US Navy CONFIRMS it was a Missle off Catialina

reply to post by janon


POint Magu was nowhere near where it happened . Oh and I am not buying the source linked in teh Op as verification of the thread title. Non sense.

Although I'm still undecided on this "missile" issue, this part has already been explained. I really don't think a whole new thread should have been started. Anyway Phage has explained this several times, but since I'm not digging through 180 pages to find it, here's the explanation from "tommyjo".

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Edit: scroll down about half way.

Okay now I have asked this in another thread and I will ask it here also. The question I have is can anyone show a pic of this plane that will conclusively prove it to be a plane? And please do not try and post the video or pics that we all have already seen time after time. It is funny how people take the answer of this plane and yet there is no pic to prove the plane story. What is funny is when a story or post about a UFO the ATS members always want to see either a photo or video to prove that what the person is posting about is not a hoax. So why is it that there are no pics that show a plane yet we are just to believe it because someone else said it was a plane. That is very interesting if you ask me. We get fairly close to the object yet it doesn't seem to show q resemblance to a plane.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I've been asking the same..All we are getting is suspicious pics with no way to check data and obviously edited videos added days later such as this one...
www.youtube.com...

I still say them Richard Warren pics are mockups and challenge anyone to show the data...
It's odd how his pictured contrail is pictured from the exact same angle as the chopper....
Also note that over his 5 pics, a huge section of contrail is completly blown away by wind yet at the bottom the same 2 little knobs sticking up on the right side remain unchanged..Suss as a $3 note...
I wish I was better at images to show what I mean..
Pics are in here..
contrailscience.com...

There is nothing special about that Notice to Mariners. It does not suggest a missile was launched. That is a standing notice...permanent. The area is a target and testing zone.

You can find them here:
The prior week:
www.nga.mil...

And one from August:
www.nga.mil...

March:
www.nga.mil...

Last year:
www.nga.mil...

It is in every issue.

There is no evidence that a missile was launched. There is very strong evidence that the contrail was caused by UPS flight 902.
contrailscience.com...

reply to post by Phage

There is no evidence that a missile was launched. There is very strong evidence that the contrail was caused by UPS flight 902.

What strong evidence would that be Phage?
The edited video?
The suspicious photos with no data to check their validity?
Or maybe the lax pic of a contrail over 160 miles away that must be many miles wide?
And please just argue the facts...

reply to post by backinblack


The evidence is best presented here:
contrailscience.com...

The "suspicious photos" with EXIF data are available here:
www.flickr.com...

How wide is the contrail in the image? Can you show how you calculated its width? How wide should a contrail be?

[Removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]

reply to post by backinblack


Phage has already presented his opinion & does not need to be pushed. The real issue here is the OP falsely claiming the navy has confirmed this. It is a blatent attempt at sensationalism. As much as I agree Phage claims cannot be proven I also accept he cannot be disproven. The Op's claim that the Navy have confirmed it is a missile at that time can be disproven. Instead of asking Phage to prove himself ask the OP to substantiate his claims with evidence other that the links presented!


Mod Edit: Quoting – Please Review This Link.

Originally posted by Phage
There is no evidence that a missile was launched. There is very strong evidence that the contrail was caused by UPS flight 902.
contrailscience.com...

Others should have a look. It's very convincing.
Even for an old Zoomie, it makes sense, but I could be wrong ( ).
contrailscience.com...

[Removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]

reply to post by backinblack


I know you feel, but my BCO sent me this email with this link.
My official comment is look at the link. It does make some sense.
contrailscience.com...

Relax people, anyone who has inside knowledge can easily see that this was clearly caused by a weather balloon.

Case solved, right?

reply to post by Phage

How wide is the contrail in the image? Can you show how you calculated its width? How wide should a contrail be?

Come on Phage..It's over 160 miles away...Common sense tells you it's many miles wide and BTW, still looks pretty darn solid at that...

And I don't think me saying many many miles implies I calculated it's width..It's just a general observation and I doubt you could dissagree and not look silly...

Maybe you should give your estimation of it's width at its widest point...But I bet you dont dare
Members here will believe you...

DOD said right off the bat that is was nothing of theirs, now all of a sudden "someone" is popping up and saying it is. What a joke, glad to know these people are in charge of our security.

I am wondering something here. Can anyone tell me why a retired Air Force Lieutenant General is not a credible person to believe even though he would know what he is taking about when he says it wasn't an airplane. Here is a little bit about this man..

Thomas G. McInerney is a retired United States Air Force Lieutenant General. He is a command pilot with more than 4,100 flying hours, including 407 combat missions (243 in O-1s as a forward air controller and 164 in F-4C's, D's and E's) during the Vietnam War. In addition to his Vietnam Service, the McInerney served overseas in NATO; Pacific Air Forces and as commander of 11th Air Force in Alaska.

en.wikipedia.org...

I haven't seen this posted on here except the one I posted on a different thread. So check this out...



So what do you think about this video?

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Nice vid but now much info..I checked his comments, he is posting comments on youtube.
He doesn't say where he was or what direction he was filming..
He also says it's 6:15pm PST.....The trail was at 5:15pm....Is PST different?

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

Did the General see a lot of ICBM launches during his career?

Can you tell me why John Pike is not a credible person?

One expert called it an optical illusion. "It's an airplane that is heading toward the camera and the contrail is illuminated by the setting sun," said John Pike, director of the U.S.-based security analyst group globalsecurity.org.

www.cbsnews.com...

John Pike, one of the world's leading experts on defense, space and intelligence policy, is Director of GlobalSecurity.org, which he founded in December 2000. GlobalSecurity.org is focused on innovative approaches to the emerging security challenges of the new millennium. Internationally renowned for his depth of knowledge on a broad array of issues, Pike is widely noted for his ability to translate complex technical information into concise and pithy soundbites. He has consistently provided insight and understanding of world affairs, military, space and satellite technology to policy makers, the press and the public at large.

www.globalsecurity.org...

Yes, the retired General has a lot of a particular branch of knowledge. John Pike (not retired) has a very wide knowledge base.

reply to post by Phage


A question on perspective...
To the naked eye the pics on the below link appear to show the trail being vertical.
Obviously in a 2d pic they would.
But knowing that this object is over 160 miles away would it.
A) Appear that high off the horizon?
B) Appear so long, ie:tall?

I would have thought at 160miles+ it would still be quite low on the horizon and appear to be coming more towards the camera, ie: very short trail....
contrailscience.com...

reply to post by Phage

Pike previously worked for nearly two decades with the Federation of American Scientists, where he directed the Space Policy, Cyberstrategy, Military Analysis, Nuclear Resource and Intelligence Resource projects. Pike developed the Federation's award winning website, and was personally responsible for creating most of the site's online content. He has also been at the forefront of utilizing satellite imagery to monitor worldwide weapons facilities.

Nowhere do I see anything to suggest he would know what a missile looks like unless it was on a computer screen He seems more involved on policy and IT...

IMO there is no doubt that Gen Thomas G. McInerney would be far more qualified to give an opinion than Pike..
That is not to say either are right or wrong but to say Pike is better qualified IMO is plain wrong....

reply to post by Phage



Hey Phage -

lifted from the "Webmaster's Commentary" in the source cited in the OP:

Now, with this confirmation, I want to address this rumor being seeded all over the blogs about a Chinese nuclear submarine. This story tracks back to only one dubious source and the story is that a Chinese Jin class nuclear ballistic missile submarine launched the "Mystery Missile" as a show of force to the United States. This rumor needs to be stopped right now.

Think this guy reads ATS? Any idea who he's referring to?

reply to post by backinblack

You know Virg...
I mean Cynic...
I mean backinblack, I wonder why it is you never really seem to contribute anything substantial.

You say "That contrail is too far away." I ask you what you base that statement on and you say "Well, just look at it!"

You say "That contrail is too wide." I ask you how wide it is and how you have come to that conclusion and you say "Well, just look at it!"

You say "That contrail is too high." Why do you say that. How about some backup?
I've calculated the height of the contrail (you can find the posts on your own) in the LAX webcam. It is at the elevation it should be. Contrailscience shows that the images align with the flightpath.

I've had it with you.