Posted on 11/13/2010 2:55:59 PM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
I answered this in a previous post - but that too is sheer speculation.
At this point I think you’re intentionally trying to make this site look bad. I’ve shown you a picture from another day of a plane doing the same moves. You ignore it. Willfully.
“So the 3 star General is a fool? Did you tell him? Would you say it to his face?”
You called them fools, I call them wrong. There is nothing magic about stars that makes one immune from this sort of stupidity, especially in this day and age.
“And the man at Jane’s, the Editor -— he is a mistaken fool too?”
He’s a fool if he stands by his erroneous conclusion. Right now he’s just wrong. Ask him if he’s ever made a mistake, I’ll bet he’d admit he has.
“then people who should know, and who DO know, state unequivocally that it is a SLBM missile smoke plume ...”
They should know, but they are wrong in this case. Just because they state something unequivocally doesn’t mean they aren’t unequivocally wrong.
“looked that way to me too and many many others.”
You didn’t know what you were looking at. Your conclusion is wrong, and you have plenty of company. It doesn’t make you right, it makes you wrong with lots of other folks who are also wrong.
It’s ok, you trusted self proclaimed experts. You f’ed up, you trusted them. You’ll know better next time.
Can you imagine the PR if the Navy shot down a commercial airliner?
It was an airplane-—thats why they can’t provide a flight plan, take off time, radar transcript, oceanic clearence request and delivery, registration number, mode 3 codes assigned etc.
Obviously!
Early on at FR it wasn’t like this. Some believe there are posers here now. I think a lot of it stems from people who joined who were interested in the right’s philosophy but who never were really on board to begin with; similar to Blue Dogs and RINOs.
Sorry you’ve had a negative experience here. There are many FReepers still here from FR’s younger years, and they are what keeps this place going...outside of Mr. R., of course
Well said and thank you.
I thought intelligent educated discourse was what we were after.
I thought wrong.
“You’ll know better next time.”
I see no evidence of that. In fact, the more he’s proven wrong the more hardcore he gets.
Looks like a missile but where did it come down at?
Depending on staging, the missile (one stage) simply stops emitting gasses and coasts down into the middle of the Pacific. Falling objects from 150,000 ft or under don’t “fireball” like breaking up Space Shuttles do. A single upper stage that is fuel and engine parts breaks up and sin’t likely to be seen over the mid-Pacific.
A re-entry capsule or bomb casing - IF (big IF there!!!) isn’t easay to see, and isn’t even really necessary. The purpose, you see, would be for some foreign power to show off the LAUNCH of their missile from near the US coast, not to actually land a capsule or bomb anywhere in particular.
Right?
Right.
Are you talking about the picture in 308?
When are you going to figure out no one here is going to get caught on the horns of your dilema?
I see that, nobody cares that this stuff is a common occurence. Funny how that works. Multiple pictures of mutiple planes that look virtually the same.
I realize that’s not as fun as the missile truthism, but there it is.
“I see no evidence of that. In fact, the more he’s proven wrong the more hardcore he gets.”
He’s coming around. He’s complaining about the discourse now. He just needs to muster up the courage to admit he trusted the wrong “experts” on this one.
Wow. What an accusation.
No, I simply don’t agree with your “picture” and see many points of dissimilarity, which I have listed at length over and over again.
Three very high level experts have given everyone much accurate and valuable information about the VIDEO, and you have not addressed what they have said.
The still photos can and are being interpreted in differing ways.
The video shows many aspects, all aspects actually, of a missile launch.
I have the Jane’s Missile Magazine expert, and the Under Sec of Defense, and the US Ambassador to NATO, and a 3 star General on my side.
You have a contrail science website and some still photos on yours.
I rest my case.
And there are a considerable number of the last group, IMO. Just in general.
As well as a fair number of leftist/misantrhopes etc.
Check your freepmail.
I will.
I’m referring to any and all videos and pictures of this still unexplained incident.
If it was an airplane, then show us the radar transcripts, transponder codes assigned, flight plan with destination, oceanic clearence request and delivery (there’s an audio of that too), registration number, operator——all the stuff!
If it’s an airplane, then that information, data and records exists. If it doesn’t exist then it wasn’t an airplane. those are the FACTS.
Which of the following FACTS does the “sub-launched missile “ definition fill?
1. There was no radar track from the FAA Los Angeles Regional Radar, Point Mugu NAS or Vandenberg AFB.
2. The DSP satellites which can detect the launch of a model rocket and send alerts to several command centers did not detect a launch.
3. Not one aircraft, ship, police officer, or surfer reported a launch.
1. Radar tracks for non-highlighted/non-identified returns of a spurious nature lasting only a few seconds are only light flashes on the screen. They'd get only a few returns before the radar return (the beams are for targeting aircraft at low elevations - 0-45,000 feet - not for tracking missiles headed into the 150,000+ levels) would get too small to be recorded/tracked on the computer screens. We have many years since “raw” returns from the scope are actually plotted or even seen by the ATC processors. Everything has to be tagged and labelled to be put up on the air control screens.
Vandenburg and the others? they could have tracked iot - if they were turned on. Why run a very expensive, hard-to-repair radar and keep a crew on-site 24 hours per day/365 days per year for a missile testing center launching only a few polar shots every year?
2. DSP satellites are not aimed near the US coast. They are used for nuke blasts/test flashes/meteor impacts detections outside the US. Detecting launches of missiles from the US coast line? No.
I have damning evidence that this is an identified plane with the pictures to prove it. You have a bunch of guys who saw a clip and made snap decisions that were incorrect.
I think you’re intentionally trying to obfuscate and make Don’tTreadOnMe look bad. Reasonable and non-duplicitous people can discuss and disagree without being a**holes.
Try it, you might like it.
Can you pull up all the info on any given flight from a week ago? I doubt it.
That doesn’t mean it wasn’t a plane, does it. It means jack.
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.