Was NOT an Airplane (as per General)

reply to post by JimOberg


Jim I think this has been all but proved a plane on ATS. Human_Alien told us last week he withdrew his stance and theory and was almost 100% certain it was a false flag, Boondock Saint has submitted to the plane theory after apparently seeing the brown paint job on the plane after zooming in 350%. I think backinblack is the last warrior of the missile theory, he is still waiting for a confirmation from the Government.

I am not trying to stop you from posting more evidence, just wanted to let you know the fight is pretty much over in case you hadn't already seen. =)

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Jim I think this has been all but proved a plane on ATS. Human_Alien told us last week he withdrew his stance and theory and was almost 100% certain it was a false flag, Boondock Saint has submitted to the plane theory after apparently seeing the brown paint job on the plane after zooming in 350%. I think backinblack is the last warrior of the missile theory, he is still waiting for a confirmation from the Government.

I am not trying to stop you from posting more evidence, just wanted to let you know the fight is pretty much over in case you hadn't already seen. =)

Well I can't help it that the information seems odd so far...
I'll look at it a different way then and see if someone can answer..
I'll assume it was Flight902..We have a clear flightpath with coordinates and times..
The first pic/video both show an almost vertical trail from where viewed..
We know the trail starts/appears over the horizon..
We know 902 was 160 miles away at time of first pic.
We know 902 at an altitude of 39000' would be visible from 240 miles.Further if you add altitude of the chopper..
Assuming it's 902 the above would be facts..
So, the trail when first viewed would be around 80 miles long, ie: about 12 minutes flight time..
Nothing to argue with the above as they are facts if it was flight 902..

Now a couple of questions...

1) Why did the trail stay reasonably vertical,even appearing to tend right, for the first 12 minutes.
Then in the sequence of stills taken over a much shorter time period, drift rapidly left/south?
The plane was at a constant altitude with steady winds..
2) Perspective is everything..Why did the trail lenghen at a much increased rate during the time the still pics were taken? Looking at the Contrailscience mockup, the trail more than doubles in lengh over the 4 or so minutes the pics were taken. If my idea of perspective is not mistaken, an object should appear to slow as it comes closer over the horizon, not speed up as these photos suggest..
It appears to accelerate during them stills....

reply to post by backinblack


I really have no idea to the answer of your questions. I would guess Phage or someone else might understand better and be able to answer or at least make a guess.

I am curious though, how an object can appear to accelerate in a still picture?I reckon it is difficult to tell the speed or acceleration rate of an object that is stationary in a photograph.

reply to post by sputniksteve

I am curious though, how an object can appear to accelerate in a still picture?I reckon it is difficult to tell the speed or acceleration rate of an object that is stationary in a photograph.

Easy. We have the sequence of timestamped pics from Rick Warren clearly highlighting the object.
We have the planes altitude which gives you its distance at the horizon and we have a detailed flightpath..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by sputniksteve

 

I am curious though, how an object can appear to accelerate in a still picture?I reckon it is difficult to tell the speed or acceleration rate of an object that is stationary in a photograph.

Easy. We have the sequence of timestamped pics from Rick Warren clearly highlighting the object.
We have the planes altitude which gives you its distance at the horizon and we have a detailed flightpath..

And your analysis of range in each of the images is - what, please?

Share results and show work.

Otherwise it's just bluffing..

reply to post by JimOberg

And your analysis of range in each of the images is - what, please?

Share results and show work.

Otherwise it's just bluffing..

What exactly am I bluffing about Jim ??
You did read my earlier post about assuming it was flight 902??
We know where the horizon is, we know altitudes, we have pics with time stamps..
There's no bluffing in all that..It's all there in full color..

Whatever. Make of this what you want. I still have no idea what we saw only I remain on my position of this not being a plane.

reply to post by Human_Alien


I am sorry Human_Alien, but this is as much speculation as anything else. Video is pretty much worthless, as contrailscience has way more scientific evidence then...the 0 evidence presented in this video. This is absolutely no different then the thread theorizing this same thing. Hell, he probably took the idea from ATS. What happened to this being a False Flag? You seem to change your mind pretty frequently concerning what this is.

reply to post by sputniksteve



I agree. It's speculation. In fact to me it means nothing because I don't know anyone except one person he speaks of.
I just thought I'd post it well.....because I can

I still think it's a false flag intended to cause commotion and controversy. And I still don't think it was a plane. Haven't read through any of these Missile-threads lately (redundancy ain't my cup o'tea) but was the plane, captain and crew identified and interviewed yet?

reply to post by sputniksteve


I don't understand why you would say that when you obviously are not aware of facts as displayed in this post of yours.

really have no idea to the answer of your questions. I would guess Phage or someone else might understand better and be able to answer or at least make a guess]/quote]

So do you know what you are talking about or not??
If not then please don't pretend that you do..It just confuses the debate..

reply to post by Human_Alien

Haven't read through any of these Missile-threads lately (redundancy ain't my cup o'tea) but was the plane, captain and crew identified and interviewed yet?

I hear you. These threads have been a complete dead end for days now. I'm deleting them from my subscriptions

If they did interview the pilot of the plane, what would you expect him to say? Probably something like:

"We had a bit of chop coasting in, but otherwise it was smooth sailing. Why do you ask? It was perfectly routine."

reply to post by backinblack


I am totally confused by this post. I don't ever remember telling anyone I was any kind of authority on the subject or that I knew what I was talking about. I haven't offered any evidence to anyone nor any theories. All I have done is point out how ridiculously flawed the missile theory is and will be. Thats all. If you pay attention to all my posts throughout all the threads I believe you will find this statement to be accurate.

Possibly I interpreted your statement wrong, please let me know if that is the case.

reply to post by Human_Alien


Sorry for the short post.

What do you think this is? Can you see the similarity's between reported event's, pictures and videos?

reply to post by Human_Alien


This is a cool link.....I dont think this is a missile, doesnt seem clear