Russian Chelyabinsk meteor-to-ground connections


I see two or three possible connections in these videos.  Care to speculate on what is causing this?

Video #1

The connections take place between the 0:45 and 0:50 marks.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FIRST VIDEO

tn_A1ctn_A1-redctn_A2ctn_A2-redc

Video #2

Two or three electrical connections can be seen between the 5:20 and 5:31 marks.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE SECOND VIDEO

tn_B3ctn_B3-redctn_B7ctn_B7-redc

Video #3

This is another video that shows a meteor-to-ground connection. The fireworks start at 4:35. The area begins to brighten, then at 4:37 it starts to darken, then at 4:38 it starts to brighten again a whole lot.  Later, still at 4:38, it starts to darken again. At 4:39 it starts to brighten again tremendously. Later, still at 4:39, there is a meteor-to-ground connection with a (z-?) pinch.  This connection continues to expand, taking up nearly half the sky line, until at 4:40 the other end of the connection finally comes into view.  The connection tube begins to narrow until at 4:40 the connection is broken and the area begins to darken again. By 4:41 the whole area is quite dark. Then, still at 4:41 there is a slight brightening which continues into 4:42 and then it starts to grow dimmer again. The whole area becomes dark again except immediately around the meteor (still at 4:42.) The area remains dark while the meteor glow is reduced to mere embers. An 4:43 the area begins to become bright again as the glowing embers fly on until they are extinguished and the area is again illuminated by the Sun. To follow this play-by-play, you’ll need to quickly pause the video at each frame.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE THIRD VIDEO

tn_C1ctn_C2c

Video #4

At 0:09 the Sun is fully out-shined and the meteor is above the street, then the bolide brightens, then dims, them brightens again. Then at 0:10 Kazaam! A meteor-to-ground connection. I won’t give a play-by-play on this. Just pause the video to see the individual frames. The three screen captures that follow the video show that light builds from the ground and then shoots upward towards the meteor while light builds around the meteor and then shoots downward towards the ground, until the two connect, forming a pinched column.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FOURTH VIDEO

tn_D1ctn_D2ctn_D3c

So there you have it.  FOUR videos showing a meteor-to-ground connection.

To me, these columns are reminiscent of a current of electricity, a plasma discharge.  The pinched form in particular (the z-pinch) is a dead giveaway.  Is there a more conventional explanation for this?

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

About these ads

13 Comments

  1. It is interesting that absolutely no one will touch this subject with a ten foot pole. That I know of, James McCanney hasn’t said a peep, nor have the Thunderbolts guys. Besides myself, I’ve only seen one other man speak about the possibility of this meteor having electrical variables. I spoke my mind on this topic on some science web site and was ridiculed. (But what else is new?) Could it be that the Plasma Universe and Electrical Universe people are afraid of speaking up? Or are they still preparing their papers on the plasma perspective of the meteor’s destruction? Or could it be that no one sees the signs of electrical destruction? Has the non-electrical models so clouded everyone’s vision that the tell-tale signs are just ignored? Is no one seeing the forest for the trees? The silence is baffling. Heck, even Richard Hoagland hasn’t said a word! I expected him to come out by now with some hyperdimensional model perspective on the meteor, but no such luck. And Tom Bearden’s been silent, too. No articles on how scalar interferometers took out the meteor…

  2. This is another video that shows a meteor-to-ground connection. The fireworks start at 4:35. The area begins to brighten, then at 4:37 it starts to darken, then at 4:38 it starts to brighten again a whole lot. Later, still at 4:38, it starts to darken again. At 4:39 it starts to brighten again tremendously. Later, still at 4:39, there is a meteor-to-ground connection with a (z-?) pinch. (I will include a picture to show this connection.) This connection continues to expand, taking up nearly half the sky line, until at 4:40 the other end of the connection finally comes into view. (I will include a picture of this, too.) The connection tube begins to narrow until at 4:40 the connection is broken and the area begins to darken again. By 4:41 the whole area is quite dark. Then, still at 4:41 there is a slight brightening which continues into 4:42 and then it starts to grow dimmer again. The whole area becomes dark again except immediately around the meteor (still at 4:42.) The area remains dark while the meteor glow is reduced to mere embers. An 4:43 the area begins to become bright again as the glowing embers fly on until they are extinguished and the area is again illuminated by the Sun. To follow this play-by-play, you’ll need to quickly pause the video at each frame.

    New Vid Shows Meteor Connection 1

    New Vid Shows Meteor Connection 2

    Video: МЕТЕОРИТ ЧЕЛЯБИНСК

    So there you have it. THREE videos showing a meteor-to-ground connection. I will update the post with this new evidence.

    Any scientists care to comment on all this footage?

  3. The reason I haven’t said anything is simple:

    I have no DATA … yet!

    On your proposed “ground connection” for this “meteor”:

    I’d be more careful; the cheap CCD cameras that took these videos have notoriously NON-LINEAR responses to light overloads; when I initially saw this “blooming effect,” my response was–

    “Oh, great — another crappy Russian (Chinese?) dashboard camera.”

    The fact the better videos, taken with better cameras, do NOT show these effects is a definite cautionary note …. :)

    And, I don’t think that the “meteor” (which we will show in the analysis we’re currently working on for “Enterprise”) was “taken out” by a “torsion/scalar weapon.”

    If we can believe one video I’ve seen, it was a good, ol’ fashioned “interceptor missile” — obviously (to catch a Mach ~60 object!) NOT using “rockets” to catch up to and then obliterate its target!

    As to what would have happened if this object had NOT been intercepted … all the videos I’ve seen, from widely different angles, show a single bright object flying on the original track (after tthe high- altitude “explosion”) … indicating that, if left alone, the entire object would have dashed BACK into outer space … after delivering a helluva scare to the citizens of Chelyabinsk … and Putin. :)

    This (in our analysis) was “a warning shot” — delivered directly over one of Russian’s key DEFENSE centers.

    “Message” effectively delivered ….

    More when our own analysis is published on “Enterprise,” in a couple days ….

    RCH

  4. Hi, Richard. Thanks for stopping by.

    And, I don’t think that the “meteor” (which we will show in the analysis we’re currently working on for “Enterprise”) was “taken out” by a “torsion/scalar weapon.”

    Yeah, scalar interferometers is more Tom Bearden’s thing. It’s good to hear that you’re working on a new article on this event. I look forward to reading it.

  5. Shall I add a fourth video showing the apparent connection?

    Video: Russian Meteor Approaches Head On, Sonic Boom

    At 0:09 the Sun is fully out-shined and the meteor is above the street, then the bolide brightens, then dims, them brightens again. Then at 0:10 Kazaam! A meteor-to-ground connection. I won’t give a play-by-play on this. Just pause the video to see the individual frames. The following three pics show that light builds from the ground and then shoots upward towards the meteor while light builds around the meteor and then shoots downward towards the ground, until the two connect, forming a pinched column.

    I will, yet again, update the post with this additional evidence.

    Here is the EU (Electrical Universe) theory of meteor destruction via electrical discharge:

    Tunguska—the Fire in the Sky

    The Tunguska Event (2)

    New Tunguska Crater Found?

    And here is what I wrote on some other site:

    I have wondered about the revised figures of the meteor. Initially the estimate was around a 10 ton bolide. This was revised to 10,000 tons! Here is what I wonder: if we keep the original estimate, could the EU theory account fur the energy released? Obviously the standard view could not account for it, which is why they had to revise their figures. Everybody is scratching their heads wondering where in the hell the meteor went. Everybody expects large fragments to have reached the ground, yet only 50 some odd pebble-sized pieces have been found but even these have not been officially confirmed, the claim coming from one university. Also, even the crater on the lake is in dispute. There is no evidence that the meteor had anything to do with its formation.

    Now, if you bring up the possibility of the meteor being electrically destroyed, people are understandably going to have a hard time swallowing that. After all, 10,000 tons of rock disintegrating with nary a trace in a matter of seconds is a hard pill to swallow. But so is 30 Hiroshima bombs worth of energy.

    When I first heard about this meteor, I breathed a sigh of relief because my unqualified assessment was that it was electrically destroyed and I was glad to see that Earth’s electrical defenses were working and up to the task of “bug zapping” any large meteor that threatens our existence. I was pleased tn see that only localized effects (the shock wave) resulted from such events and I went to bed secure that the scientists were full of $#!+ about the possibility of global destruction being caused by a large meteor. In other words, the danger does not come from the meteor itself, but from Earth’s electrical response to it. If we could see a large rock coming from far off, and pin-point where it will strike, we could theoretically evacuate the local area, let the Earth do its zapping thing, and then the people could come back in and rebuild, saving lives.

    But then I got to thinking, “What if the revised numbers are wrong because they are only taking into account non-electrical forces? What if this meteor was, in actuality a 10 ton bolide, as originally thought? What if a 10 ton bolide produces a 30 H-bomb electrical response? Wouldn’t that mean that a 10,000 ton bolide would produce a 30,000 H-bomb electrical response?” Perish the thought. I certainly hope the revised numbers are accurate.

  6. To reduce the load time of this post, I’ve decided I’m going to replace all the embedded videos with links. I’m going to do the same with the embedded videos in my comments on this post. The screen captures will remain as put.

  7. On a hunch that by doing a YouTube search for the Russian term “МЕТЕОРИТ ЧЕЛЯБИНСК,” which I believe means “Chelyabinsk Meteorite,” I would find much more video footage of this event than what was labelled in English, I discovered a TON of footage I’ve never seen before, much of which shows a meteor to ground (and also a ground to meteor) connection. (For example, see this video compilation at 00:24-00:28, 01:57-01:58 and 02:27-02:28.)

    What I’m noticing is this: if the camera is too far from the meteor, the connection can’t be properly perceived. In such cases the background overwhelms the small meteor. If the camera is too close, the gigantic discharge overwhelms the camera with light and the connection can’t be perceived because the background (side ground) cannot be seen for proper comparison. But if the camera is not too far away and not too close, so that the light column is both large (close) but can also be easily contrasted with the blue sky surrounding it, EVERY SUCH VIDEO SHOWS THE CONNECTION. The video evidence is overwhelming.

  8. The Thunderbolt project has now made a video about this event:

    Russian Meteor—Another Shock to the System | Space News

  9. Looking forward to more information. Thanks.

  10. I personally don’t have much more to add to this topic. Some think the column is an optical illusion; others do not. Whatever it is, I think it’s pretty cool. To draw out the column more easily, I’ve been turning the images into black and white. Here are some examples:











Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 164 other followers