Posted on 12/06/2010 6:26:46 AM PST by Sprite518
The Department of Defense is slamming the door on questions about the mysterious contrail filmed Nov. 8 by a KCBS television crew near Los Angeles after questions were raised about a warning from the National Geo-Spatial Intelligence Agency that there could be missiles fired in that area at that time.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
That’s because they GOT TO THEM!
I'm Impressed with your powers of observation.
...even though I'm suspended.
WND reports never had evidence. If they did, I missed it. Please provide a link.
Thanks, I’ve seen the video many times and watched it again as you requested.
The video is of the same 15 seconds sliced and diced - where is the full video?
As far as experts seeing missiles, appeals to authority are a wash, we have to go beyond the video to get to what it was.. And, again, the fact that they look like missiles is true. Lots of folks mistake them for missiles.
Still no answer??? LOL!
Its not my responsibility to post any link; its yours, since you have made the accusation.
> “Static exhaust plume? Where do you get such stuff?”
.
Where is the vehicle when the video starts?
Its way down range, so the plume is static for the only important portion, the launch. In fact, the launch plume is already blown downwind, as can be seen from the displacement gap.
Or what appears to be vertical as contrails coming toward you do appear - as shown in the flighpath in the perspective drawings. "What you see" depends on your perspective. "What you see" as vertical may actually be moving horizontal to the earth. When if veers, what you see is also based on your perspective.
I haven't seen anything supporting your assertion of the trajectory that doesn't fit an inbound eastward contrail. That's what it would look like. That's "what you see."
You'll have to introduce some other trajectory information or reference point or perspective in order to conclude otherwise.
> “Because I don’t agree with you?”
.
No, because you used malicious code on your page.
.
Thanks for looking at it. Now I have one more video for you to look at. Tell me what that bright light on the top of the trail is between 35 and 40 seconds in this video. BTW, this report believes the government is embarrassed and trying to cover it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AMdHBgHtNE
Malicious code? Seriously now. You're funny.
You have a flawed assumption in your question.
You need to resolve your post with what is visible in the video.
The obvious course change would be an instantaneous correction of more than 150 degrees by your interpretation, since for the vertical portion to be near horizontal flight, it would have to be moving toward the camera (impossible due to the lighting) and the rest of the plume is clearly moving northwesterly or there would be no dark top showing (as would be the case if it were going northeasterly) .
Think it out. There would also be a clear and advancing shadow line, with the advancing portion being dark beyond that.
.
Ask the camera man why they haven’t released the full video.
The gov clearly knows what it is, because they have both Earth and space based tracking that would yield that info.
> “Ask the camera man why they haven’t released the full video.”
.
Cameramen do not release videos; news directors do.
.
> “Malicious code? Seriously now. You’re funny.”
.
Well, when I run the cursor over the “OK” it shows the log off command. That is a malicious attempt to defeat the purpose of the page.
Implicit in your assumption is that mariners and passengers are an insular, uninformed, uncurious and untalkative group of people.
Is this what you’re trying to hide:
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.