Well, there's a video showing how it could be debris from a missle/rocket, but that doesn't seem to add up. If it were debris, it should only really look like a spiral from a specific angle. It looks the same from all the different pictures/videos, which would mean that it would have to be extremely far away in order to have the spiral appear the same from all the different viewpoints. The debris itself would have to be fairly large, as well. The blue stream is also very weird.

China had a spiral phenomenon a few months back, as well. If it was just a missle, the chances of the angle being perfect in both situations is quite unlikely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx8i5EfmYU4

this is what they say happened

its sure is one of the possibilities cattiwax,but that theory doesn't sit well with me,like you pointed out

Do you think perhaps it has something to do with exponentially weakening earths magnetism that is the cause of new never-before-seen phenomena

Those rockets go extremely high up, the are ment to carry nuclear warheads. They're high enough to be lit up by the sun while it's still dark on the ground (for a few more hours still at 8 a.m. this time of year).

Yes, but consider how high they would have to be in order for all the angles to have the spiral look correct. I'd be more inclined to accept it if the same phenomenon hadn't happened in China, but I don't really have any strong feelings either way as to what it is.

All the videos and photographs I've seen are from Norway, and since it's from Russia, there is a limit to how high it has to be to look like that from all angles. Norway isn't that big, mostly long in one direction, and the rocket was at one end of the long part (no "that's what she said jokes" :P).

i've seen this before!

well, mines better obv.

might be photoshoped,check the shadows etc.

:p

batman

It was this a failed russian missle..

see : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava#cite_note-25

read above,the current publicly released version seems like a cover up,..

cover up for what exactly?

A weather balloon?

[...]failed russian[...]

say no more

Correct, nothing to see here. But really, the did confirm it.

Oh god no. While aiming my DBZ reader at this picture it found a force of OVER NINE THOUSAND!

That can't be right!!

Read this in the paper today, does anyone have any good quality footage.

omg the martians!!!!

cumspray that it is

whose ?

sum cooller fan it seems
(http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1801227#pid1801227)

you're a clever one

God has photoshop.

There, I solved it.

looks like a something blue and like a spiral thing in the sky

that's it Norway you're finally going to hell for your atheism and lesbians!

talking abt atheism: http://i.imgur.com/PuOAy.jpg

what about talking about lesbians?

*not my trouble

rawr

[+] for female handball <3

+ for 2 fugly female handball players? :(

I love handball !

I love female handball. Fun to watch, and that's because of the game, male handball is no fun for some reason. Male basketball however is awesome.

Danish female team is sweet! But my all time favorite is the french goalkeeper : ]

Richardson ftw

Wouldn't call them that at all.

ye look better in that pic :P

Nyberg is cute. I remember Hammerseng being hotter tho, that is before she turned full lez.

female volleyball > *

female mud wrestling > *

Just go watch porn, unless you've got a mud fetish of course.

cg_railstyle 2 and a very high railcorewidth value. probably fired by cooller.

I'm with you.

Cooller fired his railgun at some incoming meteorite and saved the world!!!

can't be cooller, he wouldn't have had to set timescale to 0.1 to hit the thing, this was someone way more nub

nono, he set the railgun to "slow" to make it more of a challenge.

Anyone can save the world with an instant-hit weapon.

czm ?

Russia use to a significant arsenal of weaponry but since its economic collapse this has deteriorated into a huge stockpile of amazing fireworks.

its nothing.

its the european super-conducting electro-magnet forcefeild hull classified test for re-entry of atmosphere, that was announed last month

The missile almost hit a Norwegian guy in a boat :P

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&am...&tl=en

Too bad he didn't manage to record a video with his phone, he could have made good money on that clip :P

Edit:

Seems Google Translate doesn't do all Norwegian words when put together:

Lysfenomenet: Light phenomenon
Grytidlig: very early

read this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/25/magnetic_re_entry_shield/

makes more sense then a russian rocket,thank you for posting

it still would be a russian rocket, just being used for another purpose

oh..

What doesn't make sense to you? Don't you believe it was a rocket when the Russians confirmed it? Even which missile type it was.

how does it make a difference if the russians confirmed the missile type,..the sphere and the blue trail don't look like missile debris to me

its magnetic plasma from the earths magnetic feild, just like all plasma guns in games

knew it :P

I doubt it was, more stuff leaking from the rocket. The rocket hit the water somewhere. A Norwegian fisherman almost got hit by it actually.

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&am...&tl=en

i already saw that link,now where are the pictures of the object that almost hit that fisherman,or they didn't bother to check what exactly it was?

It was a rocket :P

... :)

one day it will be the skyline space shuttle coming back from mars, using the same forcefeild as artificial gravity and extra protection from solar storms letting aerogel do its job

Well,im sure your right,but how much longer will it take for the technology to become public.Im just sick of it,thats all,its all going backwards,example : concorde,electric car ,DEAD,,for what? because there isn't as much money in it(also oder reasons,but the main the power/money) Same thing goes for cancer cures( which i know for a fact they exist) , treatment pays more then cures..smartest people in the world running hedge funds ,while there are millions poor and starving not the mention the raping of nature ,..it is backwards

*end rent*

whatever :)

FOR A FACT eh?

How do you know this?

because its very obvious ? yes for a fact

interesting.

A friend of mine is doing research on a new supersonic passenger plane.
Many car companies have announced electric cars to come out in the next years.

thats very cool indeed,im curious what they come up with,..i am sure it must be economic in a sense that it holds many passengers and doesnt cost the comapy to much money on fuel etc. I hope they do good and really wish them luck.Yes car companies are starting to wake up again,that is nice to hear :)

well, they aren't that far I think. She is with the German Aerospace Institute, don't know if any companies are seriously involved yet.

So you've got no evidence that it is true?

What a surprise.

oh no,i have so much stuff on my computer regarding cancer and everything else i wrote..there are some vitamines and plants that fight cancer with success

i am now on holidays with family in australia and NZ ,when i get back in february i will uploadit somewhere and paste you the link

you prolly dont believe in anything im saying so i guess youll just have to wait till then :)

bye,...

Zeus.

I think it's aliens.


They come in to our country, take all our jobs... they pay NO tax and then the government hands them out money like there's no tomorrow.

It's political correctness gone mad.

They're cancelling Christmas, to the point where lobster went to Brazil because there's whiter people there these days.

THEY TOOK OUR JOBS

DUCKERDUUUUUUUUUUURB!

It's mysterious alright. Maybe now people will finally admit there's more between heaven and earth than you can explain with science.

heaven or sky?

the haven of diagonal high - infinity sky!

got ya.

I think :D

;;D

What? That's retarded, just because we emidietly can't explain something we should say "God did it". Makes me sad to see such stupid thoughts.

No one mentioned god!

True, my mistake. Though I still think it's a retarded statement.

so just because we can't explain something with science, doesn't mean we should claim that science can't explain everything between heaven and earth?

What?

"just because we emidietly can't explain something"

what follows?

I'm sorry I was to stupid to see what you meant the first time. ^^
I meant that just because we can't explain it with science at first we shouldn't credit it to something else instead. We should just state: we can't explain it now, but let's do further research on it.
What we shouldn't do is just say: well, we can't explain it. Let's just settle with that.

I'm not sure that's what you were saying though. =) Correct me if that's the case.

Are you/were you very religious at some point?

first memory; langhing at the concept of god in kindergarden (was a materialist darwinian at that time)

second memory; protesting going to church (schooltrip), instinctual feeling of revulsion agains indoctrination. (age 7)

third memory; arguing that the concept of "evil" made no sense (age 12)

fourth memory; realizing a need to "reevaluate all values"; I actually explicitly talked about the need for "new values" (age 15)

fifth memory; discovering nietzsche "lollolol!", had already anticipated beyond good and evil, reevaluating values, the "human all-too human" aspect of thought, the "bad air" of church etc.(age 17)

this developmental aspect is perhaps my most unique feature :}

actually might have been a bit older when i read nietzsche, age 17 or so.. only 5 y ago x)

What happened to a simple "no"? :D

are you seriously asking a philosopher that?


I hope you made time in your schedule ;)

No! I'm at work damnit! :D

there's a deapth to the question; people aren't on off this or that; i find history of development interesting when i talk to others around these issues, so might as well make avail a tiny bit of how my story went

Of course there are deapth to these questions, but why not wait for the follow up questions (if any). Why the need to always step ahead of the conversation?

I'm asking this as seriously as you might think. =) I just want to make you think about it.

because i want to guide the conversation into themes i like, obviously xD

and it's fun to guess at the future..

and in any case.. this might be an answer to whatever everyone finds it weird that i'm always "replying to myself". . . .

He answered the question in the best way, a simple "no" would have been fine but there would be no room to continue the topic.

Are these clear memories of these feelings/thoughts or approximations?

Well you know. I'm very good at narrating my life. And I know too much about false memories. I know all these problems.

The laughing at God in kindergarden is very vivid because it was the first conception I formed of God at all - and it's a ridiculous image; quite literally what someone who believed in it at that age would tell another when asked "who is that?" - "a man in the sky" etc.

I'm also sure that I had this atomistic void conception of the world at the time because I remember fooling my friends into thinking they could dig up lava in the sandbox. And I remember having this quite accurate sense of proportion, in relation to how impossible it would be, how long it would take, the distances involved etc. In this view the sky is so obviously just the sky.. etc.

One might say I always knew about the "pale blue dot". And it's the same with the Darwinian conception. I've *always* known it. Upon hearing it explicitly it was already obvious, as if i already knew it. I never learned these things, it was just there. Could be anything you know. Watching Discovery channel or whatever.

I'm not so sure about the age in relation to the other things. I have a poor memory. I know I protested against church at least three times, and that this was during primary school. This was "an issue" with my mom, teacher etc. (I never had a problem when they read from the bible - nice stories..)

About evil the tale i told there is the short version. Though I was always smiling and a happy child, I was in a way an ice cold child - extremely rational. Not necessarily in a logical way, step by step thinking etc. But impartial and unemotional in thinking and deciding on issues. (never thinking such things as "my mom is right", "my dad is stronger", "my team will win" etc. just because of the emotional attachment).

There's always the gap between knowing something and explicitly coming to state it and talk about it. I always tried to excuse people who were evil - I never bought into the concept itself; I knew there was an intention behind even "evil" acts. The feeling of disgust or anger never got in the way of judgement.

I knew even Hitler had his reasons. The image of the sage was always within me. I'm not sure how it got there. Some wise man with a hood speaking his mind in the marketplace among the people in some greek setting - the socratic idol. It was easier for me to lay blame on "stupidity" and "ignorance" than evil. Instinctively shifted the blame from Hitler to the masses (who I realized, in the grounded way that children realize thing, were you and me, and anyone).

So when I was coming to argue that there was no evil, this was more of a first realization that, "wait a minute.. the language i've acquired does not fit with my thoughts about the world", or some such. Early on I saw the need to uproot much nonsense.

And talked with my mom about it, and I think this was around when I was 12. It was right after I had some uncanny moments where I wondered if people were robots, or if I was somehow the center of some conspiracy like in the truemanshow or - very brief considerations of that kind, lasting maybe a week or so. The whole solipsism way of thinking. (prolly a hint into my psyche)

All of this is muddled in my head though. I really have a poor memory. Towards the end of primary school, (12 or so) I remember wondering if I was a psychopath. I had this detached attitude. I remember thinking that I wouldn't become a criminal because it was too risky compared to the benefit (and i allowed myself to reason this way always, it was rational, it was all anyone could strive to be).

At the same time i've always been empathic and feeding ants and such things quite opposite to any real psychopath. I realized this, and tried to find some other way to rationalize who i was. (and i've always wondered how I would persuade a psychopath to let me live - some kind of rational explanation for the value of life)

In hindsight I think this early development and the anxieties reflect very much of modern thought, that i went through at an early stage. The kind of egoistic rational mindset I had at 12 or so is reminiscent of the kind of Ayn Rand (don't scream! i've not read her, but it's the feeling I get) early response to Godless world.

Only first when i started consciously thinking did i realize how deep the rabbit-whole was. Explicitly wondering about evil and its place in vocabulary immediately presented the problem of value.

At first I tried to reach for the opposite of "evil" which was ignorance in my case, which became then, intelligence, talent etc. and i explored this through competitive taekwondo, and gaming.. what made some better than others? But simultaneously as I went into the psychology and nature of mind etc. the problem of consciousness presented itself.

I realized that evil was a concern because of pain, and anguish and such things. Immediately i went for the utilitarian trap of trying to measure pain against happiness, and i knew i needed a theory of consciousness to understand how this should be, and if this could be done.

The problem of value then presented itself from this latter consideration. being young and flexible i quickly moved through that "trap" and realized that the conscious ideal could be anything. I also had an instinctual revulsion against treating pain as the all-evil singular.

I knew all-too well about the "unhappy socrates vs happy pig", even though I didn't know how to phrase it that way. It was part of the image of the saint, sage, etc. that truth was not something simply pleasurable.

And i'm not sure about the timeline of all of this. I know that I found Kurzweil and the "transhumanist movement" fairly early on, and loving those ideas. And also that i went through most modern spiritual gurus over one summer holiday. I already had the psychological and philosphical immune system when i encountered these ideas. And I think I got these ideas around 2001 or so..

So I think this is a fairly continuous development from I was born. With the early development up til i was a teen being a rehash of old stuff and coming into my own and the present age at around age 14-15.. And then of course when i'm 17 or so finding Nietzsche, and him opening 10000 windows in my head, telling me about the real greeks and that there is such a person as "kant" and "goethe" and "voltaire" and "napoleon" etc. xD

cool story, bro

One might say i'm lagging behind myself. I've always been ahead of my explicit thinking. I'm not sure how to explain how this is. But for instance in the case with evil - i always knew this. And the conscious "traps" that i went into were kind of superficial traps. As if they could trap me momentarily and in some thought, but the force of it couldn't sustain it because other considerations were too pressing. Always the feeling of dots unconnected. ;)

This was also the case with Kurzweil and especially modern gurus that I nearly skimmed through at a period in my life. I entered a new thinker every day and tried to see the world from their perspective. And I kept moving through people like that for a very long time. Trying them on like suits.

Cool story bro.

I don't remember anything like that, I just don't remember ever believing in God (even though I went to a church school/nursery from 3/4 and had to pray everyday) etc.

And do you value these kinds of questions?

One thing that does not come across well in words is the significance I attach to these "religious" questions. The kind of feeling that I had realized something momentous. That people walked around with this "error" of "evil" and similar errors seemed (and still seems) deeply significant to me.

I think one way to react is to scoff it off and be done with it. I always saw it as a deep error and a significant problem that had to be faced.. I've tended not to say anything - what's the point of offering them a kind of absurdism in the guise of rationalism? People take a kind of sadistic pride in that; i'm sure you've noticed.

I'm starting to get through the intermediary stage. There's so much unexplored potential.

I don't have any feelings of revelation for such questions & answers.

It's more like my world view evolved as my knowledge expanded. That is there hasn't been any drastic change that could cause a revelation of significant change in perspective.

Whether I value these questions is trickier to answer and depends on the context obviously.

Here's an example of someone at the point where "selfishness" becomes an issue. (this guy also struggled, a few vids ago, with thinking he was some sort of sociopath)

It's interesting that there are a lot of (mainly) Americans on youtube that have recently lost faith. Many seem to figure it out in their teens or so, and by the time they start posting video's they're still in the process of figuring out "what now".

It's interesting that they all more or less go through some stages. And they all have their particular solutions; some get philosophical, some get "logical", some bash on religion, some go spiritual, some get depressed, etc. Every change has a certain regular dynamic to it; you can recognize the different types.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKJBsF1x_rU

"and it started to become very clear to me that i've never been the kind of person that loves everyone"

Or look how much this dude changed: from this to this

And this is just two examples. You have the "newatheists" and you have the "newage" people, usually all coming from the same kind of place.

no.

You just hate LSD.

And DMT.

I won't even take tylenol.

Afraid of the truth!!

If it were truth, I wouldn't need help seeing it.

Okay I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready?

Microscope.

Yours is a question of perspective, but to make such a comparison would require you to equate the truth of one to be equal to the other.

I don't get it.

Truth is relative to perspective, and you are comparing the result of perspective with perspective itself. You can't have it both ways.

I'm still not getting it.

Didn't you in effect say that you didn't need "help" to see the truth?

"the result of perspective with perspective itself" If i'm tripping i may have some result of perspective without perspective - but i can take that with me out of the trip into life like what you see in a microscope is visualised in terms of normal vision.

??

If you need to take experiences from it to here, you clearly deem this as the base of your truth. If they were both the basis of truth, what need to make a decision for one or the other? In fact, the only reason you CAN deem anything true is because of your ability to perceive the way you do here and now.

Drugs alter the way you perceive, which is inherently a lie.

so wearing glasses is a lie?

Hahaha, didn't we talk about this before once? What nick did you use before?

In any case. What if I suddenly had x-ray vision, or infra-red; there could be a million such alterations that i could coherently recognize to be real along-side the normal-everyday perception that i usually use. It could even temporarily block out my color-vision while i was on that trip. The whole point here is that as you twist your perception one way or another, you can dig up information that is neutral to the perception itself. It's not like if you realize something on marijuana, some invention for instance; it's not necessarily the case that the thought it useless to the way you normally percieve realiy. A drug could alter your way of thinking in the same way as i talked now about perception. There's a reason why different people with different abilities can unlock different parts of reality, and come back and explain them. The fact that you don't necessarily need to ever see through a telescope to picture to yourself the stars doesn't mean that on the whole - with out limited capacity - we don't need such tools to get to know the truth. It can take too long or whatever to explain through the normal way. A short-cut, if you will. (and enough short-cuts leads the way to impossible-to-reach-for-finite-human-places)

I'm Vedic, and I do remember something along these lines. =P

You can't have an opinion on a physical event. You only know that one event is different from the other because you have the physical world to bind logic to. If a microscope could change your perception, you give ultimate power (and ultimate truth) to the physical world.

Oh hi. :D

Still don't know what you mean though. What do you mean give ultimate power to the physical world?

If i say that there are kinds of information found in nature that you cannot (plausibly) invent/imagine by yourself but have to find? You constantly have to change your perception to fit phenomena. The abstract "knowledge" of things in general depend on the fact that you can designate thing by shadows, by abstractions like "my house".

(the detailed "truth" about my house, the detail and so on, can only be accesses on inspecting the house in a certain state of mind; that i now only have a memory of it does not negate its truth - if it did we wouldn't know anything except the extremely limited now)

I'm saying that you're using the truth of the physical world in order to describe truth.

String theory may be correct, but we will NEVER be able to observe a string.

Well I could just as easily use string theory in my example; in fact, it's a good one.

The fact that you have to spend so many years to realize why a "string" is a good description of what happens at a fundemental level, is no argument against it being real.

When i say that you "come back" from some experience, i mean this in the most broad sense. For instance, some people have the "mathematical" brain to be able to "see" the strings. Some don't.

My point is that no matter if we use a telescope, or drugs or spend years learning to deal with 11 dimensions, the information we come back with to our every-day consciousness does not need to be false.

I don't know in what way you use "observe".. I think my point all along is that this word can be, and is in fact, always stretching.

Like we "stretch" our limits of observation to include telescopes and mathematical realities (and maybe psychedelic experiences?), we extend the notion of "reality" alltogether.

In any case, i'm not particularly obsessive about "correspondence theory of truth", where you fit a description to a reality. Nor do care much for "objectivism" and "materialism" as traditionally concieved.

My point here was rather this limited argument i just made.

funny riddle time:

What do you need to see the stars up close?
What do you need to see the water surface from a submarine?
What do you need to look into a person's stomach?
What do you need to to see through a wall?

You need.. atoms! no wait.. the brain! no wait.. information!

Left out some information :/

You have to answer each question seperately.

I know! the transcendental "I"!

so answer is

I
I
I
I

Which makes a line! so the answer is.. vertical!

or maybe the super-I... super-ego!

it's four-I's!

seperately.

First one is a telescope and so on ;)

persicope, satelite image, some kind of camera, ... lots of things! i'm too impatient!

I guess I fucked that up :/

Works much better when talking and asking the question one by one.

Then it usually goes:

"telescope"
"periscope"
"endosscope"
"I have no idea"

Then I say "window" and everyone laughs, has a good time, runs around naked in the woods, world peace is achieved, etc.

hehehe, i was thinking x-ray on that last one xD

What if it's a glass wall?

meanie :<

what if there isn't even a wall. I'm freaking out man

He's told us there is a wall, but he could be telling a lie. He's already proven himself a trickster

hihi,as a matter of fact,when we close our eyes our brains automatically started producing DMT :P

if yall wish to start thinking abit out of the box and don't want to make to much of an effort of it,then try the likes of Bill Hicks,he is my favourite funny man :) and he will open your eyes

much love and light to you wonderful souls :))

its just a ride :p

I know where you are coming for,and i know it has nothing to do with religion.

You are infact correct

To all ignorant fools,take acid or astral project and come back to this thread :D

Hahaha. Yeah. Take acid. Come back. :D

Or should i say; RETURN. xD

Yeah ignorant fools lol why don't you rub crystals on your nipples and then try and argue that it's not aliens faggots lol x

mail

I...

.. you win this round.

heh you little joker :p

but seriously,you dont have to take acid,try googling OBE ( out of body experience) or astral projection ,its not that hard really..

like have you ever had sleep paralysis (i think we all experience it at least once in our life time) and you think that was a bit freaky,then you are in for a ride :)

it is coollers failed air rocket

I was about to + you but then I figured that there's no such thing as cooller failing.

[+]

cooller does a terribly epic fail 4/5 matches tbh, but turns it back again in most cases

cosmic baseball

mashed enchiladas

spaceballs

This is a strogg teleport, we are doomed!

damn i thought it was the ghetto bird chasin' me trhough tha hood again. Safe for now