Posted on 12/12/2010 10:47:16 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
LOL It should be. The Flightaware graphic was made from the UPS902 flight path. How could it possibly differ? Where is your data about what was in Leyvas' video?
I don't know where you were the day of the event but that graphic was all over the media...it was the only one I saw plotting location. Like I said don't ask me where they came up with that...I'm just an observer. I didn't make the graphic. Now if it was reported over Cataliina wouldn't you think they would have put the yellow dot right on the island? Seems like a good idea to me.
I don't have to believe anything about this. It was just reported that way and I make no claims to its accuracy..point is did anyone who interviewed the guy with the camera get GPS coordinates from him?
Brilliant. You post two graphics that you say show a discrepancy between the location of what Leyvas filmed, and the flightpath of UPS902. But you have absolutely no idea how the location of the yellow marker was chosen in the first graphic. Here is THE reference from Leyvas that includes 35 miles..."The onboard camera showed a plume twisting up from the horizon and narrowing as it climbed into the sky near Catalina Island, about 35 miles west of Los Angeles, he said."
So some media outlet selects a point at random, 35 miles north of Catalina island, and you think that proves what Leyvas filmed couldn't be UPS902. UPS902 was not only "near" Catalina Island. It flew right over it. So what more closely describes the only description of the event we have from the only reported eyewitness of the event. A point 35 miles to the north of Catalina Island, or an aircraft that tracks right over Catalina Island?
Great. Your only source is a guess by Leyvas. That's exactly what I told you the first time you said it and you accused me of making "...the biggest horse ^#&$ statement anyone has made yet!" Looks like you actually are as dense as I first thought.
I guess you aren't getting the point I'm making. That chopper had GPS on board you can be sure...they knew exactly where they were...you need to ask Leyvas was the event over Catalina..(what does "near" mean?) or to the northwest? Seem like such a simple question for him to answer. I am "brilliant" enough to not go chasing and wasting my time getting answers that could be easily gleaned from the horses mouth...;o)
See the Flightaware graphic. For all the reasons pointed out here... Post 410 it is the data about what is in the Leyvas video.
Yeah what a terrible source...the guy who actually shot the video...bwahahahaha!!!...(why do I bother?...)...and it would be more than a guess...if I was flying my 195 in that area and saw something that made me shoot video of it...I'd know damn well where I was (you have to to fly in congested LA airspace) and could give you a very accurate description of the location of what I saw...not just a "near Catalina" answer...
That's pretty much all you've got when it comes down to it.
He already did answer the question. He said "near" Catalina Island. MY point is that you cannot use a graphic produced by some media source to make a claim that the event Leyvas filmed was no where near the UPS902 flightpath, when the media graphic does not match the description of the person who filmed the event. The graphic is not accurate. The UPS902 flightpath was "near" Catalina Island. The yellow dot pasted on the media graphic is not.
That's it??? Well then you ought to press him for a better answer than little 'ole me..doncha think?....;o)
Well hell that convinces me!!!...LOL!!!
Sadly, that is pretty much true. I've hoped to find some faint ray of logical, rational thought process from you. But it just isn't there. Dense as granite. Fun to hammer away on. But basically thick as a brick.
And you know that...how???....:o0
Every one of those points has been gone over a hundred times. None hold water. You are right about one thing the contrailscience analysis is about the Leyvas video (what else would it be about?) but none of it is from the Leyvas video. It was all created from flight path data based on an assumption that AWE808, oops, UPS902 created the plume. That's it, an assumption. There is no evidence, just analysis, that the two are the same. And the analysis is very weak.
Now that you've given up on your circular logic for an airplane contrail I guess you can stop your pathetic lecturing on forum rules now too.
Actually, his first answer is sufficient given all the other data out there. Really, the single still from his video below is enough to determine the bearing of what he shot. Everything else he could provide is a guess. And guessing at ranges is almost always inaccurate. Especially over water.
Funny.
You're killing me here! That has got to be the lamest statement about this I've heard to date....LOLOL!
Ahem...ok...define "near" then....so when I talk to ATC next time....and they ask me my location I'll see if it flies with them when I give them a: " I'm near" something or someplace for a position report..:o)
As opposed to the counter analysis which is simply "That looks like a missile because I say it does." Got it.
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.