LA Plane Theory is blown out of the sky - US missed Chinese Missile

In all of our aviation history, this os the 1st time this has ever been news worthy. Millions of people living near airports. Videos caught of just about everything that could ever happen. I know it's really hard to swallow, the story of another powerful country breeching our space and launching a missle, but are we not all here because we believe we are spoon fed all kinds of crap from the media/government. Nice work boondox, you might be wrong, but it does seem to fit rather well.

My theory is that a Chinese sub stopped by in Cali to get some Kush. They were really baked and let off a missile. Then they tried to correct this by launching a second missile.

I honestly think it was just us launching a missile unscheduled to send some kind of message to someone.

shifting defense dollars to boost U.S. missile defense and to counter China’s ability to limit U.S. operations in the western Pacific.

China Threats Merit Shifting of U.S. Defense Dollars

www.bloomberg.com...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by tsurfer2000h

 

No.
We don't know how long it was videoed. The cameraman said he watched it for 10 minutes.

wow, I'm impressed
we're making headway.
We do agree on something
let's go get a beer
and discuss further,
ya'll can come along too
the more the merrier.

I don't think they bounced it on purpose if it was a missile in the first place..but if it was a missile it would have blown up on contact.

Why didn't they blow it up?Doesn't make sense.I know if a missile is deliberately fired into another country that is considered an act of war!

There is a number of things this could be

reply to post by Hr2burn

It's not the only time it's happened. It's the only time the internet has gone quite so nuts with it. Maybe it's because the TV news only showed the "good part" of their video.



articles.ocregister.com...
Here's the video. It's a jet plane too.



Then there's this one that never really made the news but did get quite a bit of internet play. It's a jet plane too.

reply to post by guavas


"Bah" we care what you say guavas I thought your post was very well written and thoroughly thought out only I am a little confused as to your doubts though. You say you don't think it was a conventional contrail (assuming you mean, from a conventional plane) yet you entertain the possibility of it being a passenger plane. That's a bit contradicting no? Other than that, you hit upon excellent points. Star for you!


Now as for this one:
reply to post by Use your brain


What seems to be your problem? No need to get so snippy. We're all here to express our opinions and that's all these are: OPINIONS. I know it gets frustrating, tapping out words into the void but try to deal with it.

If you don't like it here, do what I did with my own thread.....resign from it (the thread) Only I was too tempted and un-resigned a few times though! I have no will-power apparently

I posted the challenge to someone so i'll take it on, here is what I think happened. I'm not going to post any large pictures just say where to see them and explain my reasoning.

My main theory to what happened is that there was military testing of a new fighter jet, probably close to the F-22. It could be new software, but I can't say for sure.

At 26,000 feet fuel begins to become visible, giving you the contrails seen in Boondock's first picture. If it was a fighter jet this gives you the one contrail instead of two from a normal air liner and thus my hypothesis is still plausible.

What of the 'spectral analysis"? Jet engines are more powerful that an airliner -- though not the same as a missile -- there is still a substantial more amount of heat given off versus a plane. Mine still holds water.

What of the second contrail? As we all know the brand new toys can't work, I submit that the reason they couldn't disclose the information of the testing is because that the new jet was being fired upon using dummy missiles form a US aircraft carrier to test if it could take down the intercepting missiles. I also submit that the dummy missile got too close and only being filled with minor explosives knocked the plane off course, which it was able to stabilize and continue course.

The speed of a manned aircraft would be able to allow for ten minutes of flight and would not appear like a normal jet. The US government probably would not come forward with allowing the Navy to do test fires on real people, hence your conspiracy.

Thank you, and I will be glad to clear up any questions from 'debunkers' or as i like to call theory testers and others who don't want to be called that name.

The bad thing about looking for a CHINA missile . Is they do not really have many of there stuff on U tube . So I can not find out what there Missiles look like when they are taking off

Originally posted by XxiTzYoMasterxX
I don't think they bounced it on purpose if it was a missile in the first place..but if it was a missile it would have blown up on contact.

Why didn't they blow it up?Doesn't make sense.I know if a missile is deliberately fired into another country that is considered an act of war!

no offense brother
but u r covering info already
covered on prior pages.

No, it may not have blown up on contact.
Please search for Patriot Missiles Saudi Arabia
to see how these anti-missiles work and you will see
they target the heat exhaust and NOT the warhead.
a warhead can still fall undetonated. I posted this
video some pages back.

And I don't think it's an act of war if this is
just another one of those tit for tat scenarios
in the ongoing cold war with the Chinese.

see my other thread about that here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by williamAmerican
The bad thing about looking for a CHINA missile . Is they do not really have many of there stuff on U tube . So I can not find out what there Missiles look like when they are taking off

once again I posted this a few pages back
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/15b1f8a0e7fd.jpg[/atsimg]
this is a DF21 Chinese Ballistic Missile launch. The source for this
image I posted on the original link posting.

reply to post by boondock-saint


It's taken me all day to read this thread through, but I want to see what reactions you are getting and how heavy the debunking traffic your theory was to merit. (heavy!....In my view, that's a compliment coz that means you've got it right!)
I want to take the opportunity to tell you that your post reflected exactly my own conclusions, only I couldn't have done it as succinctly as you did. Bravo!
I'd like to add that Phage's meticulous diagrams are, as an above poster has described, quite compelling.
However they're WRONG.
I witnessed a section of that plume in the sky, a few minutes after 5pm, from an inland mountain viewpoint opposite the Channel Islands. They way you coursed the positon of that plume is exactly CORRECT. Phage's was WRONG, (especially his still shot of the view from LAX, which could only have been facing North!)
I don't have any more time to further comment now, but I wanted to get this in before the page count doubles by tommorrow morning.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by tsurfer2000h

 

No.
We don't know how long it was videoed. The cameraman said he watched it for 10 minutes.

Has anyone posted where he actually said he watched it for ten minutes?
I haven't seen it and I've watched plenty of videos..
I'm not doubting he did but I'd like to hear the context seeing how you believe it's so important to the evidence..

reply to post by Phage

damn Phage
I already told ya
u can't compare those videos you
posted above cuz the origins of the plumes
cannot be seen. They are obscured from
view. But yet u keep posting them page
after page.

Post some pics or videos of jet contrails
that show it coming directly out of the
horizon level with no obscurities like
weeds, mts, bldgs, etc ....
your pics hide part of the evidence
needed to prove what they are.

ya know, kinda like this one
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ae2d52332043.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by boondock-saint


OK, so if it's a missile, why is it so slow.
It would have to have a high arch, if it was a super slow flying missile- this flies more or less level.

reply to post by boondock-saint


If I see them two other vids posted once more I'm going to go nuts...
How many times do they need to post the same things??

Hey BoonDock,

Great theory. I consider this a good possibility.

I do have a question though. Maybe I don't know enough about these sorts of things, but I seem to be drawn to the trail towards the bottom of these pics. It falls below the horizon and what looks to be a cloud cover over the water. If this was a plane, wouldn't it had to have come from the opposite direction to make a contrail like that? Or a missile could have done it, with its launch area covered by the cloud cover. That would explain the direction of the missile and the large "contrail" coming from just beyond the cloud cover.

Does this sound plausible?

Edit: Looks like you already brought that up.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by williamAmerican
The bad thing about looking for a CHINA missile . Is they do not really have many of there stuff on U tube . So I can not find out what there Missiles look like when they are taking off

once again I posted this a few pages back
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/15b1f8a0e7fd.jpg[/atsimg]
this is a DF21 Chinese Ballistic Missile launch. The source for this
image I posted on the original link posting.

Bingo----> thats the plume colour,,---> remeber tech analysis said wasn't right color for amer. missle they were right.

reply to post by zcflint05


Moving the goal post? Did you make that up or is that a saying I've never heard? Either way, brilliant!!!
Some people are too conventional to think non-conforming. That's sorta what makes it interesting here. As long as you know the players (and their behavioral patterns) we sorta need to have a 'par for the course' attitude.

If members don't use personalized data/photos pertinent to the thread (opposed to stocked-photos and random data from the archive) then we already know it's just their opinion and not fact.

Some have very strong opinions about certain areas regardless of the content of said-story. So in this case, anything moving up in the sky (according to whom we speak of who......is a decent person) has a carbon-copy explanation of everything else that went before. I know it can be a bit frustrating but if you think about it, it's rather sad too.

Oh well. Your post was excellent though. Thanks!