Posted on 11/11/2010 10:55:37 AM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
(Excerpt) Read more at state-of-the-nation.com ...
Yes, the corkscrew pattern is very distinctive and easily seen.
But I just read that we are Bigfoot video believers if we see and say so.
A lot of people can reach erroneous conclusions from watching a couple of minutes of edited shaky video with a huge range of magnification in the video.
If I see the moon in the sky I'm going to believe it's the moon and it doesn't matter to me how many people tell me it's a UFO, and that they should know, because they've seen dozens of them.
You’re right. Because I’ve never seen umbrella lightning, this HAS to be an aircraft contrail. Excellent post.
I don’t know what this object was. Based upon what I know and have observed, it looks an awful lot like the plume from a ship- or submarine-launched ballistic missile. The azimuth, trajectory, apparent acceleration and visible signature all seem to support this.
But an airliner would get lower, and soon pass over the news chopper, if on its way to AZ.
Not rise up on top of its plume, and get smaller, heading west/nw, and disappear.
Plz refer to the dozens of others on this thread, many with missile knowledge and experience, who say it is very obviously not an airliner.
Sadly.
I know what you mean and I know that cool “angel” picture well, but those vortices over time would turn into themselves before they’d spiral, would they not? I’m talking about a residual corkscrew helix thingy with a cone-shaped pattern of it at its time-effected broadening base thingamajiggy.
http://state-of-the-nation.com/1478/janes-military-magazine-missile-expert-tells-truth-ballistic-missile-doubt/
As another just said:
Youre making my point for me.
This footage was shot immediately off the coast of southern CA. LAX radar showed 63 other aircraft in close proximity to this object at exactly the same time, yet there are no other contrails visible anywhere in the sky. This visual data is backed up by satellite imagery which shows no contrails. How is it that every other aircraft in the vicinity, with the same atmospheric conditions, is leaving no visible evidence such as a contrail? They were all doing the same thing as this object (moving up or down under their own propulsion), same conditions, but no contrails.
Moreover,if the pilot saw nearly the exact same thing the day before... why would he film this and present it to the media as a possible missile launch? Why would he get so excited, if this is such a common occurrence? Unless the NEARLY EXACT SAME THING was, in fact, the exact same thing... a missile.
A convex vapor trail suggests a ballistic trajectory, which passenger planes do not fly.
That was caused by the zoom feature on the camera.
This one didnt head straight up for long, it arced to the NW and kept on going. It never went over the roof of the sky. It didnt ever arc overhead as an aircraft contrail would have if it was headed to the east and an destination east of LA. This didnt it went NW and kept going NW until the video ends.
That was not a plane inbound for the US, it never arced over our shores. If it was going STRAIGHT UP in reality and was inbound for the US, then it would have disappeared that way. It didnt. It didnt arc overhead. it went straight up and to the rt and FADED from view.
thanks
See post 212.
This one? It came out of the West and headed East ~
How far is the horizon when you are at 1500 feet?
~47.5 miles
Thanks
and at 2500 feet?
And “over the horizon” would be ... ???
60 or 70 or 100 miles? ... far far away from pleasure yachts.
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.