I posted this article in bloggers, but it really is an important news story. World Net Daily essentially frabricated an article out of the one I submitted to them to prop up their missile conspiracy theory.
The big story here is not about the contrail, but whether WND can be trusted as a news source.
If you deem it appropriate, please consider moving this thread over to one of the news categories.
The Chi Coms got ticked and blew off a missile to get Barry’s attention. Quit blaming WND and just accept it. And who can blame them? Bernanke is getting ready to screw the Chinese through stealth default on our debt to them. This is what happens when you have a weakling in the Whitehouse. It emboldens our enemies. We are in a dangerous world right now, made more dangerous by Barack H. Obama and company.
Great write-up. I’m sorry WND would rather have a story to sell than the facts. I must admit that I was a “missile man” when the video first broke. But some well-argued posts here on FR and a couple web-sites convinced me that, first, I didn’t have all the facts in my hand before stating my belief. And, second, I was giving the sole source of the video too much credit. Finally, when the story disappeared without appreciable fallout, I figured it had to be a jet’s contrail. This clinches it!
Great piece. Thanks for the post.
What a shame about WND. Makes me sad as I don’t feel there’s anyone trustworthy left anymore. I’m becoming more & more of a hermit.
Mr. Kopp, am I on one of your spamlists or something?
If so, please remove me.
Ping. I know you’ve been following this story a little bit.
This comparison of the two articles shows just how wrong I was, and,
TXnMA
It’s WND.
Nuff said.
Good post.
I quote from what you wrote:
“Leyvas maintains that the object itself that created the contrail only remained in view for two to three minutes. For 30 to 45 seconds, the object glowed brightly and then seemed to disappear from view. “
And:
“Solid fuel engines such as those used in an SLBM create an uninterrupted exhaust plume for two to three minutes, after which time the solid fuel is spent, and the missile is usually out of view.”
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm
These two seem to correlate strongly. Very strongly. You might say unmistakably.
And left out of the only 100% we-are-certain-he-was witness’ statement: “The object was spiraling, spinning. It was spectacular”
and then several have noted: Lit up the sky.
Didn’t the LAX webcam people call it “Stunning. Amazing. Disappeared in 30 to 45 seconds.”
And the posters to FR and to other blogs who ACTUALLY have worked at White Sands Proving Grounds and another who also worked at Cape Canaveral for 15 to 30 years and who both / all told us “It was absolutely a missile. No doubt”.
These too have been, oddly, left out.
So. let me get this straight:
the ex Director of NORAD tells us “It was a missile. no doubt.” He is a three star Lieutenant General.
Yet
Contrail science and a guy on the 10th floor have solved it?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Your government is lying to you.
We had many “Sweeps Week” victims here. I wonder if they’ve come around now.
Great work! Have you tried contacting KCBS directly? If so, do they give you the silent treatment or what?
As far as WND goes, it’s a shame. You’re better off without them.
Freegards
You got that part wrong right there. You cannot back light a contrail at 35,000 feet from a setting sun if you are observing close to sea level. It is physically impossible. Get over it. It was a missile. You country was potentially attacked and you are wasting time responding by attacking MSM outfits for what now. CBS editing a video ? The horror. CBS has agreed with the plane theory from the second day of their reporting. Now WND changed a submitted story ? That is shocking ? I have had articles massively changed by editors. That is what happens in the publishing business. It is not shocking, unless of course it is the first time it has happened to you. If your argument is so strong, why are you erecting strawmen by attacking the reporting of the event ?
I just read WND’s article.
I don't see the deliberate fabrication you assert.
WND certainly leans toward the missile explanation.
However, at multiple points in their article they objectively present evidence for the UPS plane theory, too.
Your response to WND’s article, and to the editing they did on your submission, seems like a dramatic overreaction to me.
Have you considered writing or contacting WND and requesting you post there what you posted here? I think WND deserves the chance to rectify the situation.
Mysterious missile launch baffles even eyewitnesses
I'm surprised that you didn't post that as a thread.
Here is a third.
New footage of 'Mystery Missile' :: Nov 8, 2010, Off Southern California Coast (video; Nov. 9, 2010)
I did zoom into that portion to see if I could see a craft of some kind (at the time I thought that there was a chance the object was still making condensation/exhaust) but there was nothing there creating that segment. Had there been, I know I would have been able to see it with the high-powered lens I was using. Add to that - if it was traveling toward us, the closer it would come the easier it would be to see it, but there was nothing there. That's why I said it was merely the plume adrift and not anything continuously flying.
The incredible disappearing airplane that's flying directly towards you. lol
Interesting thoughts and arguments on both sides. WND certainly needs to protects it conservative image and simply may be mistaken though the tv and liberal media can not be trusted, not ever.