scalar Waves, to attack? lol..

its like sending an e-mail in the WW3 saying, hello we are going to attack you!

but Toast i see you are very well informed anyway... i dont know your background but i would like to ..

It's because people are creative, have too much time on their hands and often simply wish for it to be a conspiracy.

In a sense, all this speculation about some kind of greater purpose behind everything is harmless, and purely a form of entertainment.

Ahhh PHeMoX, so you mean that conspiracies are a modern form of religion...

They are modern-man's attempt to explain away the un-explainable?
(like primitive man "created" a sun god to explain the sun, because it was beyond his understanding)

@EvilSOB:
Well it would be stupid not to include recent happenings into one's conspiracy theory wouldn't it so why do you make it such a big deal? When the news about the spiral thing got around like everybody came up with their most trusted conspiracy theory. From those already mentioned here over this being the result of the latest LHC experiment to this actually being an extraterrestrial light ship...

I also don't really understand why you're so intimidated by the mere reference of such theories - did you have some bad experience of actually finding out one wasn't true you believed it in a painful way? You needn't applaude to every of them but you sound a bit rude and nerved here without an obvious reason. At least that's the way I see your recent reaction...


Well I guess there really is nothing special about my background and I guess no one is really interested in a textwall about it. I think the main point why I know so much about things like conspiracies or alternative theories is that I seem to have an unusual amount of openness. I tend to listen to one's argumentation even if the proposed results sound unbelievable or stupid. After my experience most people shut their mind when there's something that isn't compatible with their world view, morale or whatever else even before there could be done any argumentation at all. The word "conspiracy theory" seems to be one of the most powerful words which makes people shut their ears right away...

Maybe that's not unlikely as there are such huge magnitudes of bullshit floating around that it spoils those who should get some attention. To my mind people still should have a chance of being heard and not prejudiced before they even started. You also might need to have some sort of passion in order to get to know more here. I think I always had a stronger urge to think about things like what life and god is all about. To my understanding those are questions that everybody comes up with at certain times but I guess I just dug a bit more than the average guy - at least that's the only way I could explain this right now. Despite things like a cultural necessity to stick to a certain religion I just cannot understand why people would stick to e.g. Christianity...

To do some precautions: I don't want to say that Christianity is total bullshit but I just can't figure out why so many people don't come to the same conclusions as I do (and those aren't based on some blind belief but rather pure logic). Well I guess at this point this is really becoming a textwall even if it's not so much about my background so I'll try to end this here. Maybe just an example everyone of you can think over for him- / herself:

As recently I'm interested in astronomy I stumbled about a guy's homepage. He's a dedicated amateur in astronomy, works as a physicist and is a very religious Christian (yeah science and religion isn't mutually exclusive - actually I know quite some guys who fall into this category). But oh well besides stuff about astronomy and some other interesting articles he also wrote a wide field of smallish articles / comments about religion, Christianity, how to combine it with science and in genereal comments about his view. I just had to read through one of them out of interest: It was about hell...

To keep things short it was about the question of hell being just or not and that need to agree with it to be redeemed. With the appropiate quotes he showed that god is like the highest level of jurisdiction and thus hell had to be just. As he simply refused to see hell as anything lawful this gave him years of nightmares of fear. His way out of it was just odd to me and goes right into the direction of me wondering about other people's conclusions:

He started praying to Jesus that he doesn't think that hell is just and asks him to forgive him for that shortcoming as he still did forgive a sinner while being at the cross who had done way way worse things and so it should be no big deal to forgive him for his disbelief in hell's lawfulness. He then even added the wish that if hell is just to teach him about after his death...

That must have been one of the most elegant ways I've ever read of winding around in a concept one doesn't like. For me the "way out of it" is clear and I fail to see why he didn't come up with it. I won't say my solution right now but maybe somebody will find some interest in thinking about this double bind...