Project Blue Beam

  • 606 Replies
  • 72317 Views
*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #60 on: September 04, 2016, 03:16:17 PM »
Where exactly in your equation do you define the globe is wider at the south than the north.
Actually, what exactly do you define as a "polar circumference"? Is there not two poles?
Keeping balance in an equation means one must include all factors, so why not two "polar" circumferences?
Even wikipedia says Geodesy cant decide what Earth looks like.

Unless they are lying...
Please, no! Wikipedia cant lie!

Taken from "The Figure Of Earth" Wikipedia Page

"Modern geodesy tends to retain the ellipsoid of revolution and treat triaxiality and pear shape as a part of the geoid figure: they are represented by the spherical harmonic coefficients [(INSERT RIDICULOUS NUMBERS HERE)] respectively, corresponding to degree and order numbers 2.2 for the triaxiality and 3.0 for the pear shape."

I would have included the number in the parenthesis, but my computer did not recognize them...
Check it out for yourself, its under "Complicated Shapes" Yup, to make sure no one understands it but doesn't care.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_the_Earth

<Compelling evidence of a pear shaped Earth.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #61 on: September 04, 2016, 03:35:47 PM »
Where exactly in your equation do you define the globe is wider at the south than the north.
Actually, what exactly do you define as a "polar circumference"? Is there not two poles?
Keeping balance in an equation means one must include all factors, so why not two "polar" circumferences?
Even wikipedia says Geodesy cant decide what Earth looks like.

Unless they are lying...
Please, no! Wikipedia cant lie!

Taken from "The Figure Of Earth" Wikipedia Page

"Modern geodesy tends to retain the ellipsoid of revolution and treat triaxiality and pear shape as a part of the geoid figure: they are represented by the spherical harmonic coefficients [(INSERT RIDICULOUS NUMBERS HERE)] respectively, corresponding to degree and order numbers 2.2 for the triaxiality and 3.0 for the pear shape."

I would have included the number in the parenthesis, but my computer did not recognize them...
Check it out for yourself, its under "Complicated Shapes" Yup, to make sure no one understands it but doesn't care.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_the_Earth

<Compelling evidence of a pear shaped Earth.

Dude, the Earth is an oblate spheroid. It's slightly wider than it is high. The distortion is so slight that pictures just show a sphere.

You can cherry pick all you like, but you have decided to stop reading/listening the moment you got what you wanted.

Oh and STILL no evidence for, what was it now? Project Blue Balls?
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #62 on: September 04, 2016, 03:41:35 PM »
Where exactly in your equation do you define the globe is wider at the south than the north.
Actually, what exactly do you define as a "polar circumference"? Is there not two poles?
Keeping balance in an equation means one must include all factors, so why not two "polar" circumferences?
Even wikipedia says Geodesy cant decide what Earth looks like.

Unless they are lying...
Please, no! Wikipedia cant lie!

Taken from "The Figure Of Earth" Wikipedia Page

"Modern geodesy tends to retain the ellipsoid of revolution and treat triaxiality and pear shape as a part of the geoid figure: they are represented by the spherical harmonic coefficients [(INSERT RIDICULOUS NUMBERS HERE)] respectively, corresponding to degree and order numbers 2.2 for the triaxiality and 3.0 for the pear shape."

I would have included the number in the parenthesis, but my computer did not recognize them...
Check it out for yourself, its under "Complicated Shapes" Yup, to make sure no one understands it but doesn't care.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_the_Earth

<Compelling evidence of a pear shaped Earth.

Dude, the Earth is an oblate spheroid. It's slightly wider than it is high. The distortion is so slight that pictures just show a sphere.

You can cherry pick all you like, but you have decided to stop reading/listening the moment you got what you wanted.

Oh and STILL no evidence for, what was it now? Project Blue Balls?

Omega, please explain this video.

"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." - Proverbs 27:17

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #63 on: September 04, 2016, 03:47:01 PM »
PS. this is what "cheap" technology can already do at some mall in Dubai. Now, imagine what classified technology could do.

A lot of our technology is first developed for military purposes (satellites, internet, night vision, etc...), until it reaches a level of obsolescence and is finally used for civilian purposes.

"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." - Proverbs 27:17

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #64 on: September 04, 2016, 03:52:38 PM »

Omega, please explain this video.



I can't be sure, but my guess would be very high clouds, a faded trail from an airplane, the shadow of the Earth on the atmosphere or something else I can't readily think of.

I'd say we need more information before we can draw conclusions.

Or... is one video of a line in the sky conclusive proof of a worldwide conspiracy?

Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #65 on: September 04, 2016, 03:54:46 PM »
PS. this is what "cheap" technology can already do at some mall in Dubai. Now, imagine what classified technology could do.

A lot of our technology is first developed for military purposes (satellites, internet, night vision, etc...), until it reaches a level of obsolescence and is finally used for civilian purposes.



Oh you FOOL!

That's an augmented reality video! The people in the video look at themselves on the screen, where they see the projections that are superimposed on the live video.

THEY DON'T SEE THAT DOLPHIN NEXT TO THEM!

This is like Pokemon Go but slightly more advanced.

Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #66 on: September 04, 2016, 04:01:10 PM »
Ok, and how about the first video?
"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." - Proverbs 27:17

*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #67 on: September 04, 2016, 04:01:58 PM »
A quote- Omega, "the shadow of the Earth on the atmosphere or something else I can't readily think of."
What does that even mean during the day?
Oddly enough you ignore the point of that video, that planes disappeared behind nothing!
Lastly, stop calling people names Omega, its not scientific.

« Last Edit: September 04, 2016, 04:18:54 PM by N30 »

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #68 on: September 04, 2016, 04:15:36 PM »
Also, Omega, what's your take on chem trails?

I think it's related to project blue beam somehow, but even if it wasn't, aren't you the least concerned about the possible health risks involved?



And before you tell me chem trails are a fantasy, and that it's not government sponsored, watch the head of CIA admitting it's real.

« Last Edit: September 04, 2016, 04:18:33 PM by bbarreto »
"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." - Proverbs 27:17

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #69 on: September 04, 2016, 07:20:11 PM »
And before you tell me chem trails are a fantasy, and that it's not government sponsored, watch the head of CIA admitting it's real.


Talking about a possible remedy for a problem not everyone agrees exists is not proof it is happening.

Interesting looking line in the sky
« Reply #70 on: September 04, 2016, 09:49:57 PM »
please explain this video.



I am supposing that is early morning.  It is quite dark on the ground.

The video seems real but it could be a spoof by somebody who is familiar with the region who is filming this real event.

The line looks like it could be created by the morning  Sun being obscured by a mountain range where the video maker has positioned themselves either by accident or design so the shot is divided in two so there is a line between them, the mountain range and the Sun.    Usually when you see that kind of thing the line is at an angle and you are not under it.    The aircraft 'dissapearing' is just going from sunlight to shadow.

You can see at the beginning of the video the shadow is rotated slightly clockwise compared to at the end when it is slightly anticlockwise.  Presumably you could calculate how far away the mountain range using that change.  The shadow seems to be moving in the correct direction for it being a shadow where the sun is moving to the right in the northern hemisphere.  Sun goes right shadow moves left.

Probably you can find other videos of something similar but without having the video maker in that exact same position.

Probably if an American expert was asked they can tell us where the shot was taken and when that effect can be seen at that location.    It would only happen there on a few days per year because the sun is never in the same position each day.

So my bet is you have a fairly distant but very high mountain or mountain range and the shadow of the mountain appears on the left side.

It is fairly common to see the shadow of the land travel through the sky fairly quickly when the sun sets on flat land here in Finland, so this is similar but at right angles so the shadow moves much more slowly.

Something somewhat similar here but very cool picture.  "moon rising through the immense shadow of Hawaii's Mauna Kea volcano."

And again the moon is more obvious because the Sun is shining on it

« Last Edit: September 04, 2016, 10:48:24 PM by Aliveandkicking »

*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #71 on: September 04, 2016, 11:36:11 PM »
Wow, show me a mountain range that can cast a shadow like that.
Actually, please, tell me more about how a shadow can make something vanish during the day.
Keep your eye on the planes in the video, and once they pass that that line they disappear.
Everything you about clockwise and counterclockwise makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless Im mistaken, that line went above and behind the viewers perspective.
Prove to me, even if a shadow from some mountain range "covered" the planes, how that line could appear naturally.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #72 on: September 05, 2016, 12:04:47 AM »
What does this mean:

Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #73 on: September 05, 2016, 12:08:49 AM »
Wow, show me a mountain range that can cast a shadow like that.
Actually, please, tell me more about how a shadow can make something vanish during the day.
Keep your eye on the planes in the video, and once they pass that that line they disappear.
Everything you about clockwise and counterclockwise makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless Im mistaken, that line went above and behind the viewers perspective.
Prove to me, even if a shadow from some mountain range "covered" the planes, how that line could appear naturally.

Mate if you shine a light on something you can notice it very much more easily.  If you turn the light out it is much harder to see.

Mountain shadows are hundreds of miles long.

If you look at the shadow of a tree when the sun is behind the tree. the shadow moves to the left as the sun moves to the right.  You can see the angle of the shadow has changed in that video comparing start and end.

0.01 the shadow leans to the right.  By 3:38 it leans to the left. 


Whatever it is, it is most likely a shadow in my estimation.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2016, 12:24:22 AM by Aliveandkicking »

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #74 on: September 05, 2016, 12:37:41 AM »
It actually seems to be my first guess: the shadow of the Earth on the atmosphere.



Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #75 on: September 05, 2016, 12:59:14 AM »
It actually seems to be my first guess: the shadow of the Earth on the atmosphere.



It cannot just be the earths shadow in the usual way you see it because in those cases the shadow is at right angles to the sun and moves fairly quickly as viewed from beneath the shadow.   That shadows edge only rotates about 10 degrees in three minutes, and is more or less at 0 degrees to the Sun..   

I think it is a shadow though.   It could be created by clouds or by a solid obstacle like a mountain or plateau
« Last Edit: September 05, 2016, 01:04:41 AM by Aliveandkicking »

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #76 on: September 05, 2016, 01:30:34 AM »


It cannot just be the earths shadow in the usual way you see it because in those cases the shadow is at right angles to the sun and moves fairly quickly as viewed from beneath the shadow.   That shadows edge only rotates about 10 degrees in three minutes, and is more or less at 0 degrees to the Sun..   

I think it is a shadow though.   It could be created by clouds or by a solid obstacle like a mountain or plateau

It would *really* help to know where this video is shot.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #77 on: September 05, 2016, 06:02:04 AM »
Another glitch in the matrix


Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #78 on: September 05, 2016, 06:11:58 AM »
This one enables us to have a bit of insight into what causes these shadows.   The cause in the video could be a high level cloud .  In mountainous regions it is possible to have a totally clear sky apart from one long lenticular cloud which might account for the way one part of the sky is shadowed and the other is sunlit in the video.




« Last Edit: September 05, 2016, 06:13:29 AM by Aliveandkicking »

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #79 on: September 05, 2016, 06:20:59 AM »
https://www.metabunk.org/strange-straight-line-in-the-sky.t7873/

"Yes, looks like a crepuscular/anticrepuscular ray (they're essentially the same thing, just depends which way you are facing!)."



*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #80 on: September 05, 2016, 09:43:30 AM »
https://www.metabunk.org/strange-straight-line-in-the-sky.t7873/

"Yes, looks like a crepuscular/anticrepuscular ray (they're essentially the same thing, just depends which way you are facing!)."




Very cool!
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #81 on: September 05, 2016, 10:47:24 AM »
Wow, ooh ahh, more photos from NASA minions.
Always trying to explain things they cannot with pictures that prove nothing.
Keeping the real truth shrouded in doubt; Post as many pictures as they can to cover it up and keep you guessing.
Ever wonder why they do not touch on the subject of the planes visually vanishing?

Until they can explain that, I am unconvinced.
Please note, Omega even tried to account the line anomaly to the shadow of the earth... during the day...

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #82 on: September 05, 2016, 10:59:44 AM »
Wow, ooh ahh, more photos from NASA minions.
Always trying to explain things they cannot with pictures that prove nothing.
Keeping the real truth shrouded in doubt; Post as many pictures as they can to cover it up and keep you guessing.
Ever wonder why they do not touch on the subject of the planes visually vanishing?

Until they can explain that, I am unconvinced.
Please note, Omega even tried to account the line anomaly to the shadow of the earth... during the day...

During the night the sun can't throw shadows. Because it is night.  ::)
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #83 on: September 05, 2016, 01:10:33 PM »

Ever wonder why they do not touch on the subject of the planes visually vanishing?


Never heard of this. Videos?

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #84 on: September 05, 2016, 01:45:13 PM »
Wow, ooh ahh, more photos from NASA minions.
Always trying to explain things they cannot with pictures that prove nothing.
Keeping the real truth shrouded in doubt; Post as many pictures as they can to cover it up and keep you guessing.
Ever wonder why they do not touch on the subject of the planes visually vanishing?

Until they can explain that, I am unconvinced.
Please note, Omega even tried to account the line anomaly to the shadow of the earth... during the day...

So apparently you missed this comment?

Mate if you shine a light on something you can notice it very much more easily.  If you turn the light out it is much harder to see.



*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #85 on: September 05, 2016, 03:41:16 PM »
Much harder to see is not invisible.
Also, one side has a lot of clouds, the other has none whatsoever!
Think about it, this has to be a man made phenomenon.
Every natural explanation does not fit the circumstances.

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #86 on: September 05, 2016, 04:43:17 PM »
Much harder to see is not invisible.
Also, one side has a lot of clouds, the other has none whatsoever!
Think about it, this has to be a man made phenomenon.
Every natural explanation does not fit the circumstances.

With a very distant airplane, much harder to see might as well be invisible.  Have you really never seen an airplane lit up by reflected sunlight?  When the sunlight is blocked by a cloud or it gets to a part of the sky where the angle doesn't reflect it to you anymore, it disappears.

As for clouds, there are not many in the sky period and I DO see some on the shadowed side especially later in the video.

It looks and acts like a shadow.

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #87 on: September 05, 2016, 04:55:37 PM »
So basically N30 is arguing against the existence of large shadows.  I am pretty sure he believes things cast shadows unless that is also a conspiracy.  Maybe all the shadows we see are holograms to fool us.


*

N30

  • 592
  • I can only show you the door.
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #88 on: September 05, 2016, 05:10:50 PM »
Check the very end of the video and one will see another white object poof into existence. Right next to the line.
Heck, I apologize about the cloud statement.
Even though that does prove it is a shadow as the differences in colors are minimal, and it does not move at all!
Clearly something is amiss.
Kindly explain how swamp gas or a magnetic anomaly created this illusion.

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: Project Blue Beam
« Reply #89 on: September 05, 2016, 05:28:02 PM »
Check the very end of the video and one will see another white object poof into existence. Right next to the line.
Heck, I apologize about the cloud statement.
Even though that does prove it is a shadow as the differences in colors are minimal, and it does not move at all!
Clearly something is amiss.
Kindly explain how swamp gas or a magnetic anomaly created this illusion.
Strawman much?  Who said anything about swamp gas or magnetic anomalies?  Why should the shadow move in a short video?