If you find yourself thinking the same thoughts as The Comedian, seek professional help immediately. Alternately, seek a single malt scotch, and bask in the glow...
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 12/10/2009 11:30:18 AM PST by JoeProBono
Turns out they're not "out there" after all. Those UFO sighting in Norway this morning weren't actually UFOs -- just a Russian missile test gone wrong.
The Russian Defense Ministry admitted today that its Bulava intercontinental missile failed a test launch, following reports of unusual lights in Norway that caused an influx of UFO sightings.
Russia's submarine-based Bulava (Mace), which is designed to carry multiple warheads up to 5,000 miles, failed its 13th test launch, something Alexander Khramchikhin, chief analyst at the Institute of Military and Political Analysis in Moscow, called "a catastrophe."
"Billions of dollars have been flushed down the drain," he reportedly said.
A Defense Ministry spokesman said in a statement that the missile failed in its third stage, which caused an odd swirling light to appear to Norwegian scientists observing the area near the White Sea.
Truls Lynne Hansen, head of Troms Geophysical Observatory in Norway, said that missile launches are commonly observed from Russia, but "normally we see the second stage of the rocket burning then it disappears. This was something very unusual."
Tandberg also commented on the influx of calls claiming a UFO sighting: "I think it was clear to most people that it was not a UFO, as most people define a UFO. Of course everything is a UFO until you know what it is. But most people think about UFOs as aliens and things like that, that was something that came up very early but not later."
Bulava intercontinental missile failed a test launch
Another “Black Screen of Death” story.
So where are the “successful” tests and what is their ratio to “failed” ones?
You seem to know very little about how systems development in aerospace works, based on the pattern of your assertions.
You don’t stage a hundred failures to have 1 or 2 successes. You need to have confidence if your system works or not and what the reliability rate is.
OR...
If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance...
Baffle them with bullsh!t!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN_y5r7vHio&feature=related
not the first time - see video 2006. watch right through, speed and light adjustments, music ok too.
“OK, I see what you mean.
That makes sense if the image is basically a time exposure capturing every event from launch to expiration of the booster(s) of all stages.
You’re asserting, though, that this crazy-a$$ missle’s trajectory, spinning like a top, actually made it into low earth orbit where gravity didn’t deform the perfectly circular spiral swirl resulting when the nozzle locked hard to one side and expended the remainder of its fuel, right?
Seems a miracle that it made it into space, considering the deformation of flight path apparent from lift off onward. Also, there is no downward drift to the background spiral which one would expect if the expelling body was still in motion, either following a sub-orbital trajectory, or falling to earth.’
Hot dang! I was just thinking the SAME thing!!! ;)
If you find yourself thinking the same thoughts as The Comedian, seek professional help immediately. Alternately, seek a single malt scotch, and bask in the glow...
They should take up performance art, though it's a bit expensive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.