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.
It is impossible to exactly correlate any known flight path to an unknown flight path.
No one is disputing that jet contrails can look like rocket contrails. That is why we are having this debate, right ? The issue is whether the contrail/plume captured on the high res zoomed in video from a professional video crew was rocket or plane. Has nothing to do with any other plume/contrail.
Exactly how their brainwashed the sheeple with AGW and CO2. Science by consensus.
In real science all its takes is one observation to destroy an entire theory.
Headed west out to sea. If it was a plane, how come it did not past the Helicopter pilot and get filmed high over LA ? The pilot stated the event ended.
Naval shelling of San Clemente Island ?
That image is from the December 31st event.
Looks like clouds at the base of the contrail. Not contrail spreading. At any rate you cannot tell from that distance. The one fact that proves absolutely conclusively that it was a missile is the lighting in the plume. Bright on the right. Dark on the left. Missile launch. Absolute. 100 %.
Provide a link please.
Estimated by the Helicopter pilot with well over 10 years flying around to destinations within the area just about every work day.
The GOES satellite images are timestamped, and although they're at 15 minute intervals, you can spot a smeared jet contrail along the recorded path of UPS 902 at the day and time the CBS video was shot as it drifts on the prevailing winds towards the south.
Wow. They found the contrail for a known flight. What the heck does that have to do with what was filmed on video ? An event filmed at an unknown location.
The only way you can counter a high res closeup video of a specific event is another high res closeup video of a counter event. All the so called proof the ‘look boss, the plane’ crowd has come up with, cannot even be used to refute the video. Please, someone make a video of the flight, assuming you have actually agreed as to which flight it was.
It sort of reminds me when I was in elementary school and a jet was going west to east overhead and was already mostly in the east and a friend said, look, the jet’s going to crash; it’s heading straight down. I tried to explain to him that it was heading across the sky toward the horizon, not down toward the ground, but he was phenomenologically not analytically-oriented and couldn’t conceive that anything could be different from how it appeared to him.
Looks like they are photo shopping now. Also, the size of the plane does not change even though it is supposedly flying past. The reason he pasted the plane like he did was to keep the plane in line with the plume. What an idiot. The plume is moving with the wind. The plane is not. Time to employ the professionals in Hollywood guys. I knew some people that did much better work then this about 15 years ago.
The atmospheric lensing effect is strongly at work in this particular situation, but if you discount it you'll find that contrail goes way, way, way out to sea, over the horizon and darned near to Hawaii.
That's because it's a jet plane with three engines that produce a single contrail.
Do not trust your observational skills. Post the image you used to make the calculations and I will point out your mistake.
Some cruise missiles have a single jet engine.
Commercial aircraft have 2, 3, or 4 engines.
I see only one contrail...
WHY DOES EVERYONE ASSUME A MISSILE CANNOT USE A JET ENGINE?
Why does everyone assume that a submarine cannot surface and deploy a cruise missile with a jet engine?
Why does anyone not realize we have cruise missiles with jet engines?
Why would anyone think somebody else does not?
Wasn’t the old German V-1 a jet propelled missile?
Some cruise missiles have a single jet engine.
Commercial aircraft have 2, 3, or 4 engines.
I see only one contrail...
WHY DOES EVERYONE ASSUME A MISSILE CANNOT USE A JET ENGINE?
Why does everyone assume that a submarine cannot surface and deploy a cruise missile with a jet engine?
Why does anyone not realize we have cruise missiles with jet engines?
Why would anyone think somebody else does not?
Wasn’t the old German V-1 a jet propelled missile?
The other flight we thought it might be went on to Phoenix.
And the Helicopter pilot with a professional zoom camera could not see a plane flying at a low altitude. Right. So let me see if I get your changing story line. You now are certain it was the UPS flight landing at Ontario ?
Thanks for the info. Do you think there is any possibility they were testing a super sonic cruise missile ? Assuming it had a starting rocket phase to get to a safe test altitude and then the rocket engine kicks in and off it went over the open Pacific.
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.