Mysterious Missile Launch Over California - 11/8/2010

page: 194
354
<< 191  192  193    195 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



And yet still never proven to be a contrail.....


PROVEN to be a contrail.

Whilst firstly wrongly identified in some initial investigations, was subsequently solidly identified.

This is not under any 'cloud' of uncertainty, it is clear in the record, and in history.




posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by backinblack
 



And yet still never proven to be a contrail.....


PROVEN to be a contrail.

Whilst firstly wrongly identified in some initial investigations, was subsequently solidly identified.

This is not under any 'cloud' of uncertainty, it is clear in the record, and in history.





Really? So what plane was it??

Proven is such a vague word when some use it..
I love how people like you write your own history though.



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Really? So what plane was it??


UPS flight 902

Enjoy reading, and learning:

contrailscience.com...



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by backinblack
 



Really? So what plane was it??


UPS flight 902

Enjoy reading, and learning:

contrailscience.com...



Ahh but that was after they spent hours convincing and proving to us that it was another plane..
Don't you find that just a little unsettling??

But hey, you just go ahead and believe whatever your told..
Even if the have to change their story and convince you twice.



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Historical records.

Once investigated carefully, the earlier mistakes were corrected, and the actual airplane identified.

It is not difficult to understand. And, the history is on record, and is factual.

Further.....the contrail in the News video and still photos was NOT a missile trace, launched from the surface.

This is a fact, and also well documented.



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by backinblack
 


Historical records.
Once investigated carefully, the earlier mistakes were corrected, and the actual airplane identified.
It is not difficult to understand. And, the history is on record, and is factual.
Further.....the contrail in the News video and still photos was NOT a missile trace, launched from the surface.
This is a fact, and also well documented.


Seriously mate, I don't think you know what a fact is..

NO official has come forward to identify the plane so where's this "historical record"???

Put up or shut up..
You're getting kinda boring with your holy stance...
edit on 23-10-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Oddly it seems on viewing the video you didn't doubt that it was a missile..
An earlier post from you..

Just guessing here but the footage shows the missile streaking away from the camera off to the right. If the camera was facing more or less west, this would make the missile direction northwest, so heading away from the USA. If it was heading toward the USA I'm sure the US would be a lot more concerned about it if they didn't know who fired it.

If NORAD didn't really detect this launch there will be a lot of questions to answer, but I suspect they did and just aren't making any public statements about it yet.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

So you interpret the words "just guessing" to infer that I had no doubt?

That was meant to infer that I was guessing, because that was before I had a chance to do a more careful analysis.

I'm always posting about optical illusions and how we can't trust our eyes, and I usually make the point that I'm as susceptible to optical illusions as anyone else. So yeah, it fooled me too when I was still guessing. We are all easily fooled by optical illusions, including me.

But after studying it more I realized that it's perfectly consistent with a contrail and further that it has some inconsistencies with a missile launch.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


My comprehension skills are usually pretty good and your "just guessing" quote seems to be referring to the direction of the missile, not whether it is or isn't one..

But you changed your mind after seeing more on MSM..
I can respect that...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by backinblack
 




Seriously mate, I don't think you know what a fact is..


How bloody rude! (Including the comment I didn't bother to re-quote).



NO official has come forward to identify the plane so where's this "historical record"???


No "official"? Not needed, as why would someone who sees this for what it was....a hyped-up and silly claim, as is evidenced in this very thread (**), waste their time and look foolish, giving it more attention than it rightly deserved.


(**)...This very thread, only had to search back to page #191 or thereabouts, to easily find all the explanations showing how this was a colossal waste of time:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


(I still find it hilarious how embarrassed that Fox "News" talking head contributor should be.

The retired U.S. "General" (or whatever rank he held) pontificating early on that it was "obviously" a missile trail. Agent provocateur and complete fool, as he revealed himself to be).



edit on Mon 24 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I remember this, at first I thought it was chinese, bacuase the US were doing stuff in the china sea. But it could also have been a private corporation showing strength.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Sly little insults don't suit you mate but if that's the way you wish to play them I'm game.


I was referring to the "expert opinion" of retired Lt. General Thomas McInerny:


From March 1996 to December 1999, McInerney was Chief Executive Officer and President of Business Executives for National Security (BENS), an association through which senior business executives can help enhance the nations security.


en.wikipedia.org...

Oddly enough, while researching some of the other "expert testimony," I came across this:


KFMB showed video of the apparent missile to former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Robert Ellsworth, who is also a former Deputy Secretary of Defense, to get his thoughts....


"It's spectacular… It takes people's breath away," said Ellsworth, calling the projectile, "a big missile".


www.cbsnews.com...


Robert F. Ellsworth, an independent-minded former Republican congressman from Kansas who helped run the 1968 presidential campaign of Richard M. Nixon and was rewarded with a top White House job and then the ambassadorship to NATO, died on Monday in Encinitas, Calif. He was 84.




www.nytimes.com...

Where's SayanaraJupiter when you need him?



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   
As the anniversay of the slow news day missile flap approaches there is the possibility that events could repeat themselves? The combination of continuing UPS902 McDonnell Douglas MD-11 scheduled flights and the upcoming clock changes bring the sunset earlier. All that is required is the conditions to produce that persistent backlit contrail.

Remember that Gil Leyvas (The helicopter cameraman) saw something similar on the 4th November. I believe that Leyvas was fooled twice by a scheduled MD-11 flight by UPS902. It is too much of a co-incidence for me that on both days UPS902 was on a scheduled flight approaching the coast on the run up to sunset.

Snippet from his CBS TV interview.


Well, I realized that it was something that we saw earlier from the week before -- we saw something very similar the past Thursday, and immediately I realized that it was something very similar, and called on the 2-way there to our assignment desk to let them know that we were seeing it again. It's not as dramatic as the one from yesterday -- the one from yesterday was pretty spectacular. Like I said, it was growing in nature and continued to fly up into the sky, and at one point it seemed to separate. The smoke or the plume seemed to stop and then continue further up in the sky and then finally disappear.


Interview link at following.

losangeles.cbslocal.com...

I've given Rick Warren the Los Angeles photographer the heads-up.

Ricks Contrail set including his images from 8th November 2010

www.flickr.com...

Link to LAX webcam over the Pacific.

www.cargolaw.com...

Remember to keep an eye on UPS902 flights via Flight Aware. I have noticed that it sometimes takes a more northerly route into Ontario, California.

uk.flightaware.com...

If the conditions are right and with the upcoming clock changes then there just might be a repeat performance from the slow news day media?
edit on 27-10-2011 by tommyjo because: Additional info added



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Rick took some more contrail images during December 2010.

www.flickr.com...

www.flickr.com...

Imagine a news helicopter team filming that sunlit contrail and editing the footage to suit? Ask yourself why the TV station won't release the full unedited footage from 8th November 2010?



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


From these images only i could tell those contrails dont belong to a plane, in your first picture it doesnt look like a plane at all.

Because from the shape of it it has no wings look close when you zoom on it.
edit on 27-10-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-10-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


They look exactly like contrails.

Contrails that have been dispersed quite a bit from the winds aloft, and various shears that cause that effect. We are seeing them at the angle that makes them appear to be "vertical", rather than the reality of horizontal.

Zooming in on the photos and not "seeing wings", you say?

Why not take into consideration the resolution of those photos, and the amount of detail they are capable of showing?



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by tommyjo
 


From these images only i could tell those contrails dont belong to a plane, in your first picture it doesnt look like a plane at all.

Because from the shape of it it has no wings look close when you zoom on it


It must be those pesky Chinese ballistic submarines again? It never fails to amaze me how people can misinterpret such contrails? The aircraft could be up around 40,000 feet and miles away from the photographer.

Take a look at the Exif data on the images.

The photographer is using a 70.0-300.0 mm zoom lens.

Image 1. Taken at 180mm (Focal Length In35mm Format 270 mm)

www.flickr.com...

Image 2. Take at 300mm (Focal Length In35mm Format 450 mm)

www.flickr.com...

Even at 300mm on the zoom lens there is no way that aircraft appendages such as wings are going to be visible. If the aircraft was directly above the photographer then yes at those focal lengths wings would be visible.

Contrails can also be blended and much larger than the aircraft itself. For example a three engined aircraft such as a MD-11

www.airliners.net...

Two examples of sunlit contrails. Note that at the distance involved wings are not visible?

Nov 9, 2010, Off California Coast



Florida 2008



Perspective also confuses people. I can understand this but not everything that appears to be going up is actually doing so.




posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 





The photographer is using a 70.0-300.0 mm zoom lens.

those lens are pretty much outdated thanks for the links tommyjo
even as a foe i still respect your findings on other issues.
edit on 28-10-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by backinblack
 


Historical records.
Once investigated carefully, the earlier mistakes were corrected, and the actual airplane identified.
It is not difficult to understand. And, the history is on record, and is factual.
Further.....the contrail in the News video and still photos was NOT a missile trace, launched from the surface.
This is a fact, and also well documented.


Yep, 100% facts agreed by all officials..

Not sure what documents you're on about though..


I love you guys..
I don't care what it was but the way you guys come in and scream facts is priceless...



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
Wow 353 of the 418 flags the OP has are from this post alone. Doesn't seem to really deserve so many. Like is it that important?





new topics

top topics



 
354
<< 191  192  193    195 >>

log in

join