Posted on 11/10/2010 12:45:55 PM PST by Gargantua
Exploding the “That Wasn’t A Missile” Myth
By Gargantua
What appeared to be a missile rose from below the horizon, streaking into the sky off of California leaving a condensation trail identical to the kind that have been filmed being left by a ground-or-sea-to-air launch of a Minuteman missile or ICBM.
First, the Government was inexplicably mum on the topic. Next came a series of sometimes contradictory explanations. Now, days after the event, the finally agreed-upon explanation hits every news station all at once. “It’s the con-trail of a jet returning from across the Pacific.”
There are two glaring problems with this obviously false “explanation.”
First, the shape and density of the con-trail.
A missile launch would be more dense and wide at its base, just as we see in the images we’ve been shown. A jet’s con-trail would be thinner and smaller the further away as it trailed off toward the horizon. We see the opposite in the availale video footage.
Second, the lighting.
In the video footage, we see stratus clouds out over the ocean behind the rising missile. The setting sun is shining on, and illuminating, the bottom of those clouds. On the con-trail, however, the illumination from the sun appears on the right-hand-edge; just as it would if this were a launching missile’s vertically rising con-trail. There is no illumination of the underside of the “jet’s horizontally oriented con-trail” because it is not a jet’s con-trail, it is a vertically-oriented missile’s launch contrail with the sun lighting up the side away from us. Very obviously so.
The Government must think we are at least as stupid as they are if they think this lame explanation is going to “fly.”
;-\
His statement was that those things didn't happen. You are asking me to disprove a negative. Isn't that the same as asking me to prove a negative? Either he has facts to back up his assertions or he doesn't.
You mean, besides that spikey thing on top of your head?
And I'm not getting upset. I'm just funning with you. I made this post to engender vigorous debate on the topic, and it's worked like a charm. It even sucked a cynic like you into its inescapable vortex, so powerful was the original autosuggestive mechanism I shrewdly employed like the double PhD in psychology and the philosophy of physics that I am.
Just don't hate me for being beautiful...
8^D
Aren’t there records of all planes in the area?
Then somewhere today I read that the CBS helicopter camera man filmed this for 10 minutes.
A jet would certainly remain in view for ten minutes, but would a missile launch? I don’t know the answer to that, but I doubt it.
I have seen many missile launches and that video sure looked exactly like some SLBM launches.
Writing that, if the camera man filmed it for ten minutes it was definitely an aircraft as missiles only burn for around five minutes or so before releasing the RV/s. The fuel burns out pretty fast.
I would like to point out, and tell me if I am seeing it wrong, but many here have stated that it was a flight to Arizona.
Given the position of the setting sun and the angle to which it reflects off the contrail would not the object in question be flying WNW or somewhat North? I thought Phoenix was to the Southeast from there (to the left of the video).
And you know that is true because ... you know that is true. lol
>>Just because there are lots of people with the potential to tape it doesn’t mean they all had cameras on them at the time and the inclination to do so. <<
You are correctto a degree. But if this was alleged to be a launch and yet NOBODY got footage close to the launch, I would strongly doubt that it was a launch, on that evidence (or lack thereof) alone. But that is only a small part of the body of evidence. And frankly, a small one. But it matters.
I’ll wait to see how many of them come forward in the next week to say it was a missile launch. Care to wager how many will? :)
I’m betting on zero.
And yet the furthest west part of the contrail (assuming a jet contrail coming from the horizon) is in shadow and in front of all the clouds in the picture. But you ignored the main point. Why is one edge illuminated and the other edge of the contrail dark? If the light source was from below and as far away as the sun wouldn’t it illuminate the entire contrail evenly?
Can you prove to me that Pakistan did not nuke India yesterday? Please link me to an article that says this didn’t happen, thank you.
Your post reminded me of one of the aspects of this that may be confusing people: The video zoomed in on it.
I’ve actually used a 70 power telescope to watch airplanes create contrails. Sometimes they appear pretty close to the plane, and sometimes they don’t start until a ways behind the plane. But what is visually interesting when looking through a telescope, and in this video when it zooms in, is that you get a better grasp of just how fast the plane is going.
Sure, in the video it doesn’t move all that fast across the screen, but it still “seems” faster than most planes creating contrails appear to the naked eye.
I now see that a lot of visual elements to this story “conspire” to make people (yes, even “experts”) think this is a missile. But when one looks objectively at the footage and compares it to other missile launches and airplane contrails, it’s pretty obvious what this is.
Which is why the government has little to say. It’s just another plane coming back from Hawaii during a beautiful sunset.
I have no reason to doubt it, because there is not a shred of evidence you can produce to the contrary. lol
>>Can you prove you aren’t a space alien in disguise?<<
I can’t prove that, but in my case it is because that is exactly what I am.
But I can’t prove that either. ;)
8^O
>>And then just stop out in front of you with no continuing contrail. <<
You have got to be kidding me. Have you never seen a contrail that resembles a dashed line, because the plane keeps going in and out of different conditions? I’ve seen lots of planes that leave a contrail, then stop, then start again after a mile or so, then stop again, etc.
In fact, that is what I saw in one of the stills from late in the video of this plane.
QED ;)
LMAO
Cool visual.
8^D
You two are masters of the logical fallacy. The Zen koan ‘if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there did it make a sound?’ is not an intellectual exercise. The only thing either of you has said is that you lack information that you have posited would prove a point if only you had that information.
Only in your case, you’d be asking for proof it didn’t make a noise. lmao
Well, that would explain part of the confusion here. We're discussing the video of a missile. You big silly!
:-|
>>So are the number of aircraft in the area. Odd that the amospheric conditions were such that only one of them would leave a contrail.<<
Did you see the other photos of flight 808 on other days. Same basic contrail, and the only one. People don’t realize that the absence of other contrails can be due to many factors.
For example, any planes in that area that are coming into California airports are going to be at significantly lower altitudes, precluding the existence of a contrail. Add to that the simple fact that there are fewer flights in the evening that would be going to the US at that altitude. There are other considerations, but you get my drift.
In photos of the contrail left by that flight on other dates, it is the only visible contrail.
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.