Posted on 11/23/2010 10:29:06 AM PST by JoeA
In today's broadcast, conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said that the contrail spotted off the California coast by a KCBS news helicopter was a missile. "I've talked to experts" he said. "It was a missile." The comment puts him in line with many who doubt the administration’s characterization of the contrail seen off the California coast as that of an airplane.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
The scariest part is that one of the so-called "experts" was a retired NORAD general. Thankfully he's not in charge now.
That blogger is a global warming scientist that creates computer model evidence for anything.
“Considering what N Korea did today, hmmm?”
I thought the same thing as soon as the news came across about the shelling.
The Chinese are saying, “Attack NK, we’ll attack you, and we can do it, even if we don’t have a carrier”.
What goes unpunished is encouraged.
Go to a new Defcon, sortie the attack subs, and find the Chinese and NPRK subs. Then raze the presidential palace in Pyongyang.
Did some retired general tell you that?
The evidence available in the images has convinced me that it's an airplane contrail. That evidence seems a bit more relevant to me than a comparison of the relative credentials of the people expressing their opinions on the evidence.
Ok, I hope you’re right on that but it makes zero sense. We don’t have to demonstrate to anyone we have the ability and this was a message it was a silly one. Let’s say it was to China, I’m sure they’re just laughing at us as we won’t actually do anything with Obama as CiC.
I hope you’re right, I pray you are but the response by the DoD is puzzling. If it was us, come out and say we were testing. The only way this does make sense was if this was supposed to be a simulated launch and the whole command crew on that sub screwed up and I’m not buying that one either.
Pretty much makes it official then.
The only way you get into the difficulty at all, is by rejecting any explanation other than the one saying it was a missile.
But the fact remains that there is a much simpler explanation -- a mundane one, alas -- for which there is supporting data, in terms of timing, location, and visual signature.
It was a contrail, FRiend. You can go outside some afternoon and watch any number of similar "missile launches" pass overhead as airliners and cargo jets wing their way to their destinations at high altitude.
The US was caught unaware. What kind of response would you suggest?
Well, I'm not knowledgeable about the various contingencies that have been planned and wargamed incessantly for the past 45 years - but I DO know that the first 30-45 minutes of these scenarios are AUTOMATIC, involve THOUSANDS of officers and men and HUNDREDS of highly visible assets like warplanes, warships, and troop deployments.
None of that happened. Zero, zip, zilch, nada.
Therefore, either our defensive plans no longer exist (improbable), the missile was ours, or it wasn't a missile.
***shrugs****
Well that contrail has fooled a lot of ‘experts.’
How far offshore do you believe the launch location to have been?
How many ships do you think there are within 150 miles of the Southern California coast? Of those, how many have security cameras rolling 24/7?
How many ships would be inbound such that a launch would have been to the east of them and thereby set against the backdrop of a darkening evening sky and therefore easier to see?
Not one single ship reported seeing anything remotely resembling a launch.
Here's what the cameraman said:
"I realize that it was something that we saw earlier from the week before... we saw something very similar the past Thursday and immediately I realized that it was something very similar and I called on the two-way to our assignment desk to let them know that we were seeing it again... Not as dramatic as the one yesterday. The one from yesterday was pretty spectacular."
If you want to make the point that he said he had seen something similar, just say that. To say that he said he had seen the same thing three times and made no distinction between the events is disingenuous. Obviously a jet contrail and a missile contrail are similar. The cameraman made a point to say what he saw on 11/8 was more "dramatic" and "spectacular" than what he'd seen previously. Having seen my share of both, I'd say that's an accurate description of the distinction between jet and missile contrails. Missiles are much more dramatic and spectacular.
The UPS MD-11 was at 35,000 feet and traveling at 500 mph or more. At 5:15 p.m., when the video and the top photo were taken, the plane probably would have been close to 100 miles southwest of Catalina. If you draw a straight line from LAX towards the location of the "missile" on your graphic and then extend it out another 50 miles or so, that's about where the UPS plane would have been. The plane's altitude, the atmospheric conditions, and the lighting were just right to allow the contrail to be seen from such a great distance.
The curve is right for the contrail of a jet maintaining a relatively constant altitude. It’s wrong for a missile launch of rapidly increasing altitude.
When it comes to seeing what they want to see, "experts" are quite often no different from you or me.
I hate to tell you, but back in my Air Force days I was exposed to a few Generals and the quality wasn't all that consistent. Ambition, arse-kissing, moderate intelligence and a refusal to admit error (along with the luck of your chickens not coming home to roost) could carry you far.
You don’t need an expert to distinguish a westbound vertical plume arcing away toward a setting sun, from an overhead horizontal contrail heading east. You DO need more than a 30-second or even a 90-second soundbite. You have to pay attention. You have to puzzle and think and ponder and reflect. You have to go outside and observe real lighting on evening clouds.
You have to put yourself in that gigantic three-dimensional world and visualize it. Don’t let somebody else do it for you. You do it. You have to use your own head, not someone else’s.
And be honest, contrail buyers: someone else has been doing the thinking for you. How else have you drawn your conclusions? Honest answer, only to yourself. You know. Well, now, here's your chance to go out and do it yourself. It's not easy, but it's the best way to know what's going on. As it is right now, you're letting somebody else tell you what's going on with regard to a pretty important thing.
Ignore "comparison” photos of other events or supposedly of the same event. Think logically: they serve the sole purpose of confusing and distracting you. Set them aside. The plane folks expect you to be satisfied with still shots of a moving event that they show you. Yet they're not satisfied with what would be thousands of still shots in the video clips. Right ....
Spend an hour or two. Turn off the TV. Get a pencil and a light.. Study the video clips. You don’t need to be an expert to figure it out, and when you figure it out, you realize that examining “evidence” from other photos is ludicrous. That’s probably the most pointedly ironic and sad thing about the whole dispute.
And be prepared for a world in which that was a missile, because it was. I hope and trust it was one of ours.
Either way, UPS has a great ad campaign to commemorate the epic of educated gullibility: “That’s not a missile – it’s UPS!” What can Brown do for you?
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.