Hi Kent.. am looking now and mainly picking up what you already have.. + a couple of Russian pages.
Comet prophecies may indicate the Hopi blue star Kachina - see
http://www.newprophecy.net/comet.htm
Will keep looking and post if I find anything
Tabi

Yes that image intrigues me too.. looks like the images you have ( LOL somewhere ) in your archives of late of the Babylonian Sungod with wings.. the winged solar disk.. in fact it looks identical to me.
ah found it at...............  http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/marimarduk.html
The thing is : IS IT REALLY THERE or is it some magnetic imprint to alert certain  people to something. ( I use the words magnetic imprint lightly  I am not of scientific or intellectual mind )
I am sure that you have this link :
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=93191 which in turn links to two other pages in Russian .. one clearly shows a comet
but the other one doesn't seem to mention it  as far as I can see.. picture wise or the word kometa.
I reserve judgement but strange things happen of late.. will keep looking
Tabi
I have still found no other reference to the mega comet  as of  7 pm south african time.. maybe search a bit more .
 

i think this is the original article...still have no idea as to it's authenticity...

o)<

mike

http://www.online-translator.com/url/tran_url.asp?lang=en&url=http://www.mpravda.com/?lang=ru&pubId=16616+&direction=re&template=General&cp1=NO&cp2=NO&autotranslate=on&psubmit2.x=39&psubmit2.y=17

On September, 15th 17:30

To the Earth the huge comet moves!

Sensational opening was made by Russian scientist-astronomer Nikolay Fedorovsky. According to its(his) calculations and supervision,
to the Earth the megacomet which will fall in the end of October comes nearer.

" About the Tungus meteorite too anybody nothing knew, and then it(he) has safely fallen in Siberia ", - writes Nikolay Fedorovsky.

The scientist has found out object in the end of August, it(he) moved on a paraboloidal trajectory with suspiciously big speed. Approximate calculations of speed have shown, that the heavenly body applies at least for an asteroid.

Nikolay Fedorovsky has contacted the Kiev observatory, however there have not confirmed and have not denied the fact of approach(approximation) of an asteroid to the Earth.

" Very few people knows, that comets different  on a regular basis pass (take place) on the minimal distance from the Earth. Pass(take
place) not noticed - whether poorly what trifle flies around of a planet. To take even ?-?? in 95 year ", - marks(celebrates) ??.

 
Subject: Comet - Here is my translation

9/28/2006 12:42:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Hi Kent.
 
If interested post it

RUSSIAN ASTRONOMER'S DIARY: COMET THAT WILL STRIKE THE EARTH ON 10.28.2006


08.28.06.

Discoveries - this is fantasy. It is the well-known fact that all large celestial bodies, located at a distance of up to 15 billion light years
 from the sun, have long ago been discovered. But the stars of special interest are not represented, for simple reason, that is present
stage of the development of science and the distance which makes their careful study is impossible. And all reasoning and even in
scientific works as in this paper are of speculative nature. In the essence thus far this is similar to the individual study of each atom of
one molecule without the microscope. The object, observed today at night (4:32 on Moscow), from all key parameters is star. On all,
with exception of it's high-speed, "star" is moving along the parabolic trajectory with the suspiciously high speed. After hour observation,
I have fixed the coordinates of "star". The approximation calculations of speed showed that the celestial body pretends, as a minimum,
to be an asteroid. I mean I can pretend to have discovered it... Only asteroid is anomalously large. Not -et, soon, this is the fantasy:)

08.29.06.

I caught myself in the thought, that I assume the nearing of asteroid as the given. I ask myself, what it will do. Question is in that "what". Interesting detail. In 1986 the Americans noticed the asteroid of gigantic size, which was moving away along the trajectory from the Earth. Without thinking long, Yankee calculated it's trajectory, only not "forward", but "back". It came out very interestingly. It has shown that, in
 the fall of 1844, this comet had to inevitably collide with our planet. It is not quite clear what deflected the asteroid from the Earth. However,
in some historical sources of that time is described "fiery body" observed in the sky above Europe. The arrangement of cosmic bodies
and their trajectories in that distant year, which was calculated then by Americans is very similarly to the present disposition of planets...

08.30.06.

He spoke with Kiev observatory. They do not confirm and do not deny the fact of the nearing of asteroid to the Earth. As the Japanese -
there is neither yes or no. Also no one nothing knew about the tunguska meteorite, and then it harmlessly fell In Siberia. Almost no one
knows that the comets of different densities are regularly passing at the minimum distance from the Earth. They pass as unnoticed -
nobody notices what small objects fly around the planet. To take at least Shvassmana-Vakhmana in the year 95. This time, similarly,
here is flying something by no means small.

08.31.06.

Determined the coordinates of the trajectory of body, until its present point. Corridor is wide. Earth on the way. It is necessary to recognize after 72 hours that my calculated of speed are incorrect. The speed of object grew and "starry" hypothesis it was necessary to cross out. Progression is improbable. My "discovery" is also biggish for the comet, this if we look optimistically. But if reasonably, then nevertheless body falls for determination comet or asteroid. Truth exceeding all conceivable and unthinkable sizes. I hope for one additional error in the calculated of speed, otherwise...

09.03.06.

I raise old connections. It occurs, not all former researchers populate the offices of NII - SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE. The thanks
V.R. is evident, had to pass more than ten years so that you finally it would cease to see in me the competitor:) For long they discussed.
 It occurred that observatories kept silent about what and how I observed. Electronic telescopes grasped my "mega-comet" (already and named it) long before the "discovery". I do not pretend...:(on sent to V.R. of record distinctly evidently motion of body towards the Earth.
What if it must? Hypotheses start.

09.05.06.

Thus far error in my calculations is too great in order to speak about the precise coordinates of a hit spot of the asteroid. But nevertheless
 I did keep it and sketched on the map the most probable points of impact of the mega-comet. Thus. South pole. Global warming they did order? With a drop of the comet in the region of southern terrestrial pole it is secured for the long centuries. Consequences, I think, to
explain no one it is necessary. The Indian Ocean. The safest for humanity and most dangerous for the planet version. The asteroid fallen
into the water will raise the tsunami of such height, which simply will wash off all located in coastal states. Furthermore the temperature of water of world ocean will rise. To what temperature? Even I do not know... this to the geophysics. But in the fact that will be sufficient fish
soup to entire remaining peace - this is accurate. Continents will remain entire but our petrol resources unavailable. Europe. Tentatively - Germany. For the complete destruction of this small, but very proud country, will be required few minutes. To us will reach the blast wave, capable of converting the large part of the territory of Russia into the Russian field. Here to you and cinema with the specials-effect.
It is not certain, this only my assumptions, but...

09.12.06.

He compared its calculations with the data from the observatory from V.R. similarly, encounter with the Earth will occur at the end of
October. Merry for us is in following month.

09.15.06.

More than 200 letters from the different people arrived in yesterday. They want details. They request to confirm the information, which I
 as yet do not have. Pose questions which I thus far cannot answer. Everyone understands that time goes, but the precise date of drop
is not established. I am occupied by observation, but not by the composition of forecasts. After several days on duty, tomorrow I leave
 the capital. No, this is not the capitulation:) This is the possibility to conduct 4-5 days with V.R. in the observatory. After this, it is
necessary to think, will appear more precise numbers and if it occurs, even photographs. The thanks to all, who propose their aid in studies.

09.21.06.

After return. Judging from the fact that the mailbox is overfilled many took interest in my trip. It passed successfully. If we do not consider
three sleepless nights and conversation on the face of scandal with one of the representatives of astronomical association. There are
even our century heroes, prepared for the science "although for bonfire". To each it's. To me here it is - the detailed data analysis,
resulting from 4 sessions observations of the comet. That that the speed of comet grows, by the evidently almost naked eye. Catching
itself on what it began to receive mega-comet as something its, native. Almost as the living being. Soon let us be seen, everything to
this leads. I will try to obtain oral permission for the publication of new photographs. At the worst, I will publish without the permission,
to me (to us) something to lose. There will tomorrow be numbers and photographs. Today - to sleep. To sleep.

09.27.06.

There are many letters. He is grateful to all - and those, who supports, and thereby, who scolds. All can be understood. I here lay out
 the observatory photographs of comet. Some details were explained. First of all, the dimensions of comet, or more precisely its
nucleus, somewhat less than those that we assumed earlier. But it is here with speed and trajectory we proved to be right - we could
calculate the date of encounter with the Earth. On Moscow - This is The evening- night on 28 October. But the most interesting...
Structure. Precomputations make it possible to assume that the nuclear composition is unstable. I.e., in simple language speaking,
the "density" of the nucleus of comet can be sufficiently small. To what extent it is small - a question thus far opened... I will say one -
 it is obvious that the fate of planet directly depends on this. Those remaining in the observatory continue observations. I will hold all
in the course.

---

About the author:
 
About me.
Fedorov Nikolai.

I was born and grew in the family of scientists. Mom was zoologist, and dad philologist. Naturally, in so far as concerns training and
 formation each of the parents it pulled blanket to itself. But I, having once glanced into the celestial sphere, when we were in vacation
in the south, understood that neither habits of monkeys nor special features of Bayron's versification interested me. I decided in the
same second - astronomy will become the matter of my life. It can be, this was somewhat naive - so think into 14 years, but here
already about 30 years from that moment of the matter proceed precisely so - I actually am astronomer: And although with the large
science in our country now not all in the order, to me did not come and they do not occur of the thought to part with the dear matter
against something something different. To this moment all my searches could not pretend to the discovery, but nevertheless several
 theses and independent studies on my calculation exists. True, only in the printed form - in essence this form of publication in the
specialized publications. But that that I recently revealed in the space abyss, it forced me it will turn to the aid of worldwide network
the Internet. Because only so I can describe TO ALL to you about that which awaits you... I thank for help in the creation of this site
 of my friend of Vasiliy golubskiy.

Link:
http://www.kometa.by.ru/

IZAKOVIC
http://www.deepspace4.com

 

Global Gestalt And Planetary Sovereignty

B.R. McEwen
http://cyberspaceorbit.com/global_gestalt.htm

"Almost as the living being. Soon let us be seen, everything to this leads."--Fedorov Nikolai.

I was given a vision 2 years ago of an asteroid hitting just off the coast of Africa.  The asteroid  was half the size of the  African continent. Guess what happened.  Vision was in full color.

Asteroid weapons :: So there is the scenario :: we get hit with some massive asteroid YET IN REALITY ITS ONE OF THEIR NEW WEAPONS THAT JUST L O O K S LIKE AN ASTROID HIT ::: Norway?? sound familiar anyone???




While the latest Star Wars sci-fi saga makes its way to a cinema near you, a true-to-life space drama is unfolding as a new breed of weaponry may soon populate the heavens.

Military planners paint a picture of inevitability concerning space weapons. Certain experts foresee a proliferation of anti-satellites and space mines. Others suggest urgent need for totally secure, jam-proof satellite links along with a squadron of quick-reaction space bombers.

Perhaps more "out there", but openly discussed by military space strategists, are orbiting laser and particle beam weapons that focus killer rays of energy to zap satellites, enemy warheads in flight, or even blast targets on Earth.

Then there are the thunder rods. Tossed down from orbit, these long and slender kinetic-energy devices use their own mass and very high velocity to create a destructive effect.

Lastly, for those looking for a celestial "big whopper" of a weapon, how about using natural meteoroids? Good-sized fireballs of metal could be sent to Earth, aimed at targets of choice. These impactors leave a nice crater. Better yet, they leave no radioactive debris.

Space-based weapons are the topic of a new report: Space Weapons - Earth Wars. Authored by think-tank experts at RAND -- dedicated to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis -- the just released study was prepared for the U.S. Air Force.

What's possible and sensible?

Space weapons have been hotly debated for decades. At present, the Bush administration's interest in ballistic missile defense has brought the question of their use once again to the forefront.

The RAND study does not argue for or against space weapons said Bob Preston who led the effort. Rather, the intent was to sort through realities and myths surrounding space weapons.

"We wanted to provide an objective basis for grounding discussion in physical realities and historical context," Preston told SPACE.com. His observation after finishing the task is that the subject of weapons in space "is both highly polarized with people violently for and against the idea," he said.

Furthermore, those opposing views are complicated by imprecision in definition, "and by rather loose understanding of what's possible and what's sensible," Preston added.

Arguably, just about all use of space from the beginning has been about national security, Preston said.

"Even civilian scientific uses were undertaken in large part for security reasons in the context of the Cold War. There's a pretty good point of view that says that almost everything we've ever done in space has been predominately motivated by a security perspective," the RAND analyst said.

Classic classes

RAND reviewed several distinct classes of weapons:

Directed-energy weapons, such as space lasers. They use millions of watts of power and large optics to deliver a speed-of-light knockout punch as a missile arcs over Earth. Depending on the wavelength of the energy beamed out and atmospheric conditions, an energy beam can destroy a target on Earth's surface;
Kinetic-energy weapons against missile targets. This hardware can ram headlong into a target in space or an object still within the upper reaches of Earth's atmosphere;
Space-based kinetic energy weapons that slam into targets on the ground, such as large ships, tall buildings, and fuel tanks. Sleek and meteoroid-like in speed, these weapons attack targets at steep, nearly vertical trajectories; and
Space-based conventional weapons capable of maneuvering to hit terrestrial targets. These can carry and dispense rather exotic packages of destruction, such as radio-frequency or high-power-microwave munitions.
Pros and cons

Taken together, RAND analysts found space weapons having a number of distinct advantages and disadvantages.

In the advantage column, space weapons can take out targets that may be inaccessible to other weapons. While ships and aircraft can take days to weeks to reach a far-flung battleground, space-based weapons can respond in minutes to several hours. Also, space-based weapons are less vulnerable to attack.

On the other hand, there are shortcomings.

For one, an opponent can saturate a space weapon, overwhelming the weapon's ability to fully thwart an attack. In addition, the positions of space-based weapons are predictable. In this regard, a weapon destroyed on orbit would leave a persistent cloud of debris, posing a hazard to other satellites. Lastly, large numbers of weapons are required to ensure that one of them is in the right place at the right time.

Asteroid weapons

Even the notion of purposely diverting an asteroid toward Earth as a weapon was examined by RAND specialists. "For nations that already have nuclear arsenals, asteroid weapons might be of only academic interest," the study notes.

There is no doubt, the study explains, that asteroids have acted as big bruisers in the past. The Earth has the scars to prove the point. However, to use asteroids as natural bombs, the scale of the undertaking would be grander than that required to build the first A-bomb via the Manhattan Project in World War II, the RAND report points out.

"Aside from the limited range of possible effects and the great uncertainty about the precision of an effect, one clear argument against asteroids as weapons is that smaller, cheaper means of acquiring an equivalent to a nuclear deterrent are available," the study explains.

Asteroids as a space weapon of mass destruction "is likely to remain safely in the realm of science fiction."

Waiting game

RAND's Preston emphasized that the opportunity to acquire space weapons is not limited to the United States. While many countries have only modest spacefaring capabilities, each nation knows how space can benefit their security.

"There's probably nobody that's involved in space that doesn't understand its security uses and isn't motivated to some degree by its security uses," Preston said. Space-based weapons could be a high-leverage, asymmetric response to U.S. military strengths, he said.

In the report's summary, there is this observation:

"Before deciding to acquire or forgo space weapons for terrestrial conflict, the United States should fully discuss what such weapons can do, what they will cost, and the likely consequences of acquiring them. The discussion should also address whether other countries might acquire them, which ones would be most likely to do so, and how the United States could discern these developments and respond effectively."

For Preston, a personal view is that it's not obvious now there's urgent need for the United States to defend itself in space from things in space. "But its not unreasonable to expect that you may have to before long," he said.

Peacetime uses

The prospect of space weapons and the growing military space agenda engenders a wide variety of viewpoints.

Such is the case for America's first woman in Earth orbit, Sally Ride. She recently underscored the fact that space has been used for military purposes for decades. (Ride is the former president of SPACE.com.)

Last month, Ride presented the annual Drell Lecture at Stanford University, sponsored by the on-campus Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). After her NASA tour-of-duty, Ride worked in the late 1980s as a CISAC science fellow, serving alongside Sidney Drell, noted physicist and arms control expert.

"Space is a real priority for national security," Ride said. She is presently a physics professor at the University of California-San Diego and director of the University of California's Space Institute in La Jolla.

Today, U.S. intelligence agencies and the military count on some 100 satellites as part of the country's national security. These space-based assets snap detailed images day and night, keeping an eye on global hotspots, even pinpointing missile launchings around the globe for early warning purposes. A satellite that in peacetime uses the global positioning system (GPS) constellation of spacecraft for navigation purposes, may in wartime utilize that same capability to target bombs or remotely piloted vehicles, Ride said.

"The current landscape is that the United States has an absolutely huge advantage over every other country in space capabilities," Ride said. "It's hard getting to space. It's hard developing things that work in space, and it's really, really hard to get things to work reliably over long periods of time in space," she added.

Ante up: Anti-satellites

The policy question going forward, Ride explained, might be simplistically stated as: Does it make sense for the U.S. to place weapons into space? One issue in this regard, she said, is developing and placing in space anti-satellite weapons, or ASATs for short.

Unless appropriate constraints are put on testing of ASATs, there could be a problem, Ride suggested. High-speed run-ins with space debris resulting from any ASAT testing could cripple or destroy numbers of satellites in Earth orbit.

Ride recalled an encounter with space debris on her first space shuttle voyage. A small but visible gouge in one of the space plane's window appeared about halfway through the flight. Later analysis showed that an orbiting fleck of paint caused the pit, she said.

"A fleck of paint is not the same as a small piece of metal traveling at that same speed. So, as soon as you start increasing the amount of junk in low-Earth orbit, you have an unintended byproduct that starts putting some of your own quite valuable satellites at possible risk," Ride stressed

Preserve by prohibiting

One lawmaker is already pitching legislation before the U.S. Congress that bans the weaponization of space. Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat from Cleveland, Ohio, introduced early this year The Space Preservation Act of 2002.

The bill is crafted "to preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by prohibiting the basing of weapons in space and the use of weapons to destroy or damage objects in space that are in orbit, and for other purposes."

In bill language, the terms "space-based weapon" and "space-based system" mean a device capable of damaging or destroying an object or person -- whether in outer space, in atmosphere, or on Earth -- by (A) firing one or more projectiles to collide with that object or person; (B) detonating one or more explosive devices in close proximity to that object or person; (C) directing a source of energy against that object or person; or (D) any other undeveloped means.

Kucinich is shopping the bill through the halls of Congress trying to gain support for the legislation, which also calls for an international treaty to preserve space and prevent an arms race in outer space.

Complicated distinction

Prying out differences between weaponization and militarization of space is not easy.

"It's an important distinction," said Bruce Gagnon, head of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space in Gainesville, Florida. "Weaponization I think is clear. Our position is no weapons in space, at any level, period. Militarization is more complicated," he told SPACE.com.

Gagnon took part in last week's 10th Annual International Space Organizing Conference and Protest, held at the University of California in Berkeley. During the gathering of peace movement leaders from 12 nations, various strategies were discussed to block the nuclear arms race from ascending into the heavens.

"While we accept some aspects of the militarization of space for treaty verification, confidence building measures, etc., we are firmly against military space technologies that are used for conventional war fighting," Gagnon said. "Satellite systems that identify and direct war on Earth, which essentially allow for 'full spectrum dominance' are not acceptable in our view," he said.

"We want a de-escalation of all military systems for fighting war on Earth or in space. We'd like to see the stabilizing, treaty verifying satellite technologies commonly shared globally. And, of course, no nuclear power in space for any reason," Gagnon concluded.