Lights in the sky above LA

a reply to: game over man

All those locations that saw it were well within the area that would have seen a rocket launch from California.

The point of a missile test is to fly it at near maximum range to ensure the navigation and targeting systems work as they're supposed to. Moving farther out means that to do the same thing would have it coming down on land somewhere, not into the ocean. So they have to launch near the coast so it comes down into one of our ranges in the Pacific.

a reply to: game over man
No need to tell me how big the ocean is.
I live in the middle of the ocean.

a reply to: game over man

They were in an MOA. That means they controlled the entire area. They didn't have to worry about ships transiting the launch area, or having to delay the test because of events out of their control. MOAs are near the coast within US waters.

a reply to: Phage

I'm not arguing what it is and what it wasn't on my point of what and how people are describing the event online. If you use an unbiased perspective you would note that most people are reporting the missile launch as a UFO. How you missed that observation I don't know...it's a viral on the net.

a reply to: game over man

Yes. I know that missile launches are very frequently touted as being UFOs. Often by youtubers looking for clicks.
That does not mean they are.

Amazing ,looks as if a kind of portal opens and the light from the other side shines into ours..

Just a reminder, here's info from the NAVWARN message dated November 2, alerting sea and air traffic to upcoming missile activity in five zones, strung from just west of San Diego all the way to the far western Pacific. The specific boundaries of the launch zone are in message 1 of 5, below.





NAVAREA XII 363/15 [1 of 5][[WWNWSFOLDER]]

EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CALIFORNIA.
HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS 071600Z TO 080300Z AND
091600Z TO 100300Z NOV IN AREAS:
A. BOUND BY
32-09N 119-30W, 32-36N 119-30W,
32-27N 117-34W, 32-00N 117-34W.
B. BETWEEN 32-18N 32-36N AND 122-30W 120-48W.
C. BETWEEN 32-12N 32-54N AND 131-00W 127-12W.
D. BOUND BY
29-42N 159-12W, 30-42N 159-24W,
31-54N 152-00W, 30-54N 151-42W.
E. BOUND BY
12-30N 151-00E, 13-30N 150-00E,
17-15N 157-30E, 16-15N 158-30E.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 100400Z NOV 15.//

Authority: NAVAIRWARCEN 301645Z OCT 15.

Date: 020743Z NOV 15
Cancel: 10040000 Nov 15

a reply to: game over man

.Oh and yes everyone accepts the statement it was a missile test but that is not what everyone thinks. For crying out loud all the youtube videos are named UFO every picture is hash tagged with UFO and every comment is discussing UFO's.

So you say...

I am someone and I don't think it was anything other than a missile launch. I guess not everyone thinks it was anything other than a missile launch.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Well they are already spending close to 40 million dollars to launch why not spend a little more and launch from somewhere else. That is unless it wasn't a missile and was something else. There are issues with the event that make it seem like it wasn't a missile and the missile test is actually pretty good cover up.

Will we ever use one of these missiles? Have we? Is it possible Lockheed Martin designed these missiles to look like a UFO or astronomical event for cover ups? How much destruction does one cause? What happens if the submarine carrying all these warheads is attacked and blown up? How much damage would happen? Now can't our enemies just drop a nuclear bomb off the coast of San Diego and in the process detonate all these war heads?

And for comparison, here's my report on recent civilian-observed Russian ICBM launches == www.jamesoberg.com...

a reply to: game over man

There are issues with the event that make it seem like it wasn't a missile

No. It looks like a missile. It acts like a missile.

Will we ever use one of these missiles?

In anger? Hopefully not.

Have we?

There have been over 150 tests, so yes. We have used them. For testing purposes.

Is it possible Lockheed Martin designed these missiles to look like a UFO or astronomical event for cover ups?

To cover up what? Exactly?

What happens if the submarine carrying all these warheads is attacked and blown up? How much damage would happen?

It would sink.

Now can't our enemies just drop a nuclear bomb off the coast of San Diego and in the process detonate all these war heads?

Nuclear weapons do not detonate easily. What you would end up with is nuclear material spread around.

But why bother going for a submarine when a nuke over LA would be more effective?

a reply to: game over man

You can't detonate a nuclear warhead by blowing something up next to it. It takes very precise conditions to donate a warhead. Not even a nuclear explosion next to one will do it.

If someone dropped a missile on the sub off the coast the rest of our missiles would launch. What would be the point?

Again, the point of the test is to fire the missile as far as possible. Going farther out risks it being canceled which costs more money.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

What do you mean you guess? Of course there are people who don't think it's a missile launch. I already accepted the fact it's not a meteor or UFO many pages ago, but honestly I'm still a little skeptical about it being a missile and it's very disappointing to witness the costs of war right outside your home.

Do you know how many problems could have been fixed in Los Angeles with a 40 million dollar donation from the Navy/Air Force?

I will toy around with a conspiracy because that is why I'm on ATS, but the truth of the matter is pretty sick how much war financially costs and the cost of human life, and that it was displayed on millions of people's doorstep who in SoCal are interested in pretty much everything non-War related unless it's the classic rock band, or Dr Dre sampling it.

a reply to: Phage

There have been a 150 tests? Where are the 150 misidentified UFO reports? There's only been a handful of these in recent years...

a reply to: game over man

There were hundreds of missile tests, both SLBM and land based in the 60s and 70s as missiles were being developed.

a reply to: game over man
www.lockheedmartin.com...

Obviously, they were not all observed by civilians. Obviously, they did not all occur shortly after sunset.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I meant only a handful of tests in recent years witnessed by 1000's to millions of people as a UFO or portal opening up.

a reply to: game over man

Because at this point the missile is well developed and doesn't require testing the way a new missile does. In a few years the Trident replacement will be developed and we'll see a lot more launches.

a reply to: Phage

Thanks...

Why have there only been a handful of events documented by civilians all over the world of the same missile phenomenon when 150 launches have happened? Where did they launch the other 145 times that civilians did not see? Why launch at 6pm during rush hour? Why not 4am?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: game over man
www.lockheedmartin.com...

Obviously, they were not all observed by civilians. Obviously, they did not all occur shortly after sunset.

Those two points and a few others IMO constitute wearing a tin foil hat. haha

Thank you.