Here you can see the typical corkscrew pattern of a missile exhaust plume, rising into the sky and moving away from us.
Posted on 11/13/2010 2:55:59 PM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
Hannity was surprised to hear a famous ex Air Force General tell him “That Is A Missile, Shot From A Submarine!” I quote retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney (ex commander of 11th Air Force in Alaska) “I spent 35 years flying fighters, and you can see the guidance system kick in, I have watched that film 10 times, I am absolutely certain that that is not an aircraft, but a sub launch ICBM missile!!!” See the video and judge his words for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LivRJOWrcpA&feature=player_embedded#! I will next post a clickable link.
Actually I see this event as very instructive for how they were able to convince the scientific consensus community that AGW was happening. The Animated GIF is analogous to the Michael Mann Hockey Stick. Very instructive concerning the techniques they employed.
957 posted on November 16, 2010 3:19:44 PM GMT+09:00 by justa-hairyape
“To him it looked like an incoming missile.”
So an MSM second hand account about what somebody else said is good enough evidence for you. Well that explains a lot.
And when the pilot actually said it looked like it was growing, what was “it” ? The plume ? Yes, the plume/contrail was growing.
958 posted on November 16, 2010 3:25:33 PM GMT+09:00 by justa-hairyape
To: Finny
Yeah! And also that they are claiming it was a UPS plane on approach Ontario Airport, for Pete’s sake! Only 50 miles due east from where the camerman was, first appearing from a south-west point 125 miles from Ontario, and 75 miles from the cameraman.
I thought someone plotted this as a US Air flight from Hawaii to Phoenix or something? Now UPS into ONT? :o0
And the time is off too. Or just guessed at.
and it was posted up thread here by TigersEye, not me.. It was on the CBS web site, under “Morning Show” and posted here under “link” and it was clickable.
My question was: What is your cite for your assertions of how long he video taped it, what the timing on the video tape is and the object’s apparent speed?
bttt
When this incident took place our Pentagon and DOD could only say they had no clue what it was.
Strange, yes?
I take no stock in any evidence submitted by any govt. agency as being the gospel truth.
Pyramids to UFO’s all in one day. And you claim to be the sane ones.
If so, how could light so brilliantly reflect off the bottom of a plane flying straight and level, yet fail to distribute equal reflection off the bottom of its contrail that is at the same altitude?
The video shows that the setting sunlight illuminates ONLY the extreme right-hand side of the contrail that it is leaving behind at the same altitude. The extreme right-hand side is the leading edge of the object heading in a north-westerly direction. The angle of the light in context with the movement of the object tells us this.
That is a plume heading northwest -- the illumination proves it. The illumination also indicates a vertical launch because the sun is not illuminating the underside of the plume, it is illuminating the west side, the leading edge, of the plume. The object creating the plume is heading northwest. If it was headed east, it would be impossible for sunlight from beneath it, coming as it would be from the west, to illuminate the leading edge of the object as it propelled forward. In the video, it is crystal clear that it is not being illuminated from behind, but from in front.
Again, the object leaving the plume is heading northwest.
That is a plume heading northwest — the illumination proves it. The illumination also indicates a vertical launch because the sun is not illuminating the underside of the plume, it is illuminating the west side, the leading edge, of the plume. The object creating the plume is heading northwest. If it was headed east, it would be impossible for sunlight from beneath it, coming as it would be from the west, to illuminate the leading edge of the object as it propelled forward. In the video, it is crystal clear that it is not being illuminated from behind, but from in front.
Again, the object leaving the plume is heading northwest.
This is what I thought.
I have tried to offer up several links: I have also searched for the orig video, first helicopter cameraman interview, etc all unsuccessfully. All the information I can find is in snips and pieces, and then mis-quoted or repeated at second and third hand.
I recall someone saying that they TIMED the ascent that they saw on a piece of tape at 47 seconds and that this covered half of the exhaust creation.
So, if true, that would mean 94 seconds of plume, balance was of back-lit smoke slowly expanding after the object has grown smaller and disappeared.
I did not time this 47 seconds.
I would like to.
Literally, there is much less info out there now than was there the first day - I thought the information and interviews would become more numerous, not less, so did not try to download or save.
Check with others here, they have done more than me perhaps- and have more links maybe.
“We do have flight data from several possibles, especially an US Airways Flt 808 and a UPS bird flying a similar track.”
It is impossible to exactly correlate any known flight path to an unknown flight path.
Apparently, what is obvious to some is not obvious to others ...
I was wondering about that...
The process of science begins with an observation.
The observer then proposes an hypothesis to explain the observation.
The hypothesis is then tested by gathering data.
The data will either confirm or eliminate hypothesis.
The goal is truth.
Unfortunately once a conspiracy is proposed any evidence
or lack of evidence is insufficient to eliminate the conspiracy hypothesis.
Any attempts to debunk the conspiracy are viewed as a part of the conspiracy
I was wondering if you could answer a couple of questions concerning this video of the event at this news channel site. If the “missile” is indeed heading away from the camera like you say, how come we don’t see the “glow of a missile engine” in the first part of the video? If we’re looking at it from behind (like you say), shouldn’t we reasonably expect to see it all the time? Also, does the quote in the video from Robert Ellsworth seem a little odd to you?.....”It could be a test firing of an intercontinental ballistic missile from a submarine, an underwater submarine, to demonstrate, mainly to Asia, that we could do that.”...I mean, the world has only known this capability of ours for like,...40 YEARS! Ellsworth was a Republican so that tells me that at one time, he had something on the ball, but to me, that statement shows he’s losing it, and as such, his opinion on this “missile” is suspect at best. Thanks.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/09/pentagon-cant-explain-missile-off-california/
It’s obviously a reflection, even more because it’s there sometimes, and not others. A rocket motor would be constant ~and~ bigger.
When I first saw the pic it I thought it looked like a missile too. But in just looking a little further, and then watching the video, it just isn’t.
Look... there’s no point in any further discussion. I’m convinced that it’s just an airplane. You’re convinced it’s some kind of missile. I’m done. There’s nothing else to say.
The formatting of your posts makes them difficult to follow.
Odd. even the CBS news site does not have the full video, only a small portion ... where at the end the reporteress says “Well, it definitely originated from something in the ocean”.
Many interesting comments there.
Here is one:
Greg
Proper coverage of a real mystery would include interviews with the relevant sources.
In this case, the Pentagon’s Dave Lapan was the single authority providing answers, if you can call them that. He even delivered the statement from the FAA spokesman. Had Ian Gregor been available for interview, surely he would have been asked if the FAA had identified the aircraft. (The statement on record seems intentionally vague.)
On Wednesday I found a blogger who had located Notice to Mariners 45/2010. Notice# 434/10(18) was an ‘intermittent missile firing operations advisory,’ which appeared to be active and pertain to the area in question (though I can’t say for sure because I haven’t taken the time to get nautical map savvy). It suggested how ships should avoid the area so I was wondering if there was a similar advisory (NOTAMS?) for aircraft. SO, I googled…
I found a link to CNN’s Larry King Live Blog. They were going to cover this story on Monday night and the blurb said something to the effect that the FAA seems to have known about this event because it had issued a no-fly— and that was all I got.
The link went to a story that had been removed.
There is no cache for google news stories so I tried to locate it on other engines.
All caches had been replaced with a different story: Why Ricky Martin stayed in the closet so long. However, I did save images of what I told you I saw.
Sorry for the long wind. This is the first time in my life that I think I may have caught the government in an out and out lie to the people.
I know it happens but watching it unfold in front of me is eye opening. November 13, 2010 at 1:37 am
I don't buy into any conspiracy here...just seeking truth. I'm still stuck at the simple (should be) determination of which way the plume/trail is going. If that is determined factually then the airliner/missile aspect can be more easily determined. Some say east...some say norhwest. But I did notice that the contrail group ignores posts like "was on a commercial flight from Hawaii at that time and was diverted around the area in question towards Big Sur due to military ops in the area"...or articles written by people who contend they have "high up contacts who in fact did confirm it was a missile" (ie Canada Free Press article) ...I on the other hand have no agenda or interest in a particular outcome so I ignore nothing. But ....all these people are either lying or something else is going on besides a simple airliner 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.