Mysterious Missile Launch Over California - 11/8/2010

Originally posted by DrZERO
reply to post by backinblack

 

The sun-set in LA was at 4:53 on the 9th, therefore it would be on or near or below the horizon. If it was a vertical column of smoke, as a missile launch, the sun would have been on the far side of the smoke from the perspective of the person taking the picture, therefore the side facing the photographer would be dark. But it isn't, it's all lit up, because it is not a vertical column of smoke.

Funny you say that because most here debunking the missile theory stated the exact opposite..
Their argument has been that if it was a missile it would be bright, not dark.
I was almost set, now I'm more confused,,
Mind you I did ask a similar question ages ago.
ie: would a missile trail not create it's own shadow if viewed from the east...

Originally posted by DrZERO
reply to post by backinblack

 

The sun-set in LA was at 4:53 on the 9th, therefore it would be on or near or below the horizon. If it was a vertical column of smoke, as a missile launch, the sun would have been on the far side of the smoke from the perspective of the person taking the picture, therefore the side facing the photographer would be dark. But it isn't, it's all lit up, because it is not a vertical column of smoke.

Well since you claim that that thing flew towards the cam than it should become bigger at some point, right? But it doesn't and it in the video it does look like it's flying upwards...

reply to post by backinblack


ok, understood, but his wrap up was "it was a jet, and here's why" etc

the pics were all gerrymandered to make his points.

Wheres the wings of this "plane"??

reply to post by drphilxr


I can go with his theory but I honestly think them pics have been doctored in some way.
Wish I knew how to extract exif data..
What we dont need is hoaxers muddying the waters..

Originally posted by backinblack

Funny you say that because most here debunking the missile theory stated the exact opposite..

Their argument has been that if it was a missile it would be bright, not dark.

I'm not sure what the other posters were referring to but I am speaking of the part of the contrail nearest to the horizon. If it were a vertical column of smoke the lowest part (the area near the horizon) would be dark/darker than the rest of the contrail.

It is a Missile. Pres. Obama has no control over the defense sections and I am sure he is following someone elses orders.

Originally posted by Budbot
CONFIRMED: US NAVY WAS TESTING MISSILE LAUNCHES OFF THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA

From page 55.
"434/10(18).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CALIFORNIA.
MISSILES.
1. INTERMITTENT MISSILE FIRING OPERATIONS 0001Z TO 2359Z
DAILY MONDAY THRU SUNDAY IN THE NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER
SEA RANGE. THE MAJORITY OF MISSILE FIRINGS TAKE PLACE
1400Z TO 2359Z AND 0001Z TO 0200Z DAILY MONDAY THRU FRIDAY
IN AREA BOUND BY
...
3. VESSELS INBOUND AND OUTBOUND FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PORTS
WILL CREATE THE LEAST INTERFERENCE TO FIRING OPERATIONS
DURING THE SPECIFIC PERIODS, AS WELL AS ENHANCE THE VESSEL'S SAFETY WHEN PASSING THROUGH THE VICINITY OF THE SEA RANGE
IF THEY WILL TRANSIT VIA THE SANTA BARBARA CHANNEL AND WITHIN
NINE MILES OFFSHORE VICINITY OF POINT MUGU OR CROSS THE AREA
SOUTHWEST OF SAN NICOLAS ISLAND BETWEEN SUNSET AND SUNRISE.

www.nga.mil...

Take some time and either read through the thread or search for NOTAM on ATS.

It has already been covered. Apologies Phage for not linking back to your post covering it. It is nothing unusual for the area. See following.

www.nga.mil...

www.nga.mil...

www.nga.mil...

If a ballistic missile launch was to take place it would be via a NOTAM. Think about it? The Russians would have detected the launch via their space based infra red systems. They would have taken great delight in embarrassing the US by announcing that they had detected a rogue and unannounced ballistic missile launch, and especially when the US is denying any launch.

The unannounced ballistic launch would have caused a major diplomatic rift and military alert. The US and Russia agreed as part of the strategic arms limitations agreements that there would be transparency on missile tests. Space and military ballistics launches can all be misinterpreted by both sides monitoring for an ICBM attack. An unannounced ballistic launch of this type would be regarded as a rogue launch. The Russians certainly wouldn't be keeping quiet about it!

TJ

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by SarK0Y
Amicus, show me, please, jet which engines incandesce so much

only missile/rocket engine can be so powerful

First YOU show ME a missile/rocket engine that FLASHES like sun reflecting off a shiny surface, like this one did. Look at the OP video that they replaced TODAY they show longer video of those flashes

Amicus,

edit on 11-11-2010 by zorgon because: (no reason given)

Stop, Amicus, where do you see sun reflecting there?

Originally posted by DrZERO

Originally posted by backinblack

Funny you say that because most here debunking the missile theory stated the exact opposite..

Their argument has been that if it was a missile it would be bright, not dark.

I'm not sure what the other posters were referring to but I am speaking of the part of the contrail nearest to the horizon. If it were a vertical column of smoke the lowest part (the area near the horizon) would be dark/darker than the rest of the contrail.

edit on 11-11-2010 by DrZERO because: spelling

I get your point.
But it was "nearing" sunset. If the sun hadn't set at that point yet then it would be still bright and that point being on the horizon would be the last place to go dark..
All photos and vid shows there was still plenty of light.

reply to post by Hellas


I agree with you and this was one of the things that originally made me think it was a missile. But the fact is we don't have footage that keeps following the object nor have I seen all 10 minutes of the original footage. I am making a decision based on the evidence I have seen, and logically speaking the lower part of a vertical column of smoke should get darker as the sun sets, while the top stays lighter, but in all of these pictures/videos the smoke near the horizon is as brightly lit as the rest of the contrail. I cannot explain this away, maybe someone else can.

Originally posted by TristanTrouble
Wheres the wings of this "plane"??

Where are the wings on this plane?



We eventually see them because the plane is getting closer, but they aren't visible at a distance.

If the helicopter is a mile high or less, and flight 808 is 7 miles high, the closest it would ever get to the helicopter at best is 6 miles.

Originally posted by backinblack

I get your point.
But it was "nearing" sunset. If the sun hadn't set at that point yet then it would be still bright and that point being on the horizon would be the last place to go dark..
All photos and vid shows there was still plenty of light.

It's those last photos that got me, the cloud in the foreground (at a lower altitude) is dark. Also really look at the contrail, the shadowing is on the left side, and the bright area is on the right side. It just seems like it would be the other way around if it was a vertical column of smoke, or the entire lower portion would be getting darker and darker as the sun set. But it's not, in all of those pics and vids it is equally as bright. There was plenty of light, but was it direct sunlight? Sun-set was at 4:53 that day, but I'm not sure when exactly the pictures were taken.

reply to post by DrZERO


I'm pretty much for a plane but the pics you mention look doctored to me.
I wouldn't use them as proof of anything...

And look what just happened. What a coincidence. Something is going on behind the scenes that we are not being told about.

reply to post by this_is_who_we_are


You are the first to zoom in on the start of the contrail and just as I asked about one hundred pages ago - where is the plane?
I did a similar thing on my computer and all I got was a somewhat solid object (without wings) INSIDE the head of the contrail, not In FRONT of it.
An aeroplane would have been in front of the contrail, not in it.

Originally posted by boomadatigger
And look what just happened. What a coincidence. Something is going on behind the scenes that we are not being told about.

I was worried about forum moderator greeneyedleo because I thought something like this had happened to her after her disclosure back on page 8.

reply to post by backinblack


Well, I can't attest to that, but you will note in my original analysis I did use the disclaimer "IF they were not altered, and IF they are of the same event."

The raid of the rocket scientist in Melrose certainly is an interesting coincidence,

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by TristanTrouble
Wheres the wings of this "plane"??

Where are the wings on this plane?

We eventually see them because the plane is getting closer, but they aren't visible at a distance.

If the helicopter is a mile high or less, and flight 808 is 7 miles high, the closest it would ever get to the helicopter at best is 6 miles.

Again thats my problem with you plane believers your so sure of yourselves that its the flight 808 yet have no evidence.


You skeptics will be only satisfied when you keep attacking the missile theory and yet the missile theory is the better candidate.

Do i need re state why doesn't the pilot come and out and admit it was there flight? or better yet the airport?

So far no side has any CLEAR Real evidence and please don't bother posting a flightpath that isn't proof and doesn't say anything.

Usually Jetliners can change there flight paths during airborne, thus making these flightpaths sites completely useless.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


I'll lean towards plane but you are right..
No one has conclusive proof either way and thats a FACT!!!!