[Mr. Silverback]

I don't believe there was a launch; the object is an MD-11. However, I phrase it as "launch" when I'm asking how an SLBM could still be photographed by Warren five minutes later. The idea is to make the missile person tell me how that's possible. So far, no one has. I've had people ignore it, one say he has no answer and others insult me or claim Warren's photos are fake without offering evidence.

TXnMA put up a thread you may have seen in which he proves CBS lied about the video and has only provided a heavily edited "raw" version. Here's a graphic from that thread, showing the video synched up with Warren's photos:

The orange line is the flight path of UPS 902, BTW. With these time indices, I'd say it's no stretch to say the object had been producing contrail (if a missile, rocketing upwards) for at least 17 seconds. That would put us at T+5:00 by the last Warren shot. It would also mean Warren is photographing an object in or near outer space and hundreds of miles downrange, yet it appears almost exactly the same size it was a minute or two minutes before.

NASA uses purpose-built tracking cameras to follow the shuttle for the first 165 seconds of flight. They may use them for longer from other locations, the article I'm linking too is unclear, but in any case, they use these hulking tracking cameras so big and expensive that they refer to them ats "mounts," like a gun on a ship. These turrets must be manned by a technician, with tracking systems so precise that the heartbeat of the technician can affect their tracking. Yet at T+5:00, Warren is doing the same thing with a $900 Nikon (and no long lens), and Sky2 is doing it with...well, I'm not sure what they were packing, but it wasn't a NASA tracking camera.

If the object is an MD-11, taking a picture of it with a $900 Nikon is no big deal. If it's an SLBM, it's physically impossible.

[Ditto]

If the object is an MD-11, taking a picture of it with a $900 Nikon is no big deal. If it's an SLBM, it's physically impossible.

Ditto all that you said. Thank you.

This entire contrail thing is the dumbest ass stuff I have ever seen on Free Republic.

[TigersEye]

That's a freakin' joke, right?

This is from contrailscience.com.

The problem with these overlaid pictures is that the plane barely moves forward in this multiple overlay while the contrail moves a lot. That doesn't make sense.

[TigersEye]

Then there's this bit of comical CGI from Contrailscience.com.

Earlier, at 5:19, Rick Warren takes this image from his 10th floor balcony in Long Beach

Those two photos are clearly NOT taken from the same location OR the clouds moved quite a bit from one shot to the next. If the cloud moved a lot why didn't the vehicle leaving the contrail move significantly as well?

The second pic is obviously taken a little later than the first as the lighting of the sunset shows. But the vehicle is in the same approximate position and a good deal of the contrail has disappeared. The answer is simple. The vehicle is traveling away from the photographer to the west at a severe angle as the Sky2 photographer thought. Even a slow moving aircraft would have moved significantly more in the frame if it were coming towards the photographer to the east. As both UPS and flight 808 were supposed to be doing.

[TigersEye]

Here is another joke from Contrailscience.com.

The final image also includes UPS902's track as supplied by FlightAware.com and the FAA.

Why is the track of UPS902, as supplied by FlightAware.com, perpendicular to the path of the contrail?