Dec.30 - DNA CULTURE RESULTS‏

Dear Friends,

Paste the link if you don't receive the images/can't access the links.

http://www.carnicom.com/dna1.htm

Be Well.

David

DNA CULTURE RESULTS
Clifford E Carnicom
Dec 28 2009

I am not offering any medical advice or diagnosis with the presentation of this information. I am acting solely as an independent researcher providing the results of extended observation and analysis of unusual biological conditions that are evident.

A method of extracting DNA samples from living forms has been established. The protocol being followed is that from the Genetic Services Learning Center at the University of Utah¹. The methods have been applied successfully to human and fruit samples. Equipment to examine the internal structure of the DNA samples is not available at this time; visual microscopy techniques at relatively high magnification (~10,000x) are available.

The intial finding is that the Chlamydia-like organism under extensive study with respect to the so-called "Morgellons" condition occurs in relatively large numbers within the human DNA samples that have been studied and that it can be readily identified with sufficient magnification. This further confirms the supposition that this particular organism appears to broadly distributed within human physiology, and that its existence should not be restricted to blood sample examination. Thus far, this particular organism has been found within dental samples, saliva samples, urinary samples, red blood cells (erythrocytes) and anomalous skin filaments. The particular DNA sample examined here is developed from human saliva.

INTIIAL RESULTS :

Human DNA sample extracted from saliva. . Magnifcation approx 300x.		Human DNA sample extracted from saliva. . Magnifcation approx 300x.
The Chlamydia-like organism identified within the human DNA sample. . This photograph is taken from the original sample prior to any cultured result. . The size ot the individual organism, as reported previously, is approximately 0.5 to 0.8 microns. The limit of conventional light microscopy is. approximately 1000-2000x. Magnification approx.10,000x.		An additional representative cluster of the Chlamydia-like organisms identified within the human DNA sample. . This photograph is taken from original sample prior to any cultured result. The size ot the individual organism, as reported previously, is approximately 0.5 to 0.8 microns. Magnification approx. . 10,000x.

Secondly, the Chlamydia-like organism has been successfully cultured from its origin in the human DNA sample. The culture medium is again red wine. Most biochemical reactions take place within a specific pH range, and the chemistry of wine will become increasingly important in the understanding of why this particular medium is repeatedly favorable toward a multitude of culture developments under way. The chemistry of wine is relatively complex and eventually the various components that are favorable toward growth will require isolation and identification. It is presumed that the pH of red wine (acidic) will be one important factor to be identified within this future analysis as it takes place; a first hypothesis may be that this pathogenic form favors an acidic environment within the body. It is also reasonable to suggest the hypothesis that a shift toward increased alkalinity within the growth medium may eventually serve as an inhibiting growth factor. The current culture under analysis is approximately 7-8 weeks of age.

CULTURE RESULTS :

A culture of the DNA sample in a red wine medium. . The earlier stages of the identified pathogenic cycle are contained within this level of growth. This includes extensive development of the Chlamydia-like organism, the pleomorphic structures (tentative candidate is Mycoplasma-like) and the eventual encasing flllament structure (red arrows). The erythrocytic form is not identified within this culture. Age of culture is approximately 7 to 8 weeks. Approx. magnifcation 300x.		An additional view of the culture of the DNA sample in a red wine medium. Arrows point to the early development of the filament stage of the growth cycle. The background growth is composed primarily of the Chlamydia-like organism. The age of the culture is approximately 7 to 8 weeks. Approx. magnifcation 300x.
A focus on the Chlamdia-like organism that has developed from the culture of the human DNA sample (red circle enloses four individual structures). Magnification level approx. 10,000x.		Another. example of the Chlamdia-like organisms that have developed from the culture of the human DNA sample (red circle). In addition, the pleomorphic and early stages of the filament form (blue arrows). are also contained within this photograph. Magnification level approx. 10,000x.

Third, the DNA sourced culture that has been developed demonstrates identical growth to that which develops from the dental filament cultures.

In addition, as reported earlier, an environmental source for an identical growth cycle has been established; this is the unusual airborne filament sample that has been extensively reported on over the years. The identification of the nature of this filament sample has been refused by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Please refer to the paper entitled "Morgellons : An Environmental Source" for additional documentation on this recent development.

Lastly, It is now to be reported that the growth from the DNA culture as shown in this report is identical (to the magnification level that is available) to that of the airborne environmental sample culture described in the earlier report .

The level of congruence between environmental sampling, biological sampling, and culture developments is sufficient to merit extensive and detailed study and discussion with respect to the Morgellons condition. Additional preliminary studies also indicate that these examinations should be extended beyond consideration of the human organism.

Reference:

1. . How to Extract DNA from Anything Living, University of Utah, Genetic Sciences Learning Center, http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/labs/extraction/howto/

Dec. 30 - VIDEO: Wubbo Ockels on time and gravity‏

Dear Friends,

http://www.tedxamsterdam.nl/2009/video-wubbo-ockels-on-time-and-gravity/

Be Well.

David

VIDEO: Wubbo Ockels on time and gravity

Posted by Monique van Dusseldorp on November 27, 2009 at 10:37 am

Prof. dr. Wubbo J. Ockels is a Dutch physicist, and also the Netherlands’ original astronaut. He is a Professor of Aerospace Sustainable Engineering and Technology at the University of Delft, and tries to stimulate a mentality change among Dutch citizens.

In his mind-bending TEDxAmsterdam talk, Ockels explains how ‘time’ is created by human beings, as a way our brains can make sense of gravity. The speed of light is constant, because it is made by us: it’s the clock by which we have calibrated our existence. Based on this premise, Ockels proposes a new way to explore life in our galaxy.

Reports on his talk

• Wired UK, TEDx Diary

“The original Dutch astronaut, Professor Wubbo J. Ockels, sliced through the atmosphere of self-congratulation to give a mind-bending talk, based on his experiences in space. He started by berating the audience for pretending to understand the universe and mysteriously declaring, “I know what it is that you don’t know yet and it will change your life”. What we didn’t know, and were told, was that time is a creation of life, since it’s the only way our brains can make sense of gravity. This can be pithily put in the very post-Cartesian phrase: “I live, therefore time passes”. Such a view isn’t a new notion philosophically (Heidegger suggested being and time determine each other reciprocally), nor physiologically (which acknowledges time is a construct of the central nervous system) but it was not treated with seriousness in physics.”

• Idealize: Wubbo Ockels: De Nederlandse staat blundert
• Bizz: Ockels: Overheid stimuleert innovatie niet
• Studio ICT: Een spirituele maanlanding

And as a small bonus, here an interview with Wubbo Ockels, made at TEDxAmsterdam

Dec. 30 - Time to Revisit Falsified Science of CO2‏

Dear Friends,

If the science is false then so are the claims...Click the link if you don't receive the images/can't access ther links.


http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18343

Be Well.

David

Time to Revisit Falsified Science of CO2

Climate science is a productive pursuit with Nobel Prizes, an Oscar, billions in research funding, massive tax grabs and wealth for exploiters

Time to Revisit Falsified Science of CO2

By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, December 28, 2009

Climate science is a productive pursuit with Nobel Prizes, an Oscar, billions in research funding, massive tax grabs and wealth for exploiters. Continuation of these activities partly validated the claim the disclosed files from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) are of small consequence.

As I wrote earlier the scandal at CRU (Climategate) is diverting from the real scandal, which is the claim CO2 is causing warming and climate change. Climategate is the greatest orchestrated fraud in scientific history, but claims about CO2 are the greatest fallacy. Climategate lets those who’ve known what was happening to avoid being ignored as conspiracy theorists.

Everyone incorrectly talks about carbon when they mean CO2, which was the original focus of the claim human industrial activity was causing global warming. Theory assumed CO2 was a greenhouse gas that slowed heat escaping to space. As it increases temperature rises and it would because of increased industrial activity. This became fact immediately and challenging scientists were pushed aside. Mostly by nasty attacks from those who falsified records, rewrote historic records, distorted and misused science and statistics as the leaked CRU emails attest. Now they, their supporters, and all those benefiting, work to perpetuate the massive deception.

Selected Data and False Findings

Some of this article was presented in a 2008 piece, but the CRU revelations make a revisit important. The summary of work the IPCC represents is only that chosen by the IPCC to achieve their goal. Remember the email comments about including or excluding articles that supported their objective.

Claims now proven false include;

• an increase in CO2 precedes a temperature increase;
• current atmospheric levels of CO2 are the highest on record;
• and pre-industrial levels of CO2 were approximately 100 parts ppm lower than the present 385 ppm.

The last claim is basic to the argument that humans are causing warming and climate change by increasing the levels of atmospheric CO2.

In a paper submitted to a US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski explains,“The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false.” This means more when you know that Tom Wigley, who is the heart of the CRU gang, introduced the 280 ppm number to the climate science community with a 1983 paper titled, “The pre-industrial carbon dioxide level.” (Climatic Change 5, 315-320). He based his work on studies by G. S. Callendar (1938) of thousands of direct measures of atmospheric CO2 beginning in 1812. Callendar rejected most of the records, including 69% of the 19th century records and only selected records that established 280 ppm as the pre-industrial level. Here’s a plot of the records with Callendar’s selections circled.

Figure 1: Plot of 19th century CO2 levels
Source: Jaworowski, NZCPR Research, 20 September 2008 p.20

Selections changed the slope of the trend from declining to increasing. As Jaworowski notes, “The notion of low pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric level, based on such poor knowledge, became a widely accepted Holy Grail of climate warming models. The modelers ignored the evidence from direct measurements of CO2 in atmospheric air indicating that in 19th century its average concentration was 335 ppmv.”

Ice cores provide the historic record and samples from Mauna Loa provide the recent record. Both are drastically smoothed thus eliminating variability. This was done to tie in with the pre-industrial levels. Ernst Beck confirmed Jaworowski’s research in a September 2008 article in Energy and Environment and validated all the 19th century records. In a devastating conclusion Beck writes,“Modern greenhouse hypothesis is based on the work of G.S. Callendar and C.D. Keeling, following S. Arrhenius, as latterly popularized by the IPCC. Review of available literature raise the question if these authors have systematically discarded a large number of valid technical papers and older atmospheric CO2 determinations because they did not fit their hypothesis? Obviously they use only a few carefully selected values from the older literature, invariably choosing results that are consistent with the hypothesis of an induced rise of CO2 in air caused by the burning of fossil fuel.”

Pre-industrial levels were 50 ppm higher than those used in the IPCC computer models. Models also incorrectly assume uniform atmospheric distribution and virtually no variability from year to year. Beck found, “Since 1812, the CO2 concentration in northern hemispheric air has fluctuated exhibiting three high level maxima around 1825, 1857 and 1942 the latter showing more than 400 ppm.” Here is a plot from Beck comparing 19th century readings with ice core and Mauna Loa data.

Figure 2: Beck’s blended graph.
Source Energy and Environment, September 2008.

Difference in variability of the 19th century measures, ice core records and Mauna Loa are apparent. Ice core records are subjected to a 70-year smoothing average eliminating a great deal of information. For example, the Mauna Loa record covers 50 years (1958 - 2009), not enough for even a single point. Elimination of high readings prior to the smoothing makes the loss even greater. As with all known records the temperature changes before the CO2, here by approximately 5 years.

Elimination of data occurs with the Mauna Loa readings, which can vary up to 600 ppm in the course of a day. Beck explains how Charles Keeling established the Mauna Loa readings by using the lowest readings of the afternoon. He ignored natural sources, a practice that continues. Beck presumes Keeling decided to avoid these low level natural sources by establishing the station at 4000 meters up the volcano. As Beck notes “Mauna Loa does not represent the typical atmospheric CO2 on different global locations but is typical only for this volcano at a maritime location in about 4000 m altitude at that latitude.”Energy and Environment, Vol 19, No.7.) Keeling’s son continues to operate the Mauna Loa facility and as Beck notes, “owns the global monopoly of calibration of all CO2 measurements.” Since Keeling is a co-author of the IPCC reports they accept Mauna Loa without question. (Beck, 2008, “50 Years of Continuous Measurement of CO2 on Mauna Loa”

The Ice Core record

Jaworowski estimates the ice core readings are at least 20% low, which is reasonable given the CO2 levels for 600 millions years using geologic evidence.


Figure 3: CO2 and Temperature levels for 600 million years
Current level of 385 ppm on the right of the graph (Figure 3) is the lowest in the entire record only equaled by a period between 315 and 270 million years ago (mya).

Further evidence of the effects of statistical smoothing and the artificially low ice core readings are provided by measurements of stomata. Stomata are the small openings on leaves that vary directly with the amount of atmospheric CO2. A comparison of a stomata record with the ice core record for a 2000-year period illustrates the issue.

Figure 4: Ice core CO2 levels compared to Stomata over 2000 years.

Stomata data on the right show higher readings and variability than excessively smoothed ice core record on the left. The stomata record aligns with the 19th century measurements as Jaworowski and Beck assert. A Danish stomata record shows levels of 333 ppm 9400 years ago and 348 ppm 9600 years ago.

EPA declared CO2 a toxic substance and a pollutant. Governments prepare carbon taxes and draconian restrictions crippling economies for a completely non-existent problem. Failed predictions, discredited assumptions, incorrect data did not stop insane policies. Climategate revealed the extent of corruption so more people understand malfeasance and falsities only experts knew or suspected. More important, they are not rejected as conspiracy theorists. Credibility should have collapsed, but political control and insanity persists – at least for a little while longer.

Dec. 30 - Japan space agency announces proof of civilization on earth's moon‏

Dear Friends,

Click the link if you don't receive the images/can't access the video.

http://www.examiner.com/x-8698-Sacramento-UFO-Examiner~y2009m12d29-Breaking-News-Japan-Space-Agency-Announces-The-Proof-Of-Civilization-On-Earths-Moon

Be Well.

David

Japan space agency announces proof of civilization on earth's moon

December 29, 8:33 AMSacramento UFO ExaminerGregory Brewer

Is this evidence of film manipulation to deceive the public? Are there truly major structures on the Moon?
Greetings to you Lunar enthusiasts out there. We came across this new footage submitted to You Tube this morning which depicts more evidence of structures and buildings on the moon. Our crew has seen many such illustrations and mind blowing collections of recently released images of buildings on the Lunar surface which were leaked out by NASA operatives and real citizens with the aim of disclosing the lies regarding such projects. According to many of you investigative enthusiasts who have submitted information about the structures on the Moon, some of the building are ancient old belonging to extraterrestrial civilizations and others are new structures built by covert entities based here on Earth. Use your imagination on that one. Covert entities does not necessarily mean "humans as we expect them to be.

Below is an extract that accompanies this footage.


This give definitive proof that the Jaxa space agency is incorporation with NASA.
It shows evidence of film manipulation to deceive the public. Original footage has high amounts of white light and very little contrast.

I have taken the original footage and added contrast and removed some of the high brightness. This process can be done by anyone, The purpose of this process is to restore some of the true depth back into the footage.

By doing this it reveals that there is a civilization on the moon. The space agencies have for many years manipulated their images and footage they distribute to the public.

This is undeniable proof that the earths moon is inhabited.



Until later..... This is,
The Sacramento UFO Examiner

brewerg27@hotmail.com

Dec. 30 - Japan space agency announces proof of civilization on earth's moon‏

Dear Friends,

Click the link if you don't receive the images/can't access the video.

http://www.examiner.com/x-8698-Sacramento-UFO-Examiner~y2009m12d29-Breaking-News-Japan-Space-Agency-Announces-The-Proof-Of-Civilization-On-Earths-Moon

Be Well.

David

Japan space agency announces proof of civilization on earth's moon

December 29, 8:33 AMSacramento UFO ExaminerGregory Brewer

Is this evidence of film manipulation to deceive the public? Are there truly major structures on the Moon?
Greetings to you Lunar enthusiasts out there. We came across this new footage submitted to You Tube this morning which depicts more evidence of structures and buildings on the moon. Our crew has seen many such illustrations and mind blowing collections of recently released images of buildings on the Lunar surface which were leaked out by NASA operatives and real citizens with the aim of disclosing the lies regarding such projects. According to many of you investigative enthusiasts who have submitted information about the structures on the Moon, some of the building are ancient old belonging to extraterrestrial civilizations and others are new structures built by covert entities based here on Earth. Use your imagination on that one. Covert entities does not necessarily mean "humans as we expect them to be.

Below is an extract that accompanies this footage.


This give definitive proof that the Jaxa space agency is incorporation with NASA.
It shows evidence of film manipulation to deceive the public. Original footage has high amounts of white light and very little contrast.

I have taken the original footage and added contrast and removed some of the high brightness. This process can be done by anyone, The purpose of this process is to restore some of the true depth back into the footage.

By doing this it reveals that there is a civilization on the moon. The space agencies have for many years manipulated their images and footage they distribute to the public.

This is undeniable proof that the earths moon is inhabited.



Until later..... This is,
The Sacramento UFO Examiner

brewerg27@hotmail.com

Dec. 29 - A "Nobel Torsion Message" Over Norway? Part II‏

Dear Friends,

More from RH concerning the Norway spiral. Paste the link if you don't receive the images/can't access the links.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/Norway-Message2.htm

Be Well.

David

A "Nobel Torsion Message" Over Norway?

Part II







By Richard C. Hoagland
© 2009 The Enterprise Mission





The spectacular aerial display appearing in the skies of northern Norway a few days ago -- still receiving incredulous reactions from around the world -- has generated a tidal wave of speculation:

"Was it a failed Russian missile?"

"A UFO?"

"Or ... another clandestine test of HAARP (the High Altitude Auroral Research Project which, it turns out, has several not-so-well-known facilities scattered across northern Scandinavia -- a Project steeped in its own multi-layered technology, mysteries and speculations ...)?"

The curiously delayed Russian admission that it had, indeed, conducted another routine missile test on Wednesday morning (when the mysterious "light spiral from Heaven," as papers in Norway are now referring to it, appeared), did nothing to quell this "speculation explosion"; in fact, it only added fuel ....

As we reported in Part I, when initially queried by Norwegian media, the Russian Navy, and the Russian Embassy in Norway, denied all knowledge of the phenomenon -- as well as any rumored "missile tests" they may have been conducting in the same time frame and area.

Only a day later did an AP story finally appear -- quoting the Russian Defense Ministry's eventual, official statement that, indeed "a Bulava missile was launched Wednesday by a nuclear submarine submerged in the White Sea ... and its third stage suffered an unspecified failure ...." (below). The story underscored, however, that this "limited offical Ministry acknowledgement" did NOT directly link that missile failure with the growing "Norwegian Spiral" story.

Noted AP--

"... the ministry did not confirm the lights were the result of the failed launch ... but [independent] military analysts said they clearly came from the Bulava explosion [emphasis added] ...."





This very carefully-worded official Defense Ministry admission (which has been misinterpretated by America media as "confirming that the Spiral was caused by their errant missile" ...), also accurately reported by Norwegian Television, raises serious new questions about the underlying facts and context surrounding this entire, extraordinary display ....

But -- perhaps not quite as many as the sudden appearance of this even more obvious "anomalous aerial phenomenon" (below) ....







Quoting:



(MYFOX NATIONAL) - It's a bird? It's a plane? Media reports indicate that hundreds of people spotted what appeared to be a triangular-shaped UFO flying in the skies above the Red Square in Moscow.

The Daily Mail reports that two separate amateur videos were shot, one during the day and one at night, that show the same object in the sky. The UFO made its appearance on Dec. 9, the same night mysterious lights were spotted in Norwegian skies [emphasis added] ....



The same night ....



* * *



The simultaneous appearance of two "UFOs" ... the still mysterious "spiral light over Norway" -- and that same day/night -- a "massive flying triangle," floating serenely over the heart of downtown Moscow--

Both obviously linked to Mother Russia--

Can hardly be treated as "a mere coincidence" ....

However, in the meantime, back in Norway ....

Below are the official parameters of the Bulava (Russian for "Mace") ICBM (also known as the "SS-NX-30" in NATO parlance); as can be seen, it is a three-stage, solid propellant launcher, carrying as many as ten independently targetable nuclear warheads (MIRVS). The latter are housed in a "maneuverable liquid-fueled canister" (or "bus") attached to the third stage -- which separates after burnout and, by maneuvering with small thrusters, positions each warhead during coast for its own reentry ... to its own designated target.

It is the liquid fuel carried in this MIRV "bus" (atop the three-stage solid fueled missile underneath) which is the focus of attention for those now totally believing that the amazing Norway display was simply caused by "this liquid fuel ... being sprayed out in a dramatic spiral into space, as the out-of-control third stage of the Bulava missile spun out of control across the Norwgian skies" ....





Manufacturer: MITT. Launches: 9. Failures: 4. Success Rate: 55.56%. First Launch Date: 2004-09-23. Last Launch Date: 2007-11-10. Launch data is: continuing. Apogee: 1,000 km (600 mi). Liftoff Thrust: 0 N ( lbf). Total Mass: 36,800 kg (81,100 lb). Core Diameter: 2.00 m (6.50 ft). Total Length: 12.10 m (39.60 ft). Maximum range: 10,500 km (6,500 mi). Number Standard Warheads: 10. Boost Propulsion: Solid rocket. Cruise Propulsion: Solid rocket. Stage 3 Propellants: Solid rocket. Guidance: Inertial + Stellar.

Stage1: 1 x Topol'-M-1. Gross Mass: 26,000 kg (57,000 lb). Empty Mass: 3,000 kg (6,600 lb). Motor: 1 x 15Zh58A. Thrust (vac): 980.000 kN (220,310 lbf). Burn time: 60 sec. Length: 8.50 m (27.80 ft). Diameter: 1.80 m (5.90 ft). Propellants: Solid.


Stage2: 1 x Topol'-M-2. Gross Mass: 13,000 kg (28,000 lb). Empty Mass: 1,500 kg (3,300 lb). Motor: 1 x 15Zh58B. Thrust (vac): 490.000 kN (110,150 lbf). Burn time: 64 sec. Length: 6.00 m (19.60 ft). Diameter: 1.55 m (5.08 ft). Propellants: Solid.


Stage3: 1 x Topol'-M-3. Gross Mass: 6,000 kg (13,200 lb). Empty Mass: 1,000 kg (2,200 lb). Motor: 1 x 15Zh58V. Thrust (vac): 245.000 kN (55,078 lbf). Burn time: 56 sec. Length: 3.10 m (10.10 ft). Diameter: 1.34 m (4.39 ft). Propellants: Solid.



Apart from whether this Russian rocket caused the amazing Norwegian light show, given these parameters of the Bulava ICBM, the timing of its latest test raises some extremely serious political questions re the real relationship between the leadership of the Russian Federation ... and the Obama Administration.

Like:

"Why would the Russian government conduct another launch of a new, offensive missile system -- and in the immediate vicinity of Norway -- on the literal eve of the President of the United States arriving in Oslo to accept his Nobel Peace Prize?"

Or:

"How would that Russian missile ... from a submarine supposedly located some 600 miles away from northern Norway (in the White Sea region - see below) ... even be visible (according to all reports ...) from only the comparatively tiny geographical region in western, northern Norway ..?!; if a missile caused the Spiral, why wasn't it also seen in Sweden ... Finland ... even in some western sections of northern Russia itself -- in those, also-beautifully-dark, because-the-sun-never-even-rises-at-this-time-of-year ... pre-dawn skies?!"



A quick look at a polar projection of this nominal "Russian arctic missile range" reveals exactly why these are distinctly "non-trivial" questions ....





As can be seen, if the first and second solid-rocket stages of this three-stage, sea-launched ballistic missile each fired successfully (as the Russians staunchly now maintain ...), the thrust from the first two stages would have taken the rising 38-ton Bulava several hundred miles to the northeast ... and to an altitude in those first 2 minutes of flight (check the burn times for stages 1 & 2) approaching 100 miles -- more than high enough to be seen by anyone (weather permitting) over an area of literally millions of square miles ... covering northern Norway, Sweden, Finland ... AND Russia!

Why then -- if the "spiral" was simply the product of nothing more exotic than "a spectacular failure of the Bulava's third stage bus ..." -- wasn't it reported and photographed by literally tens of thousands of folks scattered across these northern nations ... home to potentially millions of curious on lookers ...?

Most (these days) equipped with inexpensive, ubiquitous cell phone cameras ..?!





A better to way to see this profound contradiction -- between the official military "explanation" (Russian and Norwegian ... with Sweden and Finland's military being deafeningly quiet ...) is to refer to a helpful 3-D visualization (below).





This is the northern hemisphere, as seen from a point in space located roughly over the latitude of Tromso, Norway (site of many of the original reports) -- at ~70 degrees N.

As can easily be seen in this projection, any Russian intercontinental ballistic missile fired from a submerged submarine located at the coordinates provided by the Russians would be visible at second stage burnout (~100 miles altitude) over a HUGE surface area underneath its trajectory (the yellowish circle) ... which would have then shifted ... northeast ... following the intended flight path toward Kamchatka ... an instaneous viewing area spanning over 1000 miles in radius!

This simple geometric reality can be confirmed by anyone equipped with a small calculator and a basic knowledge of the openly published Bulava flight parameters.

Or, if you're too lazy for that ... simply refer to this handy graphic (below) on Wikopedia:





And, for those who have trouble believing that a rocket launch several hundred miles away could be seen at all, here's an actual photograph (below) -- taken of a White Sand's "pre-dawn, solid-rocket missile test" ... from over 300 miles!





And here's another (below) -- a post-sunset launch from Vandenberg AFB, seen from San Diego, CA (about 250 miles away). The rocket here is a Boeing Delta 4 (with 4 strap-on solids for extra thrust, that burn for the first 78 seconds before dropping away).

Note how the contrail is initially dark (below the shadowed clouds), before the upwardly accelerating rocket bursts into sunlight ... still shining several thousand feet above the darkened launch pad ... and the contrail suddenly turns bright.

Note further how narrow the contrail appears, compared to the visible width of the crescent Moon (approximate 0.5 degrees across); a little trig, and one can easily calculate the contrail's own physical width ... even though it's also ~250 miles away.

The key, of course, is having that critical angular comparison ... and knowing the distance and direction to the launch -- three key parameters missing in all the early Norwegian reports ....





A closer comparison of the same launch (below) ....





After a few minutes, this initially thin contrail expands ... twisting itself into exotic and highly colorful geometries (caused by light-refracting ice crystals at high altitude - below) -- as it is also blown around by strong upper atmospheric winds.





One of the first solid (sorry ...) scientific confirmations that the "missile theory" for Norway might, in fact, be correct ... is contained in the series of published Norway images taken after the Spiral itself had disappeared--

Leaving only a strange "blue mist" hanging in the sky ... "aimed" at a brilliant white, twisted linear formation ... hovering just over the pre-dawn Norwegian horizon--



Looking exactly like the expected contrail of a solid-fueled rocket launch (closer view, circled - below)!





Here's a striking ultra-close-up (below) ....





Sure looks like the aftermath of a missile launch ....

The next test of "the missile theory" would be to determine the actual azimuth of this tell-tale contrail ... and compare that against the known azimuth of the White Sea launch site (according to the Russians) as seen from northern Norway, for the Wednesday "Bulava problem" ....

After countless hours of searching the Internet, finally ... a breakthrough--

An anonymous poster on one of the (many) Internet chat rooms that erupted after the Spiral's appearance -- someone actually doing some real science -- had managed to track down the geographical location of perhaps the most spectacular published image of this early morning apparition (below)--





Using Google Earth, this anonymous individual had then gone on to locate several daytime, matching surface shots of the unique "sawtooth range" seen prominently directly under the Spiral in the photograph ... obviously, taken from very near the Spiral photographer's location (below).





And, a Sawtooth Range close-up:





When composited together (below), the evidence was compelling:





This spectacular, time-lapse "Norway Spiral" image was NOT (as the original press reports led everyone to believe ...) taken from Tromso. Instead, the widely-circulated "Spiral Photograph" had actually, it turns out, been photographed from a location even farther north ... from a tiny fishing camp called "Skjervoy" -- located about 55 miles ("as the crow flies ...") northeast of Tromso (below).





Armed with this vital additional information, it was then a simple matter to go to back Google Maps, and plot the precise azimuth to the top of this suspicious contrail -- peaking over the "sawtooth range" of mountains seen across the fiord ... to Skjervoy's southeast (below).





The next step was to compare this result -- which read "about 21.5 degrees south of east ..."-- with the azimuth direction (~23 degrees ...) of the Russian's claimed launch-site for the Bulava ... "in the southern end of the White Sea, near Arkhangel" (below) ....





Allowing for the fact that the photographer was watching the Spiral over the top of the spectacular and jagged "sawtooth range" -- about 6 miles away from his camera -- and thus physically couldn't see the base of the inclined 1st-stage contrail on the horizon ... the ~1.5 degree northerly "error" from the actual pre-announced Russian submarine location is perfectly within the inclined ("depressed trajectory" is the technical term for the) geometry of a previous Bulava undersea launch (below)!





Here, from another anonymous post, is a 3-D recreation of this approximate launch geometry as seen from orbit (below):



--



While not super accurate (the poster -- now we know why he's anonymous -- has just triggered WWIII ... because he's launched his offensive, first-strike missile OVER the northeast corner of an independent NATO nation -- Finland!), the general geometry is "close enough for folk music"; if his launch point is moved closer to Arkhangel (as the Russian pre-launch warnings indicated ...), the launch trajectory would also take it further east -- over the isthmus between Finland and Russia ... moving it even farther away from Skjervoy.

Which is where the observed altitude comes in ....





Because of the known geometry to those unmistakable mountains SE of Skjervoy, we can now measure all the critical angular and scale parameters in the Skjervoy Spiral image -- discovering that the 0.5-degree center of the Spiral (yes, it was about as big as a Full Moon, as witnesses also reported ...) hung almost 6 degrees above the mountains ... and was therefore about 12 degrees above the true horizon.

Which meant -- if the Bulava launch trajectory was ~600 miles east of Skjervoy -- and the Spiral was (somehow ...) caused by the malfunctioning third-stage of the rocket, the Spiral would have been about ~125 miles above the Earth when visible in that striking image taken from Skjervoy.

Again -- all totally consistent with the Russian's pre-launch announcement ....

Against all this mounting evidence, however -- that it was, indeed, the Russian missile that had caused the Spiral -- was one really major flat-out contradiction:

Repeated eyewitnesses testimony that "the moving light came up over the mountain ... and then came to a dead stop ... as it began to spin out this astonishing blue-white spiral ...."

How can a "rising rocket," coasting upward on its enormous momentum (imparted by the burning of literally tons of incredibly explosive fuel)--

Suddenly ... just come to a dead stop!

Answer: it couldn't.

If that behavior, indeed, happened ... it alone would automatically rule out anything as mundane as "a failing Russian rocket."



* * *



To test this "impossibility," Enterprise had to locate at least one good video from Norway (preferably more ...); by measuring the spiral's drift -- frame to frame -- across the sky on this video, we could determine geometrically if the eyewitness reports were true ....

That ... it didn't move.

We finally located the right video -- shot by a young Norwegian military serviceman, Christopher Rakoczy, posted to one of Norway's premiere military bases, at Skjold, Troms -- which, when analyzed frame by frame, revealed the unmistakeable motion of the Spiral across Norway's pre-dawn northern skies--

In complete contradiction to the witnesses!

Here (below) are two sequential frames -- grabbed a few seconds apart--







Notice the motion of the stovepipe exhaust between frames (image left - above); the motion of the center of the Spiral is also very obvious (image - center)--

Totally undercutting -- in a stroke -- the misimpressions of multiple eyewitnesses ... with regards to the most siginificant detail of this entire amazing apparition ....

That "it stood still."

Here (below) is the overlay composite of these two revealing frames.







This elemental video frame comparison -- by unquestionably establishing that the Spiral continued to move slowly across the sky ... even as it rotated -- adds serious additional weight to the idea that, indeed--

The Spiral had been created by the out-of-control Bulava rocket ....



* * *



Case closed, right?

Of course not.

While we at Enterprise have independently proven to our satisfication that the Russians did, indeed, launch a missile from the White Sea that Wednesday morning ... and, that the tell-tale signs of that event were unquestionable captured on both Norwegian images and videos of the Spiral and its aftermath--

What we have not established by this analysis is any physical evidence that the Bulava was, in fact, directly involved in the generation of the Spiral.

The only case that we ... that anyone ... is capable of making at this point -- based only on analysis of the trajectory of the Bulava -- is completely--

Circumstantial.

While the Russians, stubbornly -- despite all their [inevitable] test telemetry -- for some reason ... continue to refuse to officially link the failed Bulava with the appearance of the Spiral ....

Could they know something we should know ...?

Like--

This--





Which, again, appeared the same night as the Spiral ... but over downtown Moscow--

Stay tuned ....