Exploding the “That Wasn’t A Missile” Myth

FreeRepublic ^ | November 10, 2010 | Gargantua

[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.”

;-\

[Finny]

... sun was setting due west. So the sun would hit the north (right)side of the contrail, leaving the southern (left)side in the dark.

A setting sun would light the underside of the contrail, the part facing the ground (the underside of horizontal contrail NECESSARILY is facing the GROUND) ...

... leaving the TOP of the contrail -- the part facing the sky -- in shade. The only way we could see it would be if our POV was above the contrail, and the contrai was between us and the setting sun.

In the Leyvas video, about 1/3 or less of the right side of the plume is bright, and it is bright becaust it is facing the sun; the remainder of the plume facing the sun is out of our POV. In the Leyvas video, about 2/3 of the plume from our POV is dark; it is facing away from the sun. The plume is between us and the sun, and we are seeing a backlit vertical plume. The sun is lighting it up for the VERTICAL plume that it is.

Plain as the nose on your face. It isn't theory, it isn't speculation, it isn't opinion, it isn't guesswork. IT IS PHYSICAL REALITY.

Again: Yow. THE SUN WOULD HIT THE UNDERSIDE OF THE CONTRAIL, FRIEND!

The majority of what we can ever see, any time, if we are on the ground or even a few thousand feet in the air, from our POV of an overhead horizontal contrail roughtly five miles high, is its underside. HELLO? Knock knock knock???

With a horizontal contrail five miles over our heads, we can only see a small part of what is facing east, north, south, or west, and the part of that rim facing the opposite direction of the sun will be in shade, hence one edge of an overhead, underlit contrail is in shade -- it is the side of the contrail facing away from the sun; MOST of the overhead contrail, at sunset, is being underlit, and therefore the pics you see again and again and again here of contrails shot at sunset, illustrate this -- most of the width of the contrail is brightly lit. This is because our POV is not to the side of the contrail, but BELOW it.

[justa-hairyape]

Or it proves that the aircraft was coming from the southwest on a northeasterly heading while the sun was setting due west. So the sun would hit the north (right)side of the contrail, leaving the southern (left)side in the dark.

Does not work that way. Sun is below horizon. Contrail is at about 35,000 feet. From an observation point close to sea level, you can only see the bottom of the contrail. You cannot see the right side or the top of the contrail. Physically impossible. The sun is actually lower then you with respect to the contrail and the sun is below the horizon. So from your vantage point the sun is down below the horizon and the contrail should be far above the horizon. Try to picture that in your head. It helps. The contrail should be uniformly lighted from the sun far below. Simple lighting problem for computer graphics people. And they are a whole lot of them around now.

Like I stated before the only chance you have at seeing a contrail at 35,000 feet lighted just like that would be if you mounted a camera on top of Mt. Everest. Obviously you could shoot one like that from another nearby plane at 35,000 feet.

So it is not possible for it to be a plane, unless you think the laws of physics failed at that instant. Later.

[Finny]

That is all you need to know. Anything else is carnival side show.

Yep. Mental hamster wheels.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

So all of the missile plumes and aircraft contrails I have watched through the boresight camera of my auto-tracking radar were wrong. Okay. Whatever.

[justa-hairyape]

You've got my attention at least.

Do not want that. Just want you guys to allow the process of scientific inquiry to progress without dumping tons of spam onto threads. Claiming there is no evidence of a missile is a lie and is spam.

OK, I didn't see this one. Could you please cite the URL that supplies the geometric proof?

Just take a look at any airline contrail at sunset. You do not need a fancy blog page for that. Use your eyes. Here is one I just pulled off the web and that sun is not even below horizon.

My understanding of this characteristic is due strictly to explainable atmospheric drift (wind) which matches the atmospheric conditions at the altitude UPS902 was flying.

The plume was moving with the general weather system wind which was 25-30 mph out of the northwest. Are they claiming wind shear ? Got to run. Later.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

That works if you assume the contrail you are looking at doesn’t originate hundreds of miles west where the sun is still above the horizon. The contrail nearest the viewer is fully lit, reflecting from the underside, but as you progress farther west the phenomena I describe is in full evidence. The earth is round, you realize?

As much as you want to believe it, it wasn’t a missile.

[Finny]

As much as you want to believe it, it wasn’t a missile.

I LIVE here, pal. It's MY ass that stands to get blown to smithereens, MY FAMILY'S ASSES that stand to get blown to kingdom-come. Pretty much all of my immediate and extended family for now seven generations (counting the two generations after me) lives on the southern part of the CA coast within range of where such a missile would hit. So you can take your "you want to believe it" sh*t and shove it up your butt. You're the one so desperately wanting to beleive that a missile was UPS plane that you will ignore the physical reality of lighting.

As Gargantua said, echoing pretty much word-for-word a world-class professional expert on aviation lighting and perspective who has forgotten more about the perspective and lighting of things that "originate hundreds of miles west" on an ocean horizon, etc. etc. that you have ever learned, and with whom I have personally discussed this and who has looked at the photos and rolled his eyes at the likes of you, ex98C:

... No "jet contrail" would have that much mass at its furthest-away point (close to 400 miles from this perspective if it were from a jet at 30,000+ feet). Plus the base is way in the foreground compared to what this photo shows as the "horizon." Also, you can see even more clearly that the trail is backlit, as would be a launch efflux rising vertically, and not underlit as would be a jet contrail stretched horizontally at 30,000+ feet at this time of day.

As much as you want to believe it, it wasn't an airplane.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

Gil said the object creating the contrail was in view for 2 to 3 minutes then was no longer in view. He took ten minutes of video total, and the contrail was in view for an additional ten minutes. He does not have any time stamps from the video, as the video does not record time stamps, so his memory of how long the object was in view is subjective. On the other hand, Rick Warren’s photos do have time stamps, and on those photos, the object was in view over four minutes.

That would seemingly rule out a missile, in my opinion.

That is something I am continuing to discuss with Gil in subsequent email exchanges, and we are comparing his video with Rick Warren’s photos to see if we can determine if and where they overlap to arrive at a better more objective total time estimate the object remained in view.

[Finny]

The contrail nearest the viewer is fully lit, reflecting from the underside, but as you progress farther west the phenomena I describe is in full evidence. The earth is round, you realize?

So, how much of your living is derived from understanding and communicating the dynamics of lighting and perspective with regard to the shifting horizon of sun-lit aerial phenomenon on the globe?

What's that? Not one red cent?

You'll excuse me if I give more credence to a person who earns his living understanding such things and whose services are used by people who also understand such things.

You want so badly to believe it was an airplane. You, living in Arizona, can afford such a fantasy.

[Finny]

Have you asked Gil if he thinks there was any possibility that what he filmed was an airliner leaving an overhead contrail?

[Brian Kopp DPM]

Here are his exact words: “I’m still not sure what the object is, jet or missile or for that matter, something else.”

[ex 98C MI Dude]

Your lighting ‘expert’ is going to have to explain away the weather satellite pic of the contrail coming from the southwest, then. Maybe he won’t roll his eyes as much when he realizes he FOS. And the fact that this has been repeated several times since the original post, of the same flight following the same flight path. That is why it has dropped out of the news, except for the “OMG! Dr Evil has missiles and is going to kill my family to the 7th generation’ crowd.

It was an airplane.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

Living in Arizona, down here by the border, I have a bit more to worry about than you on the matter of foreign interference.

[Finny]

Why did he film it, then? I'll bet he was damned sure it wasn't a UPS plane headed east.

And I'll bet he's still pretty sure of that. I'm not so much interested in hearing what he thought it WAS -- he knows he doesn't know the answer to what it was. I'm interested in hearing what he knows it wasn't. He knows it wasn't Santa's Sleigh. He knows it wasn't like any airline contrail he's ever seen. When he says "jet or missile," it's wide open as to what KIND of jet -- a military jet, or an airliner? They are two very different animals with very different connotations for national security.

Me, looking at the video, am not sure what the object creating it was, though it looks a whole helluva lot exactly like the many, many missile lauches I have witnessed live from a variety of distances both with the naked eye and with the help of binoculars. But I'm sure the trail that it left behind wasn't an underlit horizontal contrail; I'm sure it was a vertical plume because the lighting says so.

I would be surprised and frankly, pretty skeptical, if Leyvas claimed he WAS sure of what the object was that created a vertical plume. On the other hand, his knowing what it WASN'T is key to a lot of things -- first and foremost, why he filmed it in the first place.

[Finny]

You are so gullible and easily duped it's sad. Weather satellite pics of things neither you nor I nor anyone else can determine for sure are of what you propose they are.

Go ahead and believe it was an airplane if it makes you feel better. My lighting expert makes a living at what he does. You are an amateur.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

Amateur at what, exactly? Radar operations and maintenance (auto-track/surveillance)? Nope. Amateur at knowing what the different targets (missile or aircraft) I track are? Nope. I do this for a living, and have reached the highest level without having to go the engineer route. I have watched events like this real-time for years through a lense system that runs 6 figures, not including the camera itself. I can see the ISS through the boresight camera when we track it, this system is so good.

It was way to slow to be a missile, and moved at a constant speed. Missiles reach maximum velocity very quickly after launch. It would not be in sight very long. Ballistic missiles tend to run at around 9k mph, and reach that speed in short order.

In the end, it begs the question “Why am I arguing with you?” You believe it was a missile launched from a sub a mere 35 miles off our shores without us knowing that a boomer submarine was there. Believe it if you want. No skin off my nose.

Have a pleasant day.

[Gargantua]

What vig could they [the "Contrail Pushers"] possibly have in this discussion? And I don't mean the obvious government plants, I mean the everyday FReepers.

Unless...

Let's say, just for discussion, that you are the nation's premier Conservative website. Say also that the current Administration is beyond Liberal, all the way to Communist Activists.

Would you just have people scanning the conservative site and reporting back the goings-on; or would you have people log on years earlier, establish "conservative" cred over a protracted period of time, and then use those trusted "everyday FReeper assets" when needed to kill stories like "The Chink Missile Off LA" and "Obama's Homo Underwear With A Stained Fanny Door"?

To be effective, you'd need a bunch of 'em. Just like we got here. Just wondering our loud...

;-/

[Finny]

You see, if you are what you claim you are, then you are lying when you say you think it was an airliner, and you know that as well as I and quite a few others here at FR do.

SO either:
1. You are not what you claim you are, or
2. For reasons of your own, you are desperately working to deceive Americans into believing that the plume from a missile launch was "mistaken" for a common overhead airliner contrail.

As Rush says, it is what it is.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

Why did he film it, then?

Simple.

1) He was there to film the sunset as a back drop to the weather forecast. He saw it while he was filming the sunset.

2) It was sweeps week. They are encouraged to find interesting video or stories for sweeps week. During sweeps week, they go out in the helicopter just to locate and film interesting video for the news production. From that perspective, it was very successful sweeps week video footage. And the TV station made the most of it.

[TigersEye]

And let's not forget that Brigadier General Cash (retired for almost 20 years now) writes for Joseph Farah, ...

100% false. Brigadier General Jim Cash has never written anything for Joseph Farah or WND.