Was NOT an Airplane (as per General)

Originally posted by Phage
6) The plane is inbound from Honolulu to Phoenix. It is at an altitude of 37,000 feet.

7) The plane is going to Phoenix.

since Phage cannot distinguish between his left
and his right turns, let me share something.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/06b3b9d9c5ba.jpg[/atsimg]

Flight US808 makes a right turn according to the FAA
flight path. The Missile video shows a LEFT turn.

And here is another shot of the left turn by the missile.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/114215b74850.jpg[/atsimg]

Phage, I hope you never pilot a plane I am on.

It's NOT US 808

reply to post by boondock-saint

I prefer to draw a line centered on the contrail rather than angled across it. The left end of yours seems to be a bit low.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c7f4ac5bd557.png[/atsimg]

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
There is currently no information or basis to form the conclusion that this object is anything other than an aircraft's contrail being viewed at certain angles.

I beg to differ kind sir

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e489ae1e0d53.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Phage


The CBS video on this link supports what you are saying:
www.cbsnews.com...

While I may tend to lean in favor of this, it would still depend on the credibility of the webcam user. Was he taking the images from the same general Point of view (POV) or picking a POV to support his theory?

Really, the news agency that originally reported this needs to send their chopper up again to the same location at the same time to catch that flight again and lay it to rest if that is the case.

Originally posted by sickofitall2012
What if this entire thing was an experiment to see how the public would react to a missle launch off our shores.

As has been stated several times...

A test of the coming 'false flag operation' That is why they told us about the 'lost' nukes a few days back when they could have just stayed silent and no one would have known

reply to post by Phage


so I am assuming you are saying by your
image above that there is NO turn in that
image you posted?

Since this object is def within 35 miles
of the coast, then you have just refuted
the FAA's flight path of US808 by saying
it didn't turn at all. Nice going Phage.
U know more than the FAA

Originally posted by AP-Chris
Really, the news agency that originally reported this needs to send their chopper up again to the same location at the same time to catch that flight again and lay it to rest if that is the case.

it was CBS 8 760KFMB that started this in the first place and are still going like the energizer bunny

www.760kfmb.com...

give it up Phage
it was a missile
and YOU know it,
u have no argument
that can refute the evidence.
sorry brother, not this time

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I beg to differ kind sir

Care to explain THIS sequence of images then?









[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9cf86cd13b33.png[/atsimg]

SOURCE ABC News

reply to post by zorgon

This one is pretty good. It appears to show the right turn far over the ocean but with 75knot winds blowing, the contrail does get pushed around a bit.

Originally posted by zorgon
Care to explain THIS sequence of images then?

It is NOT my intention to prove what the
object is.

It is my intention to prove
it wasn't US808.

And there is no way to confirm the images
you posted are from the same incident
or from the same video footage, therefore
I would be comparing apples to oranges.

I am strictly dealing with the footage taken
by the helicopter pilot.

reply to post by boondock-saint

Clouds reflect as much light as aluminum? Interesting.
BTW, what wavelength do you think your "spectral analysis" is using?

Originally posted by Phage
This one is pretty good. It appears to show the right turn far over the ocean but with 75knot winds blowing, the contrail does get pushed around a bit.

lmao
ok, now you wanna add the wind factor to the
equation. If so then why didn't you factor in
the wind when you drew that straight line
through your above diagram, when I had
already accounted for the southerly wind
drift already and drew my line more along
it's original path. You cannot have it both
ways Phage. You use the wind in one pic
but refuse to use it in another.
Completely strawman argument
Plus, you are comparing 2 different
sets of footages which include different
angles of perception. Nice try though

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by boondock-saint

Since this object is def within 35 miles

So how exactly do we know it is "def within 35 miles" without know what it is? I think that is making a huge assumption. For anyone to be saying "I am positively right and you are positively wrong" based on assumptions is pretty ignorant. That goes both ways, whether you think it is a rocket or a plane, it still applies that we don't factually know what it is, where it came from, or where it was going.

In my opinion there seems to be "evidence" for both arguments. So it could equally be either theory really, and that is the rub. I think we could make a lot more progress if we all could agree that there are valid points for each side of the coin, and then from there work together to figure out what it is. Because that is the ultimate goal here right? To figure out what it is, not stroke our ego's by being right and laughing at who ever was wrong?

My 2 cents at least.

reply to post by boondock-saint

I talked about the wind quite a while ago. It wasn't southerly. At 37,000 feet over San Diego (the nearest sounding station) it was 295º (NW) at 75 knots.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

Clouds reflect as much light as aluminum? Interesting.
BTW, what wavelength do you think your "spectral analysis" is using?

whoa, hold on brother.
Some commercial planes
have aluminum that has
custom paint jobs which make
them darker than the clouds
or contrails. Since this is a US Air
plane you claim, then it would in fact
COULD have commons.wikimedia.org...:US_Airways_Boeing_737.jpg
a custom paint job therefore
rendering it darker and thusly
less reflective than the white clouds
and the contrails.

Spectral analysis I am using is the RGB
system.

Originally posted by Phage
I talked about the wind quite a while ago. It wasn't southerly. At 37,000 feet over San Diego (the nearest sounding station) it was 295º (NW) at 75 knots.

San Diego isn't LA !!!!

hell I can go outside and it be raining cats and
dogs and drive a half mile and the sun be shining.
Circumstantial at best

u may have talked about wind
but u did not ACCOUNT for it
when you drew your straight line
in your diagram. Which means
the evidence you presented
was false.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

I prefer to draw a line centered on the contrail rather than angled across it. The left end of yours seems to be a bit low.

now u know why my line was a bit low.
I accounted for wind drift and
you did not
As you can see the trail is flairing off
to south in the image which makes
it a North to South wind which
refutes your claim that it was a NW
wind by San Diego.

reply to post by Phage


A clouds albedo can vary from less than 10% to more than 90% hard to know the albedo of the supposed plane as they have different paint jobs and often don't actually have that much bare aluminium surfaces. I believe bare aluminium has an albedo of around 75%. So the answer is yes, there are times when clouds can be more reflective than aluminium.

the object is NOT US808

1) The object makes a left turn, US808 made a right turn

2) It has it's own heat signature brighter than the clouds and trail
when US Air jets have custom tinted paint jobs.

3) You have a retire Army General who says it is a missile.

it is a no win for the plane theory especially for
US 808.

or shall we take this to the debate forum ?