Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: az_gila; Gondring

I’ve been mulling and pondering all aspects of this all day long, and I think the contrail idea fails in this regard:

IF this had been a regular contrail, the aircraft would have had to be heading TOWARD the camera (within a few degrees of straight on) in order for it to be leaving a trail that appeared to be nearly vertical below the plane. In that case, the aircraft would appear to grow larger, and speed up as it became more nearly overhead.

As you watch the video, however, just the opposite is the case. Although the plume is below the object, which would be consistent for the contrail of an aircraft moving almost directly toward the camera position, the object producing the plume appears to grow smaller as the video goes along, and seems to slow down, which is consistent with an object moving AWAY from the camera position; NOT toward it.

An aircraft moving more or less directly AWAY from the camera position would have left a contrail that appeared to be nearly vertical, but would have been ABOVE the plane; NOT below it.

ONLY an ascending object moving AWAY from the camera could simultaneously appear to be at the top of a nearly vertical plume, appear to be growing smaller, and seem to be slowing down.


281 posted on 11/09/2010 11:53:23 PM PST by HKMk23 (Politics ain't hard! You want worse; vote Democrat. You want better; vote Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: HKMk23
That is exactly what I've tried to say previously but perhaps not as well as you have. Also I have pointed out that the contrail would continue on overhead and pass to the east which certainly would have been noticed and reported by now.

As for changing atmospheric conditions causing a cessation of the contrail before it got to the coast there was a big weather system moving in from the west whose eastern edge was in CO last night. So the same upper level conditions would have existed from out in the Pacific to the Rocky Mountains.

284 posted on 11/10/2010 12:01:40 AM PST by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/28/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

To: HKMk23

Why no other witness reports of a rocket launch?


294 posted on 11/10/2010 12:45:19 AM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

To: HKMk23
IF this had been a regular contrail, the aircraft would have had to be heading TOWARD the camera (within a few degrees of straight on) in order for it to be leaving a trail that appeared to be nearly vertical below the plane. In that case, the aircraft would appear to grow larger, and speed up as it became more nearly overhead.

As you watch the video, however, just the opposite is the case. Although the plume is below the object, which would be consistent for the contrail of an aircraft moving almost directly toward the camera position, the object producing the plume appears to grow smaller as the video goes along, and seems to slow down, which is consistent with an object moving AWAY from the camera position; NOT toward it.

An aircraft moving more or less directly AWAY from the camera position would have left a contrail that appeared to be nearly vertical, but would have been ABOVE the plane; NOT below it.

ONLY an ascending object moving AWAY from the camera could simultaneously appear to be at the top of a nearly vertical plume, appear to be growing smaller, and seem to be slowing down.


No, if you are looking UPWARDS at the contrail, it could be made by a plane moving AWAY from you.

A low altitude helicopter view point and a plane at 5 to 6 miles high could make a “vertical looking” contrail as it moved away from you. The telephoto lens would also give a different "feel" to the visual picture.

Draw out the geometry on a piece of paper...:^)

312 posted on 11/10/2010 7:28:28 AM PST by az_gila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

To: HKMk23

The object does not grow smaller with time on any of the video I’ve seen. It also was not “nearly overhead,” but was distant throughout the time of the videos—the position given by CBS was a rough estimate based on the optical illusion. The speed is similar to the jet airliner speed listed on the flight tracking, and the passengers didn’t note any launch, and that plane isn’t seen on the video where it should be (unless it’s the contrail-maker).


347 posted on 11/11/2010 5:14:41 PM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson