World Net Daily fabricates a "Missile" Contrail tale

Faith, Reason, and Health ^ | 12/12/2010 | Dr. Brian Kopp

[Brian Kopp DPM]

World Net Daily fabricates a "Missile" Contrail tale

I've been following the California contrail saga closely since the original video was captured in early November. I was never fully satisfied with any of the explanations, so I tracked down the two known first hand eyewitnesses and spoke to them about what they actually witnessed. As a result of these interviews, I contacted World Net Daily (because they were still writing about the subject a month later, from the bias that the contrail was indeed a missile, and I had written for them once before) and asked them if they would be interested in an article based on these first hand eyewitness accounts. They asked me to submit my article, and were eager to use it.

At this point, I was thoroughly convinced that the contrail was nothing more than UPS flight 902, back-lit by the setting sun. The object remained in view to the eyewitnesses far too long to have represented a missile launch, despite several credible military experts who had stated the contrary. Because WND was following the lead of these experts, and continued to insist the contrail was a missile exhaust plume, I knew I had to be extremely diplomatic in presenting a countering view, if I wanted them to actually publish it. So I used terminology that was deliberately non-committal.

Furthermore, Gil Leyvas had given freely of his time in presenting his side of the debate, and was very kind and gracious during our phone interview as well as multiple subsequent email exchanges, so I wanted him to have "his day in court." I gave him a lot of column space to explain his perspective.

Here is the article, as I submitted it to WND, with the graphics I recommended (the first of which was graciously supplied by FreeRepublic.com poster TXnMA) and for which I had obtained permission. I was not blatantly militating for the airliner contrail argument, because WND would not have published such an article, but any objective reader would see from the manner in which I presented the facts that, despite Leyvas' good faith, the evidence underpinning the "missile exhaust plume" side of the debate was exceedingly weak at best:

California contrail: Four conflicting eyewitness reports

One month after the KCBS video purporting to show a missile contrail off the coast of California went viral, a heated debate over what exactly created the contrail persists. Experts have offered convincing analysis supporting the theory that the contrail represents an SLBM launch, while internet pundits have assembled a formidable collection of evidence that the contrail was created by UPS flight 902. The debate is seemingly at an impasse, and it might be a good time to step back from the intense data analysis and review the basic facts of November 8, 2010.

There are two known eyewitnesses who captured images of the contrail. Gil Leyvas is the helicopter camera man for KCBS in Los Angeles who videotaped the contrail and Rick Warren lives on Long Beach and photographed the contrail from his tenth story balcony. A 50 minute phone interview with Leyvas was obtained for this report and discussed further via email, and Warren was also contacted by email.

According to Leyvas, his video was obtained while filming a sunset view for a KCBS weather report. As he was filming, Leyvas noticed an object on the horizon that appeared to be climbing vertically out of the ocean, and he zoomed in on the object. He videotaped the contrail for a total of ten minutes and subsequently continued to view the contrail for an additional ten minutes. Leyvas maintains that the object itself that created the contrail only remained in view for two to three minutes. For 30 to 45 seconds, the object glowed brightly and then seemed to disappear from view. His initial impression was that the object was traveling east towards the coast. On reviewing the video later, he had the impression the object may instead have been heading away from the coast, towards the northwest.

The highly unusual appearance of the sunset contrail shown on TV and posted online, combined with Leyvas’ perception that the object creating the contrail only remained in view for two to three minutes, constitutes the primary basis upon which many observers believe the object was a Sub Launched Ballistic Missile.

Rick Warren wasn’t sure what the object was that he was photographing on November 8th. “I was shooting with a telephoto lens and looking through a viewfinder so I never really saw the separation of the object and the contrail until I looked at the photos, but I’m sure that this whole thing lasted way too long to be a missile. I see lots of contrails from my 10th floor balcony but the difference in this one was that it “seemed” to be going up.”

Having seen many contrails, what stood out for Warren was the vertical nature of the contrail, not that it looked like a missile exhaust plume. Some of his photos of the contrail were posted on the local ABC7 website, and were utilized by Mick West of Contrailscience.com to create a composite image of the flight progression of the object. The time stamps on Warren’s photos were used to establish that the object creating the contrail remained in view for 4 minutes 43 seconds in Warren’s photos. Based on altitude and position, the object first appeared in Leyvas’ video at least five minutes prior to Warren’s photos. After seeing West’s analysis of the images, Warren says, “I’m now of the opinion that it was indeed a plane."

At this point, one of the most glaring discrepancies between these eyewitness accounts must be addressed. Most observers looking at Warren’s images agree that the small dark object which appears at the top of each of his later photos is the same craft creating the plume that was seen in his earlier photos as well as that which was seen in Leyvas’ video.

If the object that created the contrail was still visible in Warren’s photos, then the object itself is not likely to have been a missile. Solid fuel engines such as those used in an SLBM create an uninterrupted exhaust plume for two to three minutes, after which time the solid fuel is spent, and the missile is usually out of view.

On the other hand, when an airliner transitions from cold moist air to warmer drier air, the dew point changes and contrail formation decreases. In the case of USP902, the airliner would have been transitioning from moist cool air at altitude over the ocean to warmer, drier air over land. This could explain the contrail disappearing as the object moved farther east.

Mick West created a "chronological cut" of Leyvas’ video and posted it to YouTube. The transition from moist cool air over the ocean to warmer, drier air over land may have occurred at 1:17 to 1:20 of the chronological cut, which Warren referred to as “the separation of the object and the contrail.” When still images from Leyvas’ video are compared to the overlay of Warren’s photos, there is a remarkable similarity and continuity between the two sets of images, providing a better time frame for Leyvas’ video within the context of Warren’s time stamps:

When Leyvas was initially queried regarding these later photos, he replied,

“…the [Contrailscience composite] animation … only shows the path the plume drifted and not anything in flight. The 30-45 seconds of video I captured in which I could see the object (the portion of the video showing the glow/flame of the object at its pinnacle) occurred 8-10 minutes prior to the animated images of the animation (if the time stamps are accurate). I have no way of telling if those time stamps are accurate since the raw video has no real-time time stamp associated with it. I can only go by an estimated time based on the time we launched out of John Wayne airport and the approximate time of our weather shot. My guess is that the time stamps are relatively close to the accurate time. However, what you are seeing in those images is the plume drifting and not anything in flight.

Leyvas still maintains the object creating the contrail is not visible in Warren’s photos 8 to 10 minutes later:

”The separate smaller trail that is separate from the main body of the plume and that was captured by Warren in his photos, which makes it seem as if the object continued in flight, appears in my video to possibly be the top portion of the plume that partly dissipates leaving a segment of the tip adrift - detached from the main body of the plume. (I highlight "possibly be" because during that portion of the video, I zoom in and out and pan off and back onto the plume, so I'm not sure if what we are seeing is a stage of separation like that of a missile or if it's the tip of the plume separating from the main portion). I did zoom into that portion to see if I could see a craft of some kind (at the time I thought that there was a chance the object was still making condensation/exhaust) but there was nothing there creating that segment. Had there been, I know I would have been able to see it with the high-powered lens I was using. Add to that - if it was traveling toward us, the closer it would come the easier it would be to see it, but there was nothing there. That's why I said it was merely the plume adrift and not anything continuously flying.

“Though there was no time code associated with the raw footage I shot, you are still able to accurately time the footage from the moment I started the recording (as we departed John Wayne airport) to the final moments of the mystery missile story. When I play the video I can time the duration of the object in flight which was between 30-45 seconds of "Glow Time" - which is inclusive within, and at the end of the 2-3 minute estimated flight time from which the plume was visible at the horizon ... I can rely on the raw footage as it plays to gauge my estimated times since it plays back in real time on the player deck's control track timer.”

There were also two unknown witnesses who captured images of the contrail, both anonymous posters on the image hosting website Flickr. A photographer on Hermosa Beach, north of Leyvas and Warren, uploaded a photo of the November 8 sunset and only subsequently realized he had captured the same contrail due to media reports. From his vantage point, without the setting sun directly back-lighting the contrail, it apparently appeared similar to the other contrails in his sunset photo.

Another anonymous photographer uploaded photos of clouds at sunset on November 8, and noticed a bright horizontal contrail that he subsequently associated with the media reports regarding the contrail. Notice that in the case of these latter two eyewitnesses, the first noted nothing unusual about the contrail until he read media reports about it, and the second viewed a horizontal, not vertical contrail.

Finally, the opinions of the known military experts must be taken into consideration. Several highly credible experts have stated their opinion that the contrail in question represented the launching of an SLBM.

A little further background from Leyvas might shed more light on the way the video was edited and presented to the public. Leyvas related that the video was taken during sweeps week in his TV market, and part of his job during sweeps week is to go out and look for and capture video of interest for sweeps week ratings. The video he captured of the contrail was subsequently heavily edited before being aired, and less than two minutes of the ten minutes of video has been seen by these experts. From the perspective of garnering sweeps week ratings, the footage was certainly successful.

It may be that the experts would modify their opinion based on viewing the entire footage. The footage is owned by the local CBS affiliate and nothing was found by the Department of Defense in reviewing the footage that would prevent its release to the public. According to Leyvas, it might still be available on their server. If that is the case, it should just be a matter of uploading the unedited ten minutes of video to YouTube to put an end to the debate.

Now compare the article I composed and submitted above to the sensationalistic manipulated (and frankly, fabricated) version WND actually published:

MATTERS OF NATIONAL SECURITY
Mysterious missile launch baffles even eyewitnesses
Video, still photographers watched contrail soaring over Pacific Coast

One thing to note, as I implied in my original closing paragraph. Both CBS and WND know that Gil Leyvas has a back up copy of the original unedited ten minutes of raw footage. CBS knows they duped credible military experts into stating publicly that the contrail was formed by a missile by deliberately editing the raw footage for ratings. CBS has also conveniently let the impression persist from the first week that the video was seized by the Department of Defense for analysis (implying they no longer had a copy.)

WND also knows from my correspondence with them that a back-up copy exists, but they left that important fact out of their version of the story.

Frankly, both media outlets are acting like ... typical mainstream media outlets.

I never trusted CBS to begin with.

Unfortunately, I can no longer trust World Net Daily as a news source.

And I sure as heck will never submit anything to them in the future for publication.

[TigersEye]

Since you demonstrably do not know the difference between the unrelated terms, "atmospheric distortion" and "optical illusion", (illusion is maintained in vacuo) you prove yourself to be incompetent to continue this discussion.

LOL You prove yourself insane.

[Hardraade]

Not that slow and they don’t fly that high, either.

Actually, that depends. For example, a path that takes the missile high in the start to get the orientation right and then brings it down for the final leg with ground matching is common. The physical configuration also varies - the Klub is different from the Tomahawk is different from the Scalp. I think someone else covered why the initial speed isn't all that great, so I'll just assume you can read.

Of course, to know any of this stuff I probably ought to be a Dr. Divinity or a Bishop (or at least a Pastor) or something.

[LowOiL]

Thank you...

[DoorGunner]

Doubler, schmubler.

1. I am judging speed past the little thin cloud.

2. Assuming the “airplane” was at 30,000 ft, the “contrail” would be visible for over 200 miles.

3. Assuming 600MPH, the “contrail” be visible for 20 minutes

4. If the disturbed part of the “contrail” had been blown apart by the upper winds for 20 minutes, it would have dissipated much more.

5. An aircraft transiting LA at FL30, or more, is not going to descend to a low enough altitude to stop producing a “contrail.”

6. The only characteristic this item shares with “contrails” is that it is long, and sort of cloud shaped.

DG

[mvpel]

Three engines, grouped close together near the tail of the plane.

Here's a "missile launch" in North Carolina:

[Right Wing Assault]

You need some more info about contrails. The article is aimed at “chemtrail” people, but the contrail info in the links is very informative.

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/health_risks/Contrail_Controversy.html

Contrails can persist for 10 hours or more, depending upon temperature and humidity. Those can change even when a plane is at a constant altitude.

Search on “contrail persistence.” Do image searches on “contrails” and “wide contrails.”

[aruanan]

Sorry, I put in the wrong address for the link. Here is an MD-11 with a giant contrail apparently coming in for a landing somewhere. And here is one of another couple of planes with massive contrails. I'm not posting the images because they're copyrighted.

[Mr. Silverback]

Eff off, Kong. Don’t you have a plane to catch to somewhere, and some chemtrails to smoke?

Ah, thank you for providing me the opportunity to discredit you further...though truth be told, you've done almost all the work yourself over the past month.

I wonder why you're lying here.

You see, you know I'm not a chemtrailer. You know the folks at Contrail Science are not chemtrailers, that they in fact debunk chemtrail crapola. I know these things because I've told you.

Though that is the only time I personally told you, you have made this assertion that Contrail Science is a pro-chemtrail site numerous times, which means you either haven't checked their evidence or you are knowingly mischaracterizing them and FReepers who find their evidence compelling.

Now, if I were one of those conspiracy kook types, I would take you repeatedly and knowingly mischaracterizing people as an indication of something dark, evidence that you are part of a sophisticated effort to convince Americans of an imminent threat that doesn't exist. Perhaps so Obozo can yell, "Chinese attack" and declare martial law.

The good news is, I'm not a conspiracy kook, so I realize you're just a bloviating butthole.

The Royal Navy says "Hi."

[Brian Kopp DPM]

Actually, I have not read WND in years. I don’t read websites that disguise marketing as news.

[DoorGunner]

I did as you ordered, for about an hour, but I neither saw, nor read, anything that would make me think differently.

Has anyone bothered to check whether the UPS plane changed altitude, or, if the OAT (at altitude) changed over LA, or even humidity? OR is it easier to just ASSUME that such happened?

Did anyone as themselves how the UPS plane could be moving obviously faster than sound, when it passed the little cloud?

Did anybody wonder why the “contrail” is thicker, not thinner, 200 miles away (and presumably, 20 minutes later)?

DG

[Brian Kopp DPM]

An aircraft transiting LA at FL30, or more, is not going to descend to a low enough altitude to stop producing a “contrail.”

The theory is not that UPS902 descended enough to cease creating a contrail, but that it passed from cold moist air over the Pacific to drier warmer air (changing the dew point) as it approached land.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

to know any of this stuff I probably ought to be a Dr. Divinity or a Bishop (or at least a Pastor) or something.

If that was a reference to me, I am a foot surgeon ("DPM" - Doctor of Podiatric Medicine, i.e., a Podiatrist.) I have never claimed to be an expert on anything related to this debate. I just talked to the first hand witnesses, and related their opinions.

One of them thinks it might have been a missile, but he's not sure. One of them said it definitely was not a missile, based on the fact it was in view for almost five minutes in his photos. My contention all along has been that SLBMs do not create an exhaust plume for 5 to 10 minutes.

No one has proven Leyvas' main point, that the object disappeared from view after 2 to 3 minutes.

On the contrary, the opposite view has been established: the object creating the contrail continued creating a contrail throughout Leyvas' video as well as throughout Warren's photos, which represents a time frame of over ten minutes.

Missiles do not create exhaust plumes for over ten minutes.

Airliners do create contrails, given the right atmospheric conditions, as long as they are flying in those atmospheric conditions.

Every possible scenario that could "prove" this was a missile has been dismissed. There's nothing left to debate.

[mvpel]

Has anyone bothered to check whether the UPS plane changed altitude, or, if the OAT (at altitude) changed over LA, or even humidity?

It was coming in for a landing at Ontario, California, and its altitude was dropping, as recorded in the FlightAware.com logs. Nobody is assuming anything.

The contrail appeared thicker 200 miles away because the winds aloft were about 80mph that day based on images from the GOES weather satellite, and they'd had about 20 minutes to spread out the distant part of the contrail.

If you look at a contrail from an actual missile launch, the difference between surface winds and winds aloft causes the upper portion of the contrail to spread differently than the lower portion.

[Finny]

Every possible scenario that could "prove" this was a missile has been dismissed ...

... by armchair theorists with enormous egos who refuse to accept the proof of the video itself and the lighting direction of the setting sun that proves a vertical plume created by an object headed north-west. They deny this in part by way of a pretend "optical illusion."

Kopp, you had me fooled for a little while that you were approaching this in real seek-the-truth, objective curiosity via investigative reporting. The reality: You went into your interviews with Gil Leyvas WITH YOUR MIND ALREADY MADE UP that no matter what he told you, you were going to "discover" that he was mistaken, that he was fooled, that he was too dim to understand that he was shooting footage of a common airliner condensation trail instead of a missile.

From YOUR article, words Leyvas said TO YOU: I did zoom into that portion to see if I could see a craft of some kind (at the time I thought that there was a chance the object was still making condensation/exhaust) but there was nothing there creating that segment. Had there been, I know I would have been able to see it with the high-powered lens I was using. Add to that - if it was traveling toward us, the closer it would come the easier it would be to see it, but there was nothing there.

You're a phony-baloney as non-agenda reporter, Kopp, and your contempt for Leyvas' intelligence and competence is disgusting.

[Finny]

I should make it more clear -- the Leyvas quote in my post above (#254) illustrates how the poor guy was telling you loud and clear, with all the patience and civility he could muster: "Look, bub, the thing I shot in the video clearly wasn't an airliner heading east and leaving a contrail. GET IT?"

But even before your WND article was published, and you had mentioned here on FR that it was "in the works," and I was still under the illusion that you had no agenda, no fore-gone conclusion to confirm, you slipped up in a FReeper post somewhere on these thread, when discussing that Levyas had INDEED told you (what some of us knew he would) that he only saw the object creating the plume for two or three minutes before it disappeared, not ten minutes, though he shot video for about ten minues, mostly of the lingering plume.

That's when you mentioned that there was another person you were hoping to interview, another "expert" who could explain how/why Levas (the poor dumb bastard!) was fooled by optical illusions into thinking it was a missile launch. *sigh* In other words, you went into it determined to prove Leyvas didn't know what he was doing, and by gosh and by golly, THAT'S WHAT YOU THINK YOU PROVED.

I never was a fan of WND, and now I see why. YOU are a perfect representation of WND's flaws.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

The reality: You went into your interviews with Gil Leyvas WITH YOUR MIND ALREADY MADE UP that no matter what he told you, you were going to "discover" that he was mistaken, that he was fooled, that he was too dim to understand that he was shooting footage of a common airliner condensation trail instead of a missile.

On the contrary, I thought it was a missile from the very beginning. The appearance of the video was compelling in that regard.

Then I stumbled on a quote from an article that said Leyvas filmed the object for ten minutes, which seemed to indicate it was not a missile.

Then someone here on FR said Leyvas only witnessed the object for 2 to 3 minutes. Which brought my opinion back into the missile camp.

So I contacted the photographer Warren. He was convinced it was an airliner because the contrail was being formed for almost five minutes in his photos.

Given the discrepancy, I tracked down Leyvas himself, and we spoke by phone for almost an hour, and subsequently exchanged about a dozen emails.

When I got off the phone with Leyvas, I was convinced he had the best explanation, but even then there was this glaring discrepancy between Leyvas' view (wasn't sure what it was, could have been either a contrail or a missile) and Warren's view (was a plane, definitely stayed in view too long to be a missile.)

So I went back and compared Leyvas' video and stills from his video to Warren's photos.

That's how I came to my conclusion:

One of them thinks it might have been a missile, but he's not sure. One of them said it definitely was not a missile, based on the fact it was in view for almost five minutes in his photos. My contention all along has been that SLBMs do not create an exhaust plume for 5 to 10 minutes.

No one has proven Leyvas' main point, that the object disappeared from view after 2 to 3 minutes.

On the contrary, the opposite view has been established: the object creating the contrail continued creating a contrail throughout Leyvas' video as well as throughout Warren's photos, which represents a time frame of over ten minutes.

Missiles do not create exhaust plumes for over ten minutes.

Airliners do create contrails, given the right atmospheric conditions, as long as they are flying in those atmospheric conditions.

Every possible scenario that could "prove" this was a missile has been dismissed. There's nothing left to debate.

If your opinion differs from mine, that's fine.

But I'm not going to ascribe nefarious motives to the reasons you formed your opinions the way you did. We simply disagree, and I hope you would refrain from ascribing nefarious motives to the reasons I arrived at my conclusions.

I see now you've continue down the line from ascribing motives to personal insult with your subsequent post.

So be it. It does not help you build your case in this debate.

[Brian Kopp DPM]

"Look, bub, the thing I shot in the video clearly wasn't an airliner heading east and leaving a contrail. GET IT?"

You do not know what you are talking about. Leyvas was adamant that he is not sure what it was, airliner, missile, or something else. He said repeatedly, "I'm still not sure what the object is, jet or missile or for that matter, something else."

You are going further into personal insult and conjecture with your posts here, and I won't go there with you.

Have a Blessed Christmas.

[TXnMA]

I was going to answer some of your questions, but, then I realized that you have made so many ignorant assumptions, that, in order to do so, I would have to teach you second grade science first.

Here: Watch this video, generated with Google Earth, to get a beginner's view of what was going on. At the same time, try to gain a clue about trivia like perspective and angular velocity. Meanwhile, you will get a glimpse of the (free) tools and level of capability we are applying to this issue.

You are floundering in the dark with guesses and untutored impressions. We are applying data, facts, and sound engineering and graphical principles.

Watch the video (which was generated as a tutorial for those who are just learning Google Earth). The flight track was generated and plotted using actual RADAR data. The viewpoints were established by matching the viewpoints of the actual images and video stills discussed.

Everyhing in that video matches what was recorded by Leyvas and various still photographers. Nothing matches an outgoing missile -- and no missile could match reality as recorded on 08NOV..

Work with FACTS. Try to grasp how magnification of the image affects apparent angular velocity aross the sensor/screen. If you can't get on sound enough scientific ground to ask reasonably intelligent questions, don't expect us to do your work of providing the answers.

[TigersEye]

The theory is not that UPS902 descended enough to cease creating a contrail, but that it passed from cold moist air over the Pacific to drier warmer air (changing the dew point) as it approached land.

That's the theory now. Last week it was that UPS902 dropped from 39,000 ft to 37,000 ft. Oddly enough their source for that, FlightAware.com now shows that flight, on Nov. 8th, traveling most of its flight at 37k ft and ascending to 39k ft for the last portion of its flight.

Even the contrailscience guy used that argument on his Youtube page.

# Epoxynous

Epoxynous
2 weeks ago

@zerotolerance4u That's the average cruising altitude. You need to click on "Tack log and graph" UPS902 was at 39000 feet from 4PM PST (listed as 7PM EST)

FWIW, DoorGunner, I tried to find weather info for that date everywhere I could and none was available that I could find. I do know that a huge front had come in from the Pacific at that time and was over the Front Range of the Rockies in Colorado at 5:00 PM PST. I know because the humidity in it was coming down in white flakes here.

[TigersEye]

...the object creating the contrail continued creating a contrail throughout Leyvas' video ...

Except for the point where it stopped making a contrail and he continued to tape its ascent.

Leyvas' video here showing the change from a continuous plume to a short, quickly dissipating contrail.