Was the Chelyabinsk Meteor engaged by a UFO and shot down?

[Semjase]

Is there something to the possibility that the meteor could

have been shot down, they have to look at all the evidence

and get to the bottom of it, there's lots of photographic evidence

and eye witnesses so the task can't be that difficult.

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/paranormal/2013/02/which-russian-meteor-conspiracy-theory-sounds-best-to-you-

Edited February 20, 2013 by Semjase

[Moontanman]

Is there something to the possibility that the meteor could

have been shot down, they have to look at all the evidence

and get to the bottom of it, there's lots of photographic evidence

and eye witnesses so the task can't be that difficult.

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/paranormal/2013/02/which-russian-meteor-conspiracy-theory-sounds-best-to-you-

 

 

What could you have used to shoot it down? What about the fragments?

[Semjase]

What could you have used to shoot it down? What about the fragments?

 

There's photographic evidence to support this hypothesis

the rest is anybody's guess, without more evidence.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_OxMaJPiC8

[ACG52]

So the ufo shot down the meteor.

 

[Semjase]

So the ufo shot down the meteor.

 

 

2 different cameras filming the meteor just before it explodes

show the same unidentified object approaching the meteor

from the same angle. The other camera view can be seen on

this thread on post # 32, then you decide.If you get enough

original data from a number of cameras showing the same

unidentified object approaching from the same angle then

chance of fraud disappears to nothing. Then you have

an unexplained mystery.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Semjase

[swansont]

We got it with our gravity weapon. Fortunately, we leave this tractor beam on full-time and have 4*pi coverage for the planet.

[ajb]

I am just glad that SHADO are on top of these things

[Ophiolite]

There's photographic evidence to support this hypothesis

the rest is anybody's guess, without more evidence.

What do you think the video shows that constitutes evidence for the shooting down of the meteor?

 

What do you mean by 'shooting down'? The meteor, apparently, was on a collision course with the Earth. It did collide. What did 'shooting it down' change about that?

 

How could an object with the level of kinetic energy is possessed be 'shot down'?

 

Please address each of these points.

[Phi for All]

I think the evidence points to this idea being shot down, most likely with a high-definition reality accelerator.

[Semjase]

2 different cameras filming the meteor just before it explodes

show the same unidentified object approaching the meteor

from the same angle. The other camera view can be seen on

this thread on post # 32, then you decide.If you get enough

original data from a number of cameras showing the same

unidentified object approaching from the same angle then

chance of fraud disappears to nothing. Then you have

an unexplained mystery.

 

Here's video footage of the other camera showing the same unidentified object approaching

the meteor from the same angle

 

 

 

 

 

 

What do you think the video shows that constitutes evidence for the shooting down of the meteor?

 

What do you mean by 'shooting down'? The meteor, apparently, was on a collision course with the Earth. It did collide. What did 'shooting it down' change about that?

 

How could an object with the level of kinetic energy is possessed be 'shot down'?

 

Please address each of these points.

 

"shooting down" I'm quoting a term used by another report.

 

In reality it appears from the 2 videos an unidentified object

intercepted the meteor and caused it to explode.

 

Unless the video's are faked what other conclusion

could you draw?

Edited February 21, 2013 by Semjase

[pwagen]

Unless the video's are faked what other conclusion

could you draw?

Reflections in the windshield?

[Semjase]

Reflections in the windshield?

 

The problem with that is the first camera was stationary,

it doesn't seem plausible considering the footage, both

cameras producing the same moving reflection?

[pwagen]

The problem with that is the first camera was stationary,

it doesn't seem plausible considering the footage, both

cameras producing the same moving reflection?

Sorry, I totally missed the first video. To me, however, the shapes of the "UFOs" aren't even the same in both videos. In the first video, it still looks like something on the glass of the camera. Smudges or something. Especially since the "UFO" is in two places at once, and it doesn't move from either spot.

[Semjase]

It will interesting to see how far this story goes.

 

http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/a-meteor-falls-and-the-russian-character-comes-out/

[Externet]

Better scenes of the same above:

 

-------> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=0cT8vZ-7vxQ

[Semjase]

I've done the math and there's something drastically wrong with

numbers on the meteors explosion energy.

 

meteor mass = 9,000,000 kg

 

meteor velocity = 17,000 m/s

 

1 megaton of TNT energy equivalency = 4.184*10^15 joules

 

blast equivalency in megatons according to

nuclear monitoring stations = 30 megatons

 

Total energy of blast = 30*4.184*10^15 J= 1.255*10^17 joules

 

Total energy of the meteor = .5*9,000,000 kg * (17,000 m/s)^2 = 1.3005 * 10^15 joules

 

The energy numbers are out by a factor of about 100

 

The blast energy is 100 times the meteor's energy

 

This is evidence that there had to be an outside energy source

which supports the UFO theory.

 

I was looking at the Tunguska blast energy equivalency numbers by mistake

the energy numbers do match provided the estimated mass of the meteor

is correct.

 

These 2 web pages support these numbers

 

 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/russia-meteor-blast-largest-detected-nuclear-monitoring-system-224151086.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Sulawesi_superbolide

Edited February 22, 2013 by Semjase

[swansont]

Semjase, on 21 Feb 2013 - 17:54, said:

blast equivalency in megatons according to

nuclear monitoring stations = 30 megatons

 

…

 

This is evidence that there had to be an outside energy source

which supports the UFO theory.

No, it's evidence you have the wrong numbers

 

30MT does not appear in either of your links; I don't know from where you conjured it. The wikipedia entry puts it at 500 kilotons, with slightly higher mass and speed.

[SamBridge]

I've done the math and there's something drastically wrong with

numbers on the meteors explosion energy.

 

meteor mass = 9,000,000 kg

 

meteor velocity = 17,000 m/s

 

1 megaton of TNT energy equivalency = 4.184*10^15 joules

 

blast equivalency in megatons according to

nuclear monitoring stations = 30 megatons

 

Total energy of blast = 30*4.184*10^15 J= 1.255*10^17 joules

 

Total energy of the meteor = .5*9,000,000 kg * (17,000 m/s)^2 = 1.3005 * 10^15 joules

 

The energy numbers are out by a factor of about 100

 

The blast energy is 100 times the meteor's energy

 

This is evidence that there had to be an outside energy source

which supports the UFO theory.

 

I was looking at the Tunguska blast energy equivalency numbers by mistake

the energy numbers do match provided the estimated mass of the meteor

is correct.

 

These 2 web pages support these numbers

 

 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/russia-meteor-blast-largest-detected-nuclear-monitoring-system-224151086.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Sulawesi_superbolide

if it was fragmented some of it's energy would be lost from pieces burning up in the atmosphere. It is completely natural for meteors to explode on their own from sudden heating due to atmospheric friction.

Anyway, I like alternative news sources when it comes to politics, but when it comes to science, I'm not so sure about them.

Edited February 22, 2013 by SamBridge

[Moontanman]

Is there something to the possibility that the meteor could

have been shot down, they have to look at all the evidence

and get to the bottom of it, there's lots of photographic evidence

and eye witnesses so the task can't be that difficult.

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/paranormal/2013/02/which-russian-meteor-conspiracy-theory-sounds-best-to-you-

 

Semjase you have to ask why would a UFO want to shoot down the meteor?

 

Meteors of that size rarely if ever do much in the way of damage, the damage this meteor did do can be explained by it's mass and speed no ufo is necessary and then there is the question of how much energy would it have taken to explode this meteor and what would the effect of that had on the ground.

 

I may not have the maths skills to show it but my instincts tell me that every would have to had gone someplace and such energy would only have made the explosion worse.

 

But logically you would have to ask why the benevolent aliens did simply change the meteors orbit before it got close to the earth so it wouldn't hit at all.

 

We could have detected it before it got close to the earth if we had the infrastructure to do so I would have to assume aliens capable of flying around an incoming meteor (that would be very difficult to do in terms of energy expended if nothing else) would be capable of shooting it "down" well before it entered the earths atmosphere...

[Semjase]

Semjase you have to ask why would a UFO want to shoot down the meteor?

 

Meteors of that size rarely if ever do much in the way of damage, the damage this meteor did do can be explained by it's mass and speed no ufo is necessary and then there is the question of how much energy would it have taken to explode this meteor and what would the effect of that had on the ground.

 

I may not have the maths skills to show it but my instincts tell me that every would have to had gone someplace and such energy would only have made the explosion worse.

 

But logically you would have to ask why the benevolent aliens did simply change the meteors orbit before it got close to the earth so it wouldn't hit at all.

 

We could have detected it before it got close to the earth if we had the infrastructure to do so I would have to assume aliens capable of flying around an incoming meteor (that would be very difficult to do in terms of energy expended if nothing else) would be capable of shooting it "down" well before it entered the earths atmosphere...

 

If the photographic images are authentic then it appears that the meteor was engaged

by a UFO. Aliens having highly advanced technology seem to have time travel abilities,

maybe they knew the outcome of the future if they didn't cause the meteor to explode

at a higher altitude, it might have of led to more destructive consequences. Aliens

always seem to want to attract attention to themselves maybe they knew of all these dashboard

cameras in vehicles and could therefore stop destruction and bring attention to themselves at the same time.

 

Here's video footage of a possible UFO near the path of the

meteor fly over.

 

 

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

Edited February 22, 2013 by Semjase

[Moontanman]

The photo graphic evidence I've seen so far would need to be analyzed quite a bit before i would entertain the idea that it is footage of anything but lens flares... at best it is a blob that showed up on camera for a second or so, not exactly a screaming vindication of aliens intervening in the impact...

Edited February 22, 2013 by Moontanman

[Semjase]

The photo graphic evidence I've seen so far would need to be analyzed quite a bit before i would entertain the idea that it is footage of anything but lens flares... at best it is a blob that showed up on camera for a second or so, not exactly a screaming vindication of aliens intervening in the impact...

 

When it comes to the blob on the last video it would be interesting to understand what the

Russian guys are talking about, if they were talking about the blob or not? After all the images

are analyzed barring any new evidence and was found that it was a UFO that intercepted the

meteor, it will be dealt with like any other UFO story it will never be officially acknowledged

or accepted in mainstream circles. Could this be the straw that breaks the camels back to

finally getting official acknowledgement of the existence of extraterrestrial craft?

[Moontanman]

When it comes to the blob on the last video it would be interesting to understand what the

Russian guys are talking about, if they were talking about the blob or not? After all the images

are analyzed barring any new evidence and was found that it was a UFO that intercepted the

meteor, it will be dealt with like any other UFO story it will never be officially acknowledged

or accepted in mainstream circles. Could this be the straw that breaks the camels back to

finally getting official acknowledgement of the existence of extraterrestrial craft?

 

 

I am going to have to say no on this one, it is far to unclear, it would take quite a bit more than this to even interest researchers, an blurry blob is not evidence of anything but a blurry blob...

[Externet]

Correction : The crater on fire at post #15 has no relation to the meteorite.

 

-----> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2202202/Karakum-Desert--Giant-hole-known-The-Door-Hell-40-YEARS.html

Edited February 22, 2013 by Externet

[Semjase]

An expert in the field of meteors say if the meteor

would have exploded closer to the Earth there could

of been a 100,000 causalities this would give benevolent

aliens a reason to intercept it and cause it to explode at a

higher altitude. This interview is very interesting and informative.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8bIHRxYA_E