Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Yo-Yo

My point is that unless the object disappeared mid-flight, I don’t understand why there’s no additional ground footage of the object given the serious nature of the original claim of an apparent missile.

Let me put it this way rhetorically: Is there any footage of the object going completely out of view? If not, why?

I’m not interested in the forensics. I want to know more about the credibility of the reporters, and omissions of details.


138 posted on 12/05/2010 2:06:04 PM PST by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies ]


To: Gene Eric
I’m not interested in the forensics. I want to know more about the credibility of the reporters, and omissions of details.

You're going to have to do some of the work yourself. I linked to a KCBS follow up story (link reproduced here,) where the original KCBS helicopter photographer Gil Leyvis describes what happened to the image he followed. His statement is near the end of the video, beginning at the 3:06 mark.

The quote that caught my ear: "and at one point it seemed to separate, the smoke or the plume seemed to stop, and contnue further up in the sky, and then finally disappear."

That is contrail behavior, but definately not rocket behavior.

139 posted on 12/05/2010 2:43:01 PM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson