World Net Daily fabricates a "Missile" Contrail tale

Faith, Reason, and Health ^ | 12/12/2010 | Dr. Brian Kopp

[TigersEye]

It was coming in for a landing at Ontario, California, and its altitude was dropping, as recorded in the FlightAware.com logs.

That's not what the logs say today. See post #259. But it is now being said that it wasn't an altitude change that caused the cessation of the contrail it was because it was getting closer to land. The contrail explanations change regularly so you have to keep up.

[Right Wing Assault]

Did anybody wonder why the “contrail” is thicker, not thinner, 200 miles away (and presumably, 20 minutes later)?

Last question. In your reading, I imagine you saw that some contrails grow if the humidity is high enough, rather than thin out. Numerous pictures of this are available. They also spread naturally as clouds of smoke, etc. do.

Second question mentions "moving obviously faster than sound." Where does that come from?

First question. The track of the UPS plane is probably still available. I don't know it anyone has checked altitudes. As far as the humidity, changes can be small and local and not easily determined.

BTW, have you see the San Clemente picture from December 31st 2009?

Here's the article:

http://articles.ocregister.com/2009-12-31/blogs/24546879_1_images-rocket-crystal-cove

Here's the picture.

[Hardraade]

Ah, thank you for providing me the opportunity to discredit you further

You couldn't discredit a lead penny, you yellow-bellied ape. Actually, you are showing very clear signs of serious mental problems. I really hope they don't let you operate machinery ;).

[mvpel]

Oddly enough their source for that, FlightAware.com now shows that flight, on Nov. 8th, traveling most of its flight at 37k ft and ascending to 39k ft for the last portion of its flight.

Actually, FlightAware shows the flight beginning its descent into Ontario shortly before 5:30pm Pacific Time, just as the video was being shot. It went from 39,000 feet to 29,000 feet over the course of six minutes from 5:27pm to 5:33pm.

Just look at the track log, it's right there starting at 8:27pm Eastern time.

[Hardraade]

I am a foot surgeon ("DPM" - Doctor of Podiatric Medicine, i.e., a Podiatrist.)

Plenty of flakes in the medical profession too, I'm afraid. Zawahri is a pediatrician. No, that is merely a little back reference to what people often push the most irrational stuff.

No one has proven Leyvas' main point, that the object disappeared from view after 2 to 3 minutes.

So, apart from writing for the hated WND (and bragging of it on your profile), you are also hanging the actual producer of the footage out as a liar while, of course, thanking him profusely for helping you.

As I've said before: something about this case (and I think it is the rather bad conclusions you have to draw) is scaring some people quite literally out of their tiny minds. At which point they *must* rationalize it into something harmless.

[TigersEye]

That’s not true. The track log, at the bottom of the page, shows it ascended from 37k ft to 39k ft at about 5:10 PM PST and held until about 6:00 PM when it descended into Ontario. It does not give times in EST anywhere on the page. Are you sure you are looking at Nov. 8th and not today’s flight?

[r9etb]

Unfortunately, I can no longer trust World Net Daily as a news source.

Better late than never. I have to tell you, though -- WND's uselessness as a trustworthy news source has been obvious for over 10 years.

[Ditto]

"How many engines did UPS jet flight 902 have?

It was an MD 11, a wide body jet with three engine. One on each wing and one in the tail.

Now as to your 'typical' contrail, I suggest you look a few minutes after the jet passed. In atmospheric conditions where contrails can linger for a long time, you will not longer see seperate contrails from each engine, but one large contrail as they tend to spread out and merge with each other.

[verity]

U R NUTZ

[Rokke]

It is right here: Detailed track log of UPS902 on Nov 8 to include altitudes, lat/longs and times The facts are all there.

As a side note, aircraft ascend as they burn off fuel because their engines work more efficiently at higher altitudes (depending on the winds). Higher is better, even for relatively short periods of time.

[TigersEye]

Yes, it is right there. Drag the bar across the graph and look at the altitude reading on the right hand side. At about 5:10 PM PST it ascends from 37k to 39k ft. and at it doesn’t begin to descend again until about 6:20 PM.

[Rokke]

"Yes, it is right there. Drag the bar across the graph and look at the altitude reading on the right hand side. At about 5:10 PM PST it ascends from 37k to 39k ft. and at it doesn’t begin to descend again until about 6:20 PM."

Sigh. Did you scroll down a bit on that page and review the minute by minute breakdown of locations and altitudes of the aircraft. It ascends from FL370 to FL390 between 3:55 and 4:05PST and starts its descent from FL390 at 5:27PST.

You are a case study in the type of person who bites off on conspiracy theories and why.

[TigersEye]

You're right. I was an hour off. What difference does it make? It was still at 33k ft. at 5:30 when it crossed the coastline. That is at least ten minutes after Warren's pics show that it stopped leaving a contrail.

Besides, the "altitude difference is why it stopped contrailing" theory has been dropped. It's now "the air over the ocean is more humid (at 30+k ft. LOL) than it is over land."

You're a case study in a sheeple that believes anything with a fancy picture attached to it.

[mvpel]

It was still at 33k ft. at 5:30 when it crossed the coastline.

And three minutes later, it was at 29,000 feet.

What's not to believe?

What difference does it make as to why the contrail stopped? The fact is that it did for whatever reason, and a picture is worth a thousand words, and they demonstrate that it wasn't a sub-launched missile.

[Rokke]

"You're right. I was an hour off. What difference does it make?"

You're kidding right? An hour off? It makes a lot of difference.

"It was still at 33k ft. at 5:30 when it crossed the coastline. That is at least ten minutes after Warren's pics show that it stopped leaving a contrail."

At 5:30 it was still 42 miles west of the coastline. And who says it was leaving a contrail when I crossed the coastline?

"Besides, the "altitude difference is why it stopped contrailing" theory has been dropped. It's now "the air over the ocean is more humid (at 30+k ft. LOL) than it is over land."

What are you talking about? Dropped by who? Do you think there is some official panel discussing this issue?

"You're a case study in a sheeple that believes anything with a fancy picture attached to it."

Though it will fly right over your head, the irony of your statement is that it is YOU who believes something based solely on a picture. I rely on all the facts and data.

[TigersEye]

At 5:30 it was still 42 miles west of the coastline.

You were partially right. At 5:31 it was crossing Santa Catalina Island. Which is about 25 miles from Long Beach and almost due south. Airport Monitor

And who says it was leaving a contrail when I crossed the coastline?

That is the point. It magically stopped creating a contrail at 5:19 while it was at 39k ft. even though it continued to maintain 39k ft. until 5:27. The following pic will show you when the contrail stopped.

What are you talking about? Dropped by who? Do you think there is some official panel discussing this issue?

The people discussing it are the people discussing it. If you want to stick to the old worn out theory about altitude you're free to.

YOU who believes something based solely on a picture.

Video. Video vs. graph.

[DoorGunner]

Since the maker of the video couldn't be bothered to put an adequate amount of volume on it, I can't tell what he is saying. If, however his radar track is accurate, it is many MILES to the south, of either Santa Ana, OR LA harbor. Therefore, to the LEFT, not straight toward the video camera. (nor, specifically, slightly to the NORTH)

Be pleased to concern yourself with this picture: (your own evidence)

<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8SJPjCbt-YM/TQUNW9wHgEI/AAAAAAAAAlw/OnlNkI-r4yo/s1600/Vid-Rick-Mick-Link.4.jpg" />

Note the various positions of the "contrail." Again assuming reasonable accuracy, there are FIVE positions for the "contrail," apparently taken within 4 minutes and 43 seconds. They are more or less parallel, which means that the wind had a Northerly component that was essentially the same for over 200 miles . Also note the dissipation, caused during that 4 min, 43 seconds. Not only very rapid, but essentially even, for over 200 miles!

Then, nothing, near the cloud, is shaped even vaguely like an airplane.

DG

[DoorGunner]

>>”Second question mentions “moving obviously faster than sound.” Where does that come from?”

Unless the video has been speeded up, that object, at 37,000 feet, is moving much faster than a subsonic jet. This is from many observations.

DG

[Rokke]

"You were partially right. At 5:31 it was crossing Santa Catalina Island. Which is about 25 miles from Long Beach and almost due south."

No. I'm completely right. At 5:30 (the time you referenced), it was at 33.33N 118.63W. Plot it out on Google Earth yourself. It was moving at 606MPH ground speed, which means 10 miles per minute. At 5:31 it was probably 10 miles closer to the coast and directly over Catilina Island.

"That is the point. It magically stopped creating a contrail at 5:19 while it was at 39k ft. even though it continued to maintain 39k ft. until 5:27. The following pic will show you when the contrail stopped."

That is awesome. Can I assume you now agree that the photo you reference is of the object Leyvas was filming? And at 5:23:47 (the last image in the sequence) the object is still producing a contrail. Unless you believe that dark line is an aircraft or missile body.

"The people discussing it are the people discussing it. If you want to stick to the old worn out theory about altitude you're free to."

Thank you. As you continue to prove it's validity, I will.

"Video. Video vs. graph"

Riiight. You mean the 52 seconds of spliced pieces of out of sequence stills and zoomed in shots? That video? Like I said, I prefer to reference all the facts.

[TigersEye]

Can I assume you now agree that the photo you reference is of the object Leyvas was filming?

I never said it wasn't.