Posted on 12/02/2010 6:21:47 AM PST by yoe
Thank you oh so very much for this excellent explanation, dear brother in Christ!
Every single one of my challenges for a month has gone unanswered — except for vitriolic personal attacks. Notice who I DID NOT ping...
And for the record, if anyone, ANYONE, can come up with a data set, or single datum, of similar quality that refutes your analysis, I will publicly question your methods, assumptions, data, and ancestry.
So far, I'd say you're pretty damn safe.
Thanks! But a word of caution: I had some pretty rowdy ol’ ancestors!! LOL!!!
They are just angry cranks. Its easy to make up a conspiracy, but, when asked to prove it, they scatter like roaches.
A plane can be flying totally level and appear from a distance to be flying at a very steep angle. This is due to a combination of the curvature of the Earth and the fact that it is very hard to judge the relative distance of the various parts of a contrail.
Fantastic job. This thread will die soon now that it’s been (once again) so thoroughly proven that it was a plane.
I’m sure another one will pop up in a day or 2 and there will be 30-40 posts from the cranks before anyone with sense comes in. And on and on..
I’ve mentioned that, too (other sources, witnesses, etc) and never get an answer. Oh, and of course it’s always a Chinese missile, too, without a shred of proof. Let’s say it was a missile, most likely it would be ours, but that isn’t a good enough conspiracy, I guess. Hell even a few people claimed the Chinese launched a nuke to emp that cruise ship, as the source for that contrail. /facepalm
>> but I at least have to try.
And you should if you have a reasonable case.
Assuming it was an airplane, under these dramatic circumstances would there not be continuous footage of the plane at least passing overhead?
It's really appalling that you can't post anything at all without a demeaning insult in it.
Well, first of all the November 9th video was shot from a news helicopter, and news helicopters have their cameras mounted in a ball under the nose of the helicopter, preventing them from shooting overhead.
Second, if this was an airplane, the destination of the airplane was LAX, so by the time it got to the Los Angeles area it would have landed, again preventing it from being shot flying overhead. So, no, there would not be continuous footage of the plane passing overhead.
Hopefully you've continued to read all of this thread, including posts 85 and 119.
Especially Post 119. TXnMA did a fantastic job, and the new (to me) image from the CargoLux security cam of the November 8th "missile" is the final nail in the missile theory coffin for any open-minded person.
“It’s really appalling that you can’t post anything at all without a demeaning insult in it.”
Well, at least now the discussion is about method and style rather than the missile conspiracy itself.
That’s progress, wouldn’t you say?
Well, there's the problem right there....
Merely a south-drifting cloud (contrail) and perspective...
Pot, meet kettle. OK, you covered that distraction, now focus. Where is the data that proves it to be a missile? Surely after all these weeks you must have something... Show me some data.
The KCBS reporter who shot the video and started this whole flap, says that the trail stopped for a while, then started up again, then disappeared altogether, which is also consistent with a contrail passing through different atmospheric conditions.
BTW, If you're still near the DFW area, go outside and look up. Here, near the LA/AR border, there are dozens of contrails -- with several that stretch from western horizon to eastern horizon.
Some of those have been in place for over an hour, are "rippled" like the "missile plume", and have spread out several miles wide by now. With contrail formation and preservation conditions this good, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a significant fraction of the high clouds in today's sky started out as contrails.
My granddaughters are singing in a church Christmas musical this evening, but maybe I can get a few shots of some contrails in the western sky after sunset...
My point is that unless the object disappeared mid-flight, I don’t understand why there’s no additional ground footage of the object given the serious nature of the original claim of an apparent missile.
Let me put it this way rhetorically: Is there any footage of the object going completely out of view? If not, why?
I’m not interested in the forensics. I want to know more about the credibility of the reporters, and omissions of details.
You're going to have to do some of the work yourself. I linked to a KCBS follow up story (link reproduced here,) where the original KCBS helicopter photographer Gil Leyvis describes what happened to the image he followed. His statement is near the end of the video, beginning at the 3:06 mark.
The quote that caught my ear: "and at one point it seemed to separate, the smoke or the plume seemed to stop, and contnue further up in the sky, and then finally disappear."
That is contrail behavior, but definately not rocket behavior.
Apologies for giving the impression I was delegating.
Now that you mention it, I recall the quote.
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.