I’ve been away from this for a while, but the pics in post #556 (and other supporting work on this thread) put the last nail in the “missile’s” coffin. Good work by Yardstick, TXnMA, Rokke, and others.
I know they are feeling frustrated in knowing they have been proven wrong and I commend them for fighting to the end, but I think soon some of them will finally say, “Damn! I hate to say it, but you guys are right.”
Let me guess. You've never seen a missile launch, but you've seen lots of contrails. And in all this time, you've never been fooled for long into thinking a contrail was a missile, but you can understand it if ....
a) an 11-year-local professional airborne cameraman in one of the world's most competitive markets didn't know the dif between a horizontal airline contrail and a vertical missile plume at sunset!
b) Multiple Air Force Generals and an editor from Jane's were dunderheaded simps
c) It was only natural that there'd be an intense, immediate counter-response very heavy on unverifiable and/or unsourced still shots of supposedly the same moving event combined with numbing mathematical calculations, graphs, charts, arrows, and lines to prove an optical illusion!
....Or ....
a) A missile was fired off the Southern California coast, a traffic cameraman got footage of it, and nobody wants to officially own it.
Occam's Razor calls are laughable. Just like those photos that supposedly "prove" that contrails can look exactly like what was in Leyvas' video, but actually reveal shiningly the dif between an underlit horizontal contrail and a vertical plume. Big as the nose on your face. Some people here point and yell "Occam's Razor!" at its opposite, in order to convince themselves that a missile was an airplane.
Yikes.