Mysterious Missile Launch Over California - 11/8/2010

reply to post by weedwhacker

Thanks. So it may not show up in the webcam.
That's good to know.

reply to post by this_is_who_we_are


Like, let's say, the retired General who also has a vested interest in lobbying for defense contractors, AND has a problem with the Obama administration. He supports the "Birth Movement", apparently...:

nicedeb.wordpress.com...

www.mediaite.com...

It's always important to thoroughly vet your "experts", and not blindly cite them just because they seem to believe in your position on an issue....

reply to post by weedwhacker


touché

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are

Originally posted by tarifa37
I am absolutely flabbergasted and amazed at how many people bought this missile rubbish.

Like, let's say, the retired General who sad is was 100% a misslile?

Generals make mistakes too. Anyone who's been in the service or has studied military history knows that. That guy jumped to a conclusion without getting all the facts. That's why he and a lot of others are wrong on this one.

Not sure if someone has already posted this news story but this morning Los Angeles' CBS 2/KCAL 9's Sky 9 news helicopter experienced engine failure and had to make a hard landing that ripped the tail rotor section from the helicopter. I'm not sure if this is the exact same helicopter that captured the contrail the other day.
losangeles.cbslocal.com...

Also, I just read that the day of the contrail sighting was the same day that in 2007 a Chinese sub popped up near the USS Kitty Hawk off the coast of China.

Originally posted by maybereal11
Yep. It would have helped everyone if CBS released the full Vid...start to finish, that way we would have a better sense of speed..

Enough images from the entire sequence -- still and video -- have now been located and linked to, above, to satisfy those kinds of questions.

The helo is flying north and passes under the 808 ground track, so that in the final views it is seeing the contrail from the north, from the opposite side. The parallax provided by the moving observation point nails down the 3-D orientation of the true vehicle trail. This demolishes the theory that the path is away from the coast and the observer, off to the northwest.

The full-range images also show the contrail producer proceeding east (not northwest) growing darker (consistent with farther away from sunset) and still leaving a slight dark (non sunlit) tail.

There is NO light phenomenon similar to that produced by REAL rocket launchings as they emerge from the atmosphere within 30-40 seconds and their exhaust plume dramatically widens (and thins). That tell-tale visual clue is neither on the video, the independent set of contrail photos released yesterday, or in ANY other claimed eyewitness report from the area.

I'm trying to understand how folks can view the full video and not see it as an airliner moving steasily eastwards at essentially constant altitude.

One method appears simple -- just assume the images are faked.

Funny thing, when you key "Pentagon lies" into a search engine (I don't use Google, but I am sure the results are similar), you get only 2.6 mil hits, or so.

www.wsws.org...

www.fff.org...

psychoanalystsopposewar.org...

www.opednews.com...

And then of course, the latest...

news.yahoo.com...

Vetting the source? I don't think we can use the Pentagon as a source. I think I will trust the good General.

rewatch the original video, its been changed, theres more stuff there too

www.760kfmb.com...

boy this post is moving faster than a plane attached to a missile !

my two cents on trails, with focus on that 'blank' part, where it's not seen anymore:
(ammo for both sides, I want to know, not judge)


planers: contrails comes from condedensation, which means you need cold air. in the videos it looks like there's an inversion.
the higher you go, the colder air gets normally. an inversion is where the temperature goes warmer again, till it 'breaks" and gets colder again. this phenomena is mostly seen by clouds (they build there, because the water in the rising air is condensating) so you would have it at the level of the clouds. which is seen in the videos.

meteorologists: inversion on that day ??

missilists: the 'blank' in the trail could be the 2nd stage firing off.

to the remark of phage, something like: the trails are blown away equally on all altitude levels, hence a horizontal movement, since the wind is stronger, higher up.

true that wind is normally stronger in higher altitudes. BUT: when the flying object is moving up vertically means the lower trail-parts have more time to disperse than the upper part, which are built later. so the lower parts are dispersed slower (less wind) but they have more time to disperse.

edit: add

inversion: en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Sailor Sam
reply to post by tommyjo

 

If you can see the contrail clearly, you should be able to see the plane AHEAD of it. Simple really, look at any contrail next time you go outside. You will see the plane, if you photograph the head of the contrail and zoom in on it.
And don't attack the messenger, that is usually the sign of someone who is losing or has lost the argument.

All I am doing is asking questions, no one has answered them yet. I asked at least 3 times in the last 160 pages. And still no answer!
Show me the plane and I and thousands of others will believe.
Until then?

I suggest that you observe more closely next time you look up or examine video footage or stills. Due to a whole range of conditions the aircraft is not always visible in every frame.

That is why you see so many people taken in and fooled by the whole 'fake/holographic' plane nonsense.







Go and examine videos from the likes of Rod Hilderman. They believe that 'bad holograms' are the cause of missing wings and engines, etc.

TJ

reply to post by tommyjo
Just to remind everyone, we have 'planers' telling us we can the green navigation light on the wing, we have planers telling us that we wouldn't be able to see the aircraft.

It takes a leap of faith for someone to look at the video and say it is either a plane OR a rocket.

reply to post by butcherguy


Here is a screen grab of when the green light flashes, it is brighter at one point in the video, but pausing at just the right moment was difficult.....tell me, how many rockets have green navigation lights?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0df6d692098e.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by Cyberspy
Generals make mistakes too. Anyone who's been in the service or has studied military history knows that. That guy jumped to a conclusion without getting all the facts. That's why he and a lot of others are wrong on this one.

Make mistakes and jump to conclusions huh...are you an expert here?

The General stated he watched the video several times, that doesn't sound like jumping to conclusions to me. He is also an experienced military aviator, he also stated that anyone with some reasonable flight time in the military who has witnessed missile launches from a submarine would readily state this was indeed a submarine originated missile launch. To say he made a mistake...how 'Convenient' for unqualified debunking, the only REAL Fact out there is the video.

On another note...I wonder how many people we have in this thread are working for an Alphabet Agency busily creating disinfo in this thread? The DOD isn't stupid, this riddle could have been solved days ago if they would have responded quickly, they have technology far beyond our imagination and know damn well what's going on out there, to lay it all on any other entities is utter BS. If for whatever reason you think this thread isn't being monitored by them that's BS as well.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by tommyjo

 

Just to remind everyone, we have 'planers' telling us we can the green navigation light on the wing, we have planers telling us that we wouldn't be able to see the aircraft.

It takes a leap of faith for someone to look at the video and say it is either a plane OR a rocket.

Why does it take a leap of faith? Examine the independent stills footage. Since when does a ballistic missile exhibit those characteristics? On the video all we are presented with is an edited version. It is edited for dramatic effect. The news cameraman has simply been fooled by an aircraft contrail at sunset.

He is not the first and will certainly not be the last. Expect more types of this footage to be presented in the future. Twenty fours hours after the footage aired people in California were still filming 'missile' launches simply because the airliner contrails appeared to be shooting up into the sky.

TJ

reply to post by woogleuk
I just believe that everyone seems to be reaching. You haven't seen an aircraft or a rocket. You have looked at the same piece of video who knows how many times, but no one has seen a rocket. No one has seen a plane.

You see a flash of green light. You are jumping to the conclusion that is a navigation beacon on a plane. If you don't believe me, answer this. How many planes have navigation beacons that flash just once?

Some people see a flash of light that they equate with a rocket engine exhaust. Others equate that flash with an airplane fuselage reflecting the sun. Truth is it could be the sun reflecting of the body of a rocket instead.

There are so few verifiable facts here that this really will not be solved, except in some peoples minds, and that will be on faith alone.

Originally posted by Boomer1941

Originally posted by Cyberspy
Generals make mistakes too. Anyone who's been in the service or has studied military history knows that. That guy jumped to a conclusion without getting all the facts. That's why he and a lot of others are wrong on this one.

Make mistakes and jump to conclusions huh...are you an expert here?

The General stated he watched the video several times, that doesn't sound like jumping to conclusions to me. He is also an experienced military aviator, he also stated that anyone with some reasonable flight time in the military who has witnessed missile launches from a submarine would readily state this was indeed a submarine originated missile launch. To say he made a mistake...how 'Convenient' for unqualified debunking, the only REAL Fact out there is the video.

On another note...I wonder how many people we have in this thread are working for an Alphabet Agency busily creating disinfo in this thread? The DOD isn't stupid, this riddle could have been solved days ago if they would have responded quickly, they have technology far beyond our imagination and know damn well what's going on out there, to lay it all on any other entities is utter BS. If for whatever reason you think this thread isn't being monitored by them that's BS as well.

edit on 12-11-2010 by Boomer1941 because: (no reason given)

Of course the General is jumping to conclusions. He is purely relying on the fact that what he witnessed in the edited footage resembles a ballistic missile launch. People, regardless of military experience, can be fooled. The General has a political agenda and a bias against the current administration.

Retired US Navy Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem has also given his opinion and believes that it is NOT a ballistic missile launch but an aircraft contrail. Stufflebeem has given interviews on Fox News. I've only seen edited versions of his interview on You Tube, but the full version was clear and concise.

www.navy.mil...

TJ

reply to post by butcherguy


because the camera is only zoomed in for mere seconds, in which time you see both a red and green flash, the green is more noticeable though, and it is a couple of times, not just once.

reply to post by tommyjo


Thanks for those videos - I see totally different contrails on these as compared to the CA one. 2 and 4 distinct contrails, from behind each engine.
And even the 2nd "chemtrail" video shows whispy contrails of short duration, not dense, long lasting clouds like the video in question here.

But no-one has yet answered my question - where is the plane in the video?
Oh yes one green flash (very difficult to see and find) and a bit of orange (which could be flames anyway).
Planes have FIXED green and RED lights, not flashing ones that flash once every goodness knows how long.
I note that no one with good photographic enhancing equipment has come up with an image of a plane, even when the green light flashed. That leads me to suggest that there is in fact no plane.
Until this happens there will alwasy be conjecture and half baked answers which just add to the mystery.

Show me the plane and I and everybody else will be happy. Easy.

And further to my previous - the one shot of teh green flash shows a source of light of huge proportions, about the size of a plane. Not a small light at the wingtip. No something much bigger I think.

while that questionous list would be not solved, we have had more reasons to appreciate the occasion among old-good missile launches
---------------------------------------------------
1. luminous intensity from source of light?
2. jet part to reflect Sun light?
3. how much squares in reflecting area?
4. distance to jet?
----------------------------------------------------