Posted on 11/13/2010 2:55:59 PM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
Hannity was surprised to hear a famous ex Air Force General tell him “That Is A Missile, Shot From A Submarine!” I quote retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney (ex commander of 11th Air Force in Alaska) “I spent 35 years flying fighters, and you can see the guidance system kick in, I have watched that film 10 times, I am absolutely certain that that is not an aircraft, but a sub launch ICBM missile!!!” See the video and judge his words for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LivRJOWrcpA&feature=player_embedded#! I will next post a clickable link.
So, how many nuclear missiles have you stood guard over?
Here's a clue for you on how to look at the "pyramid". If you think the base of the pyramid is close to you and the apex is far away, you might well think "Hey, it's a missile". However, if you think the base of the pyramid is far away and the apex is quite close, you might well think "Hey, it's an airplane coming right over head".
We actually have people who imagine that the base disappearing over the horizon (which is 35, 42 or 62 mile away depending on the height of the observation) is actually ON THE GROUND or ON A MISSILE launch platform of some sort ~ maybe a submarine.
Using nothing more than Egyptian trigonometry and modern notation, I was able to establish that the BASE, no matter how you looked at it, was FAR LARGER than can reasonably be expected from even our largest missiles. Recasting the requirements and redoing the computations (on a modern digital computer of the finest manufacture) I established that the engine array had to be about 1.5 Km wide to produce the contrail observed.
If we but accept that it was an airplane and the wind was sufficient to blow the contrail around, we can get something that wide quite easily.
Remember, a missile is going to be only seconds away from the launch program at the time of filming. Flight time for an airplane is sufficient to allow for wind to do its work, but flight time for a missile isn't.
Now, show me your numbers.
“To what end? What would a trajectory prove? Nothing”
Amazing. I’m definitely talking to the wrong person about this subject and I strongly suspect you are too.
Trusting official military sources is one thing, and they're the ones saying it's an airliner. Trusting retired military sources and the authorites at Janes, the foremost publication on missiles and defense tech, is a whole 'nother ballgame.
You've never seen a missile launch live, have you? You've never seen a missile launch live with binoculars as well as viewed overhead airtraffic with them, have you? You don't LIVE UNDER THE FLIGHT PATH of the plane you say was responsible for this, do you? *sigh*
Rudimentary knowledge of scientific principles is not the same as being there. Folks with rudimentary knowledge of scientific principles could once "prove" that it was impossible for bumble bees to fly. Trust your first impression this time, FRiend. It was correct. And I am your FRiend telling you: this is an example of how at risk the BEST of us Americans are (I consider you among "the best," even though you're a Canadian, if I remember right!), and the next time it may be YOU trying to wake up a stubborn populace who rely more on theory than reality, and fall for glib technical explanations based on unverifiable evidence and come conslusions you know are possibly dangerously wrong. THEN you may look back and think, "Hmmmm ... deja vu. Now I'm in the place where Finny once was. And nobody will believe me even when I'm backed by incredibly qualified experts. Wow -- this is scary."
And it is. Just tuck it away in your mind for future reference, because it WILL happen again in some other form.
Good catch. Even the photographer said it was moving from West to East ~
“I’m glad he’s retired.”
Why, cause you’re a genius, an expert, and can more definitively tell us all what it is?
What did you bail out at, JCS Chief?
And it is. Just tuck it away in your mind for future reference, because it WILL happen again in some other form.And it has.
Other have re-created the same thing, the same image, on the nights following ...
Sadly, there is a contingent that can't, nay, won't accept even a re-creation as a point of evidence that a contrail can under the proper visual conditions resemble what appears to be a 'missile launch'.
Some ppls brains are just 'wired for conspiracy theories'.
From the blog that did yeoman's work in detailing this:
I think you’ve got yourself worked up into an unneccessary lather over this.
I think you will get information soon that will set your mind at ease.
If it is, as it appears to be, UPS902,
it will likely be highly observed over the next few weeks
resulting in video showing you an adequate similiarity to the Nov 8 occurrence.
The answer is he always takes off UP THE MOUNTAIN ~ and then he banks left and you think something is wrong.
The snow capped peaks are right out your window!
They do something like that at SLC as well ~ has to do with a local prevailing wind at ground level ~ gives 'em extra lift when the cold air flows down the hill.
Certainly counterintuitive but what a thrill.
Now, good places to lay back and watch jet planes come in overhead ~ right off US 1 at Ronald Reagan airport. My backyard ~ a military base nearby provides jet fighter support to the DC area. I'm off the end of the runway.
I am asbolutely unqualified to show you numbers because I'm not a mathematician nor do I do mathematical caluculations. I know for a fact that folks who DO mathematical calculations have been known to "prove" the impossibility of something right in front of them. Folks who "do the math" did their best to prevent the building of a structure designed by someone close to me, on the premise that it would fall down. The structure ended up being built as per its original "impossible" perameters and has been standing now for about 15 years. :^)
I AM pretty experienced in seeing missile plumes as well as contrails left by jets. I did not see the event in question live because it was behind hills for me where I life presently. But I did see the video, I did see contrail science arguments, and I know what can fool people and what can't.
I've responded to your challenge with honesty. Now, how about your five-word answer to the questions posed in my post #803?
How can I put this ~ no answer would suffice in your case. You even distrust mathematics that’s been in use THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
Still, listen to the fellow who filmed it. He said it was coming in from the West and going to the East. Amazing eh?! http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7040407n&tag=related;photovideo
Do you have or have you heard of any plans for further observation of UPS902 ?
that proves my point, too!
look how far away the contrail is and how it is fading
now look at the missile shot
SPEED is why the contrail is NOT breaking apart that close to the main object, that rocket was going fast and the contrail had no time to disperse over the distance and the effects of winds aloft
Wow... this is still going on? Holey cow...
I have an honest question for you (or anyone else that still believes this was a missile):
You have said that this is a missile launch, and it is being covered up by the government. Honest question: Why?
What possible reason could there be to deny a missile launch? Nobody gets freaked out over that sort of thing. Everybody understands and expects that there are military missile tests all the time. They’re no big deal. Even if the purpose of it is some super-secret new missile or whatever... they would just say it was an ordinary test launch and everybody would yawn and go on about their business.
Even if it was somebody’s elses... and we wanted to cover it up... Well, the obvious way to do that is to just claim it was one of ours. Slam dunk. Nobody’s the wiser.
Sure, the pictures look similar to a missile. They also look similar to an aircraft. For me... When I saw the video it was obvious that it was moving far, far too slow to be a missile. Plus... the contrail is lit from below by a sun that’s already set. That means it has to be heading east.
But why cover it up if it was otherwise when they simply don’t have to? Just doesn’t make any sense.
Good stuff!
By the way, what proof do you have that Warren's photos are of the same event in the video? His word? And you're taking it over the word of retired AF generals, an editor with Jane's, etc., etc. etc.?
I wish you'd respond in a five-word post with a simple yes or no to these questions:
1. Have you ever watched a missile launch live?
2. Have you watched more than five missile launches live from a range of 160 miles or less?
3. Have you lived for a year or more in the greater L.A. area from Malibu to Newport Beach within 25 or 30 miles of the coast?
4. Have you watched both airplanes and missile launches with the aid of binoculars?
5. Have you watched this video?
Gil Leyvas must be an incompetent of huge magnitude if he, seasoned local professional that he is, equipped with all manner of zoom lenses (see, this is where those of us with actual EXPERIENCE using binoculars while watching planes and missile launches are in a unique place to understand how absurd the "camerman was fooled!" argument is) was duped into thinking this was a commercial airliner.
I think there's a contigent who not sadly, but dangerously, won't accept that someone is taking advantage of the fact that the vast majority of people have absolutely no experience to combat the overwhelming "reason" of authority created through technical info overload, versus actual experience of the kind that tells the same people that what a magician performs on stage is an illusion. That kind of thing is what tells me all the "scientific" arguments that this was an airliner are illusion. The effort to deceive, and I have no idea why or who, is also taking advantage of the fact that the vast majority of people want to believe that this was an airliner contrail.
I understand perfectly that you mean to insult me by likening me to a conspiracy nut. I understand, too, that if you were a stone-age tribesman who had never seen Western technology and saw a flashlight for the first time, you'd probably -- and justifiably, in the context of your experience -- think those who told you it was NOT a product of a powerful god were also "wired for conspiracy theories."
I see you are still in good form.
5.56mm
I don't pretend to know the reason, and I never HAVE pretended to know the reason. As Werhner von Braun might have said, "That's not my department." All I know is that this was a missile launch and that a whole lot of effort is going into convincing people that it wasn't.
At first, I thought it was probably just a good thing to shut up on the premise of "loose lips sink ships." Maybe I was correct, that it is in our nation's best interest for "the people" to think it was an airplane. But I have come to think now that it is certainly a bad thing when smart, educated, good fellow Americans are duped in this manner. It is scary to me.
A stone age Egyptian could do that math. Let’s see your math for a missile.
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.