Mysterious Missile Launched Off California Coast

US News • Views: 31,048

A disturbing story from California, where a mysterious missile/rocket launch was caught on film by a news helicopter camera.

Youtube Video

UPDATE at 11/9/10 11:39:34 am:

A likely sounding explanation: it wasn’t a missile at all, but an airliner.

Southern California’s top meteorologist Kevin Martin from the Southern California Weather Authority states it was nothing but a contrail from an airliner.

“We see this often when the flights come at the right time, however some people are just out to witness it at the right time,” says Martin. “We had strong winds up there as well as really cold temperatures from a passing storm system. This also had an area of upper level moisture at 250 to 200mb, where airliners fly.”

Martin described the event as too slow for a missile launch.

“Even from Los Angeles, an ICBM from Vandenberg is very quick in the sky, not as slow as this looks,” he added. “I found archives from Monday evening from the San Diego area and came to the conclusion this airline was coming in from the west, at the observers. While it may look like a flame originating from the object, it is nothing more than sunlight bouncing off the airliner fuselage.”

UPDATE at 11/9/10 1:11:34 pm:

Here’s an excellent post on jet contrails, and how they can easily be mistaken for rocket or missile launches: Jet contrails from some angles look like missile trails.

Jump to bottom

254 comments
1 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:04:22am

Mysterious “missile” launch seen off Los Angeles coast a “problem of perspective”

Reports of the supposed “missile” all came from the same area, the coast of San Clemente, Orange County, California. People in other areas, such as Los Angeles, would have simply seen a contrail not worth mentioning because of perspective.

Optical illusion.

2 sagehen  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:05:25am

Those CalTech/Harvey Mudd prank wars are really getting out of control.

3 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:06:26am

Mexican Space Program

Image: southparkmom.jpg

4 avanti  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:06:57am

If that’s true, Fox and the right wing sites will be disapointed. They think it’s the Commies.

5 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:08:39am

The tragic results of a fart lighting contest between Glenn Beck and Michael Moore. /

6 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:09:04am

US Northern Command says that they don’t know what it was, but it wasn’t a threat to the US.

U.S. Northern Command says it’s “unable to provide specific details … [but] can confirm that there is no threat to our nation, and from all indications this was not a launch by a foreign military.”

Come again?

What they appear to be saying is that it was a not-nearly-as-secret secret US program and even NOCOM hasn’t been read into the program to comment?

CYA alerts in 3…2…1…

Because the possibilities of the alternatives is quite disturbing (that a foreign country/entity launched a missile within miles of the US coast and no one in the DoD seems to know what happened.

7 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:09:11am
8 Feline Fearless Leader  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:09:43am

Opening shot of the dolphin-mouse war. And we’re unwittingly caught in the middle.

Sucks to be us.

/

9 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:09:47am

re: #4 avanti

If that’s true, Fox and the right wing sites will be disapointed. They think it’s the Commies.

maybe it is

10 theheat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:09:54am

re: #6 lawhawk

And all the while claiming not to know jack shit, they have to gall to announce it wasn’t a threat.

11 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:10:09am

Footage here of the missile in flight rather than a still shot:

[Link: latimesblogs.latimes.com…]

12 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:11:05am

re: #7 Dreggas

LOL

Brian Fischer declares holy war on bears

We should get rid of sharks and tigers too. Man eating monsters must be vanquished.

13 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:11:47am

re: #11 LudwigVanQuixote

Footage here of the missile in flight rather than a still shot:

[Link: latimesblogs.latimes.com…]

You will never escape ‘Glow Ass’.
//

14 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:11:54am

re: #7 Dreggas

LOL

Brian Fischer declares holy war on bears

IMO, it’s foolish to roam around grizzly country unarmed….would you walk down the streets in Detroit unarmed?…I thought not

15 theheat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:11:55am

re: #7 Dreggas

He’s a major asshole fundie douchebag. Just sayin’.

16 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:12:04am

re: #6 lawhawk

US Northern Command says that they don’t know what it was, but it wasn’t a threat to the US.

Come again?

What they appear to be saying is that it was a not-nearly-as-secret secret US program and even NOCOM hasn’t been read into the program to comment?

CYA alerts in 3…2…1…

Because the possibilities of the alternatives is quite disturbing (that a foreign country/entity launched a missile within miles of the US coast and no one in the DoD seems to know what happened.

With all of the tracking systems we have, it is quite easy to tell that it was not incoming into American territory while it was in flight.

I have no doubt that the statement that the launch was not a threat (in as much as it would not come to our land) was correct. The rest strikes me as he honestly has no clue or real details.

17 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:12:53am

re: #15 theheat

I know he is, which makes this so much funnier.

18 theheat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:14:46am

re: #17 Dreggas

It’s dimwitted dominionist assholes like this that will be probably be appointed to some faux Republican conservation legislation. Drill it and kill it politics at their finest.

19 avanti  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:15:09am

re: #9 albusteve

maybe it is

Maybe it’s the Martians too.

20 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:15:13am

re: #14 albusteve

IMO, it’s foolish to roam around grizzly country unarmed…would you walk down the streets in Detroit unarmed?…I thought not

re: #15 theheat

He’s a major asshole fundie douchebag. Just sayin’.


If he were to think it through he’d realize that most of the volunteers in the feed a grizzly program were bleeding heart enviro-weenies. It’s a win-win for a good lib hating socon. /

21 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:15:47am

re: #19 avanti

Maybe it’s the Martians too.


Return trip?

22 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:15:50am

It had to be one of ours. No sub or surface vessel can make it so close to US shores without being detected.

US ASW is second to none in that regard.

23 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:16:27am

Yo, my bad. I was just trying to whip up a new batch of my aqua vitae, and mixed in a bit too much of the ‘go juice’ at the wrong time. Sadly, that was my best still.
/

24 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:16:40am

re: #19 avanti

Maybe it’s the Martians too.

there are no Martians, but there are a fair number of lunatic Norks

25 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:16:50am

re: #23 Slumbering Behemoth

Yo, my bad. I was just trying to whip up a new batch of my aqua vitae, and mixed in a bit too much of the ‘go juice’ at the wrong time. Sadly, that was my best still.
/

There are times you scare me.
/

26 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:17:03am

electoral-vote.com evaluates 2010 pollster accuracy

…on average, Rasmussen’s polls were 4 points more Republican than the actual election results and PPP’s polls were 0.9 points more Republican than the election. The least biased pollster was SurveyUSA, whose average deviation was 0, favoring neither party…

…Rasmussen was the most biased and least accurate pollster (although a lot of that came from one horrendous poll in Hawaii). SurveyUSA was the least biased and Quinnipiac University was the most accurate. Also noteworthy is that six of the nine pollsters had a Republican bias averaging 1.9%, possibly due to the issues around cell phones (although Opinion Research and the two colleges use live interviewers). Only two of the nine had a Democratic bias…

27 jaunte  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:17:17am

re: #23 Slumbering Behemoth

I’m glad you had it tilted out to sea.

28 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:17:40am

re: #20 DaddyG

re: #15 theheat


If he were to think it through he’d realize that most of the volunteers in the feed a grizzly program were bleeding heart enviro-weenies. It’s a win-win for a good lib hating socon. /

heh…getting close

29 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:19:00am

re: #22 researchok

It had to be one of ours. No sub or surface vessel can make it so close to US shores without being detected.

US ASW is second to none in that regard.

detected yes, but who knows what’s on board…I’ve seen this bad shit on HBO

31 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:20:36am

re: #22 researchok

It had to be one of ours. No sub or surface vessel can make it so close to US shores without being detected.

US ASW is second to none in that regard.

Two years ago a Chinese sub skipper put his scope up just to say hello in the middle of one of our aircraft carrier task groups. He had a clear shot dead astern of the carrier.

Heads rolled, but the point of a sub and a good sub skipper is you don’t know they are there. That is why we use them.

As to the launch, the footage from Lawhawk’s post, shows a clear arced trajectory. From miles away, where the footage was taken, it is physically impossible for something straight and horizontal to look like that from 30-35 miles away. Such a report, that it actually some trick of perspective - might be possible from a cropped still frame, that does not show the whole contrail, but with the actual footage, this quickly becomes is utter BS.

[Link: lawhawk.blogspot.com…]

32 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:21:44am

re: #27 jaunte

I’m glad you had it tilted out to sea.

Safety first, I always say.

33 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:22:20am

re: #29 albusteve

detected yes, but who knows what’s on board…I’ve seen this bad shit on HBO

If we are ready to shoot civilian airliners out of the sky, we are sure as hell ready to blow the the crap out of subs that threaten us- before or after they launch a missile.

If a boat that fired a missile wasn’t one of ours it would be sleeping with the fishes by now.

34 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:23:05am

re: #33 researchok

If we are ready to shoot civilian airliners out of the sky, we are sure as hell ready to blow the the crap out of subs that threaten us- before or after they launch a missile.

If a boat that fired a missile wasn’t one of ours it would be sleeping with the fishes by now.

I’m thinking a frieghter

35 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:23:32am

Get a grip, people. I know a thing or two about missiles. There are several problems with this story. To begin, calling it a “missile” rather than what we can see it is, a rocket, invites conclusions that aren’t warranted by the facts. KCBS does not indicate how they estimated the distance, allegedly 35 miles, or how they estimate the size.
The ionized launch plume from a large rocket would have left a huge radar signature, visible on every radar in the LA basin and for a good distance beyond. This would imply a cover-up involving not just the military but the FAA and several non-governmental research facilities as well.
I have yet to see the full video, which leads me to wonder whether it has been edited for effect. Are the clips we’ve seen running in real time, for example?
My guess? This is a very large amateur rocket launched from a boat at a good deal shorter range than the chopper estimated. Remember, being a news chopper pilot does not make them experts or qualified observers of rocket flight.
Those not familiar with amateur rocketry would be amazed at what is possible:
Amateur Rocketry-notable events

On May 17, 2004 Civilian Space eXploration Team (CSXT) successfully achieved the first officially verified flight of an amateur high-power rocket into space, achieving an altitude of 72 miles (115 km).[5]

Prior to that the Reaction Research Society on November 23, 1996 launched a solid fueled rocket, designed by longtime member George Garboden, to an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) from the Black Rock Desert in Nevada.


Compare the photo of the CSXT launch to the KCBS video clips.

36 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:24:07am

The US NRO (nat’l recon office), DSP (defense support program) and DoD have a catalog of missile launch profiles to work with based on known launches of different missile types, so I have to believe that they’re trying to see whether the energy output (based on the launch characteristics) match one of the known profiles - whether it’s one of ours or not. I’d disagree with the assessment that it wasn’t a threat to the US because it didn’t hit land because it shows that someone managed to get in position to fire the missile and but for bad aim could have resulted in a bad day for someone in the US.

37 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:24:52am

re: #33 researchok

If we are ready to shoot civilian airliners out of the sky, we are sure as hell ready to blow the the crap out of subs that threaten us- before or after they launch a missile.

If a boat that fired a missile wasn’t one of ours it would be sleeping with the fishes by now.

Assuming w knew it was there, were tracking it, and our skipper had permission to shoot.

Again, subs are really really good at not being seen. While we may have the best subs in th world, we don’t have the only ones.

Again, the Chinese tweaked the Pacific fleet really well about two years ago.

38 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:25:07am

Some other NOTAMs I found:

NTD POINT MUGU NAS (NAVAL BASE VENTURA CO)

M0327/10 - NAVAIR SURFACE LAUNCH MISSILE TEST IN R-2519. AIRCRAFT, MEN AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO REMAIN CLEAR OF AREAS SOUTH OF TAXIWAY A-2 SOMETIMES DURING THIS PERIOD. MISSION ESSENTIAL FLIGHT REQUIRING TRANSITIONS THROUGH THE RESTRICTED AREA SHALL CONTACT POINT MUGU RANGE CONTROL[no phone numbers allowed] OR 306.6) FOR DECONFLICTION. 09 NOV 22:00 2010 UNTIL 10 NOV 01:00 2010. CREATED: 09 NOV 15:17 2010

M0326/10 - VPR RADAR TEST, AN EVENT IS SCHEDULED INTO R-2519. AIRCRAFT, MEN AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO REMAIN CLEAR OF AREAS SOUTH OF TAXIWAY A-2 SOMETIME DURING THIS PERIOD. MISSION ESSENTIAL FLIGHT REQUIRED. 09 NOV 20:30 2010 UNTIL 10 NOV 08:00 2010. CREATED: 09 NOV 15:16 2010

M0325/10 - NAVAIR SURFACE LAUNCH MISSILE TEST IN R-2519. AIRCRAFT, MEN AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO REMAIN CLEAR OF AREAS SOUTH OF TAXIWAY A-2 SOMETIMES DURING THIS PERIOD. MISSION ESSENTIAL FLIGHT REQUIRING TRANSITIONS THROUGH THE RESTRICTED AREA SHALL CONTACT POINT MUGU RANGE CONTROL[no phone numbers allowed] OR 306.6) FOR DECONFLICTION. 09 NOV 16:00 2010 UNTIL 09 NOV 20:00 2010. CREATED: 09 NOV 15:14 2010

39 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:25:58am

re: #35 Shiplord Kirel

Get a grip, people. I know a thing or two about missiles. There are several problems with this story. To begin, calling it a “missile” rather than what we can see it is, a rocket, invites conclusions that aren’t warranted by the facts. KCBS does not indicate how they estimated the distance, allegedly 35 miles, or how they estimate the size.
The ionized launch plume from a large rocket would have left a huge radar signature, visible on every radar in the LA basin and for a good distance beyond. This would imply a cover-up involving not just the military but the FAA and several non-governmental research facilities as well.
I have yet to see the full video, which leads me to wonder whether it has been edited for effect. Are the clips we’ve seen running in real time, for example?
My guess? This is a very large amateur rocket launched from a boat at a good deal shorter range than the chopper estimated. Remember, being a news chopper pilot does not make them experts or qualified observers of rocket flight.
Those not familiar with amateur rocketry would be amazed at what is possible:
Amateur Rocketry-notable events


Compare the photo of the CSXT launch to the KCBS video clips.

There are two links with a lot of video. The one from Lawhawks page is the best.

40 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:27:10am

re: #31 LudwigVanQuixote

Two years ago a Chinese sub skipper put his scope up just to say hello in the middle of one of our aircraft carrier task groups. He had a clear shot dead astern of the carrier.

Heads rolled, but the point of a sub and a good sub skipper is you don’t know they are there. That is why we use them.

As to the launch, the footage from Lawhawk’s post, shows a clear arced trajectory. From miles away, where the footage was taken, it is physically impossible for something straight and horizontal to look like that from 30-35 miles away. Such a report, that it actually some trick of perspective - might be possible from a cropped still frame, that does not show the whole contrail, but with the actual footage, this quickly becomes is utter BS.

[Link: lawhawk.blogspot.com…]

Was that sub in international waters? Did we know it was there?

LVQ, I just imagine that was a foreign vessel. We would have sunk it.

As I noted on teh earlier thread, I believe the launch was a scientific package, new tech test, test on behalf of foreign government, test for foreign government (as in sales pitch) and so on.

I also believe that some idiot XO launched before checking the radar for air traffic, not unlike that sub that surfaced onto a Japanese trainer fishing trawler a few years back.

41 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:27:33am

re: #36 lawhawk

The US NRO (nat’l recon office), DSP (defense support program) and DoD have a catalog of missile launch profiles to work with based on known launches of different missile types, so I have to believe that they’re trying to see whether the energy output (based on the launch characteristics) match one of the known profiles - whether it’s one of ours or not. I’d disagree with the assessment that it wasn’t a threat to the US because it didn’t hit land because it shows that someone managed to get in position to fire the missile and but for bad aim could have resulted in a bad day for someone in the US.

Obviously I am with you there.

42 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:28:02am

Hey…has anyone seen my missile? I parked my mobile launcher outside of Starbuck’s and when I came out with my triple-shot grande soy latte with extra foam, it was missing.

43 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:28:39am

re: #37 LudwigVanQuixote

Assuming w knew it was there, were tracking it, and our skipper had permission to shoot.

Again, subs are really really good at not being seen. While we may have the best subs in th world, we don’t have the only ones.

Again, the Chinese tweaked the Pacific fleet really well about two years ago.

But we do have the best ASW in the world and out coastal waters are all sound mined. We would have known, especially of the incursion was in coastal waters.

44 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:28:52am

re: #37 LudwigVanQuixote


Again, the Chinese tweaked the Pacific fleet really well about two years ago.

Surfacing an attack sub in the middle of a carrier group can have a humbling effect.

45 blueraven  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:29:14am

re: #42 darthstar

Hey…has anyone seen my missile? I parked my mobile launcher outside of Starbuck’s and when I came out with my triple-shot grande soy latte with extra foam, it was missing.

Dude, where’s my missile?

46 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:29:41am

re: #42 darthstar

Hey…has anyone seen my missile? I parked my mobile launcher outside of Starbuck’s and when I came out with my triple-shot grande soy latte with extra foam, it was missing.

First you lose the new Iphone and now this?! /

47 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:30:08am

re: #40 researchok

Was that sub in international waters? Did we know it was there?

Yes it was in international waters. No we did not know it was there until the skipper “bragged” by showing he was there, dead astern one of our carriers.

LVQ, I just imagine that was a foreign vessel. We would have sunk it.

Why? If there was nothing near it for ten or more miles, it would have just submerged and gone away.

As I noted on teh earlier thread, I believe the launch was a scientific package, new tech test, test on behalf of foreign government, test for foreign government (as in sales pitch) and so on.

I hope that is the case too.

I also believe that some idiot XO launched before checking the radar for air traffic, not unlike that sub that surfaced onto a Japanese trainer fishing trawler a few years back.

I simply can not imagine one of our subs firing in plain sight of LA on purpose and without seriously going up the food chain on it.

48 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:30:41am

re: #42 darthstar

Wait… I think I saw that one....

49 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:30:43am

re: #46 DaddyG

First you lose the new Iphone and now this?! /

I know…I suck. But I figured asking here was worth a shot.

50 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:31:13am

The truth is we don’t have all the info yet.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

51 _modok_  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:31:44am

I know from all UFO investigations that this either an abnormal weather pattern or a hot air balloon. Do we need to look further? :)

52 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:32:07am

There is an easy answer to this.

We line up all the kids and we see which one is short a missile.

Problem solved.

53 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:33:43am

Maybe it was just a UPS plane carrying a load of toner cartridges?

(too soon?)

54 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:34:34am

Saddam’s WMD Finally Found!

55 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:34:49am

Missile launch over Southern California explained


A trail lit up the western skies across Southern California on Monday evening and many speculate a missile was launched from behind Catalina Island. However, Southern California’s top meteorologist Kevin Martin from the Southern California Weather Authority states it was nothing but a contrail from an airliner.

“We see this often when the flights come at the right time, however some people are just out to witness it at the right time”, says Martin. “We had strong winds up there as well as really cold temperatures from a passing storm system. This also had an area of upper level moisture at 250 to 200mb, where airliners fly”.

Martin described the event as too slow for a missile launch.

56 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:35:00am

re: #47 LudwigVanQuixote

Yes it was in international waters. No we did not know it was there until the skipper “bragged” by showing he was there, dead astern one of our carriers.

Why? If there was nothing near it for ten or more miles, it would have just submerged and gone away.

I hope that is the case too.

I simply can not imagine one of our subs firing in plain sight of LA on purpose and without seriously going up the food chain on it.

You’re right. Too many unknowns.

I will say this- if our coastal defenses and ASW are compromised, it’s time to fund new technologies.

That is one stimulus package I can get behind.

Time for you to apply for a grant.

I would, but you can’t talk a missile down.
/

57 dr. luba  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:35:00am

re: #14 albusteve

IMO, it’s foolish to roam around grizzly country unarmed…would you walk down the streets in Detroit unarmed?…I thought not

I can, and I do….walk down the streets of Detroit unarmed. Seriously, could you all pick on some other place for a change? My hometown is not that dangerous.

58 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:35:21am

We should also no rule out a misfire from one of our surface vessels. I say this because launching a missile of any sort from a sub is a lot more complicated a process. The surface vessels have the birds ready to go.

If that is the case, you can bet there is a captain in the hot seat right now.

59 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:35:49am

I saw this in a James Bond movie once. In order to solve this mysterious missile crisis, I’ll need to sleep with a number of hot Russian and Chinese female agents, and play some Baccarat in Monaco, ski Chamonix (again), and do some diving near Palau. I’ll set up a PayPal account so you all can donate to this effort.

60 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:35:59am

re: #54 engineer dog

Saddam’s WMD Finally Found!

And lost again.

61 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:36:21am

re: #55 Killgore Trout

Missile launch over Southern California explained

And people don’t understand why Roswell won’t go away.
/

62 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:36:40am

re: #55 Killgore Trout

Missile launch over Southern California explained

If that were really the case, NORAD would be saying that upfront and it wouldn’t be some weatherman.

63 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:36:54am

re: #57 dr. luba

I can, and I do…walk down the streets of Detroit unarmed. Seriously, could you all pick on some other place for a change? My hometown is not that dangerous.

Would you walk around Luckenbach, Texas unarmed?

64 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:37:13am

re: #58 LudwigVanQuixote

We should also no rule out a misfire from one of our surface vessels. I say this because launching a missile of any sort from a sub is a lot more complicated a process. The surface vessels have the birds ready to go.

If that is the case, you can bet there is a captain in the hot seat right now.

And planning for retirement.

In Kansas.

65 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:38:55am

re: #39 LudwigVanQuixote

There are two links with a lot of video. The one from Lawhawks page is the best.

The longest clip is about 4 seconds. If that’s all there is, we are seeing a lot of conclusions from very little data.

66 darthstar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:39:56am

re: #55 Killgore Trout

Missile launch over Southern California explained

I’ll believe this when someone explains where Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy were at the time of the incident.

67 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:40:51am

re: #55 Killgore Trout

The FAA could confirm that with the tapes of the area in question.

Of course, there is one further possibility.

It was Iron Man.

Someone get Rodey on the horn.

68 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:40:55am

re: #65 Shiplord Kirel

The longest clip is about 4 seconds. If that’s all there is, we are seeing a lot of conclusions from very little data.

Truth. However, it is enough to say it was not a small rocket and that the arc was curving and that the missile was pretty far from the chopper because we can see LA in the frame.

69 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:41:01am

re: #57 dr. luba

I can, and I do…walk down the streets of Detroit unarmed. Seriously, could you all pick on some other place for a change? My hometown is not that dangerous.

yes it is…the murder rate is 5 times the national average according to these guys

[Link: www.cityrating.com…]

70 yasharki  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:41:33am

I’ll repost my ramblings from previous thread since everyone seems to have jumped over to this story.

Please do not be offended, but I’d like to make a rather technical suggestion how comments section may be improved. Wouldn’t it be cool to anchor replies within current page instead of linking them externally to showc applet? It should be easy to replace <a href=”/showc/foo/bar”> with <a id=”bar”>, and then replacing “re: <a href=”/showc/foo/bar”> with <a href=”#bar”>. This would eliminate network traffic required to fetch a single comment completely, reduce server load, and improve user experience because clicking on a “re: #” would just cause one’s browser rewind to an anchor instead of making a remote http get request.

71 subsailor68  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:41:35am

re: #63 darthstar

Would you walk around Luckenbach, Texas unarmed?

Heh. If ya did, you’d be about the only one.

;-)

(Seriously, we go to Luckenbach for the music all the time. It’s about the mellowest place around - and the beer is really cold and really good.)

72 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:41:42am

re: #62 LudwigVanQuixote

If that were really the case, NORAD would be saying that upfront and it wouldn’t be some weatherman.


Well, it’s not really up to them to debunk the missile theory. All they can do is search their records for lanches in the area. Really, the press should have researched this better before advancing missile theories. It didn’t take people on the internet to discover it’s an optical illusion. They should have asked around a little bit.

73 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:41:52am

re: #66 darthstar

I’ll believe this when someone explains where Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy were at the time of the incident.

They were playing a game of chess.

74 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:43:02am
75 dr. luba  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:43:52am

re: #63 darthstar

Would you walk around Luckenbach, Texas unarmed?

I go everywhere unarmed, but try to avoid visiting active war zones (e.g. the north when I was in Nicaragua in 80s, and the Eritrean border when I was in Ethiopia in 99). Still, can’t think of any reason I would ever actually be in Luckenbach….

76 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:46:16am

Contrail.

77 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:47:10am

Super chemtrail!

//

78 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:47:27am

re: #76 Gus 802

Contrail.

Chemtrail.

79 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:47:31am

re: #72 Killgore Trout

Well, it’s not really up to them to debunk the missile theory. All they can do is search their records for lanches in the area. Really, the press should have researched this better before advancing missile theories. It didn’t take people on the internet to discover it’s an optical illusion. They should have asked around a little bit.

The footage at 32 seconds in Lawhawk’s post shows that this is not some optical illusion or airplane. You can clearly see the shadow of a round and wide contrail. Jets just don’t do that. You can clearly see LA in the foreground and the Missile is obviously quite far away.

Exactly the difference between a rocket and a missile is unclear to me in this context - but for certain - it was not small, it was not some airplane and it was flying in a curved arc pretty far out to sea.

80 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:47:57am
81 yasharki  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:49:09am

How does a single image of what appears to be a jet propelled thingy make a news story? If it was a news helicopter, shouldn’t they have a motion picture instead of a still image? Is there any other evidence of this mystical launch? Some news outlets are now claiming it were ze alienz, or possibly area 51 related…

What a joke.

82 dr. luba  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:49:11am

re: #69 albusteve

yes it is…the murder rate is 5 times the national average according to these guys

[Link: www.cityrating.com…]

It’s all relative. Much of the violence is criminal on criminal, or family/acquaintance violence. My family is pretty mellow and generally unarmed (except for deer season), and I’m not involved in criminal activity. Of course, there are certain neighborhoods where you don’t venture, particularly at night. But most major cities in the US are like that, no?

83 Charles Johnson  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:50:15am

re: #70 yasharki

The links to individual comment pages save much more load on the server, because when someone links to a comment from another LGF page or from another site, the entire page of comments doesn’t have to be loaded.

84 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:50:59am

re: #82 dr. luba

Of course, there are certain neighborhoods where you don’t venture, particularly at night. But most major cities in the US are like that, no?

I avoid K street in Washington DC. Lobbyist stampedes can get pretty ugly. /

85 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:52:03am

Hey, Charles is here. Perhaps he can explain exactly what he was doing in his underground lair when that missile went off?

86 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:53:05am

re: #85 DaddyG

Hey, Charles is here. Perhaps he can explain exactly what he was doing in his underground lair when that missile went off?

Aiming for Sacramento?
/

87 Feline Fearless Leader  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:53:06am

re: #84 DaddyG

I avoid K street in Washington DC. Lobbyist stampedes can get pretty ugly. /

I’m still unclear on the facts of roundup week. Do the lobbyists gather Congressmen and put their brands on them, or is it the other way round?

;)

88 yasharki  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:53:29am

re: #83 Charles

That makes sense, I didn’t realize comments were referenced across different topics or even sites.

89 blueraven  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:53:32am

re: #85 DaddyG

Hey, Charles is here. Perhaps he can explain exactly what he was doing in his underground lair when that missile went off?

Keeping Cheney company?

90 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:53:42am

re: #85 DaddyG

Hey, Charles is here. Perhaps he can explain exactly what he was doing in his underground lair when that missile went off?

Your mom?

/Sorry, I really could not resist

91 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:54:27am

re: #90 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Your mom?

/Sorry, I really could not resist

Good breeding precludes me from comment.

Damn.

92 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:54:32am

re: #68 LudwigVanQuixote

Truth. However, it is enough to say it was not a small rocket and that the arc was curving and that the missile was pretty far from the chopper because we can see LA in the frame.

How small is “small?” How far is “far” and how does having LA in the frame determine that?
I think this could easily be one of the big amateur rockets. If that’s the case, it will be hard to get anyone to own up to it, since it would involve a whole catalog of airspace and safety violations.

93 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:54:35am

re: #87 oaktree

I’m still unclear on the facts of roundup week. Do the lobbyists gather Congressmen and put their brands on them, or is it the other way round?

;)

I think its sort of like a daisy chain thing. /

94 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:56:20am

re: #1 Killgore Trout

Mysterious “missile” launch seen off Los Angeles coast a “problem of perspective”

Optical illusion.

I do not buy this for one instant.

I repeat. It is not possible to make a straight horizontal trajectory look like an arcing vertical trajectory from miles away.

Seriously, try it! Do the experiment. Take a straight wire or a pen or something long and thin and move it around . See if there is any place you can put your head where that straight horizontal thing looks curved and vertical.

If you want I could prove this with projective geometry - but I really don’t think anyone here would care for the math. Just grap something long and thin and try it.

This is horse shit.

Further, the footage from CBS in Lawhawk’s post clearly clearly shows LA in the foreground. LA is big. This missile was far away.

look at 32 seconds.

[Link: lawhawk.blogspot.com…]

Further, look at the size of the plume and the obvious roundness of it from the shadows. Jets just don’t have contrails that look like that.

Furhter, look at the obviously flaming rear of the bird - unless that jet has some serious afterburners, you would not see that. This was not a jet. This was not an optical illusion. You are being taken in by crap.

95 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:56:25am

I told those damn aliens to use the fuel from the blue pumps, not the red pumps. Everybody know if you use diesel in a non-diesel engine, it starts blowing smoke.

What good is a cloaking device if your flying saucer spews smoke? Stupid aliens.

96 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:57:15am

re: #95 b_sharp

I told those damn aliens to use the fuel from the blue pumps, not the red pumps. Everybody know if you use diesel in a non-diesel engine, it starts blowing smoke.

What good is a cloaking device if your flying saucer spews smoke? Stupid aliens.

Somebody get the MiB!

97 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:58:45am

Fuckin’ contrails…

98 SpaceJesus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:59:39am

re: #7 Dreggas

lol conservatives

99 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:59:46am

re: #97 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Fuckin’ contrails…

How do they work?

100 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 11:59:55am

re: #97 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Fuckin’ contrails…

Fuckin’ magnets.

101 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:00:27pm

re: #96 CuriousLurker

If you would, please, focus on the top of my pen here for a moment…
:flash:

102 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:00:28pm

re: #94 LudwigVanQuixote

I do not buy this for one instant.

I repeat. It is not possible to make a straight horizontal trajectory look like an arcing vertical trajectory from miles away.

Seriously, try it! Do the experiment. Take a straight wire or a pen or something long and thin and move it around . See if there is any place you can put your head where that straight horizontal thing looks curved and vertical.


But it’s not a straight line…

Curvature of the earth… remember we’re talking multiple tens of miles, which can induce a fairly significant curvature effect.

Just a point I thought worth making

103 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:00:53pm

re: #94 LudwigVanQuixote

Seriously, try it! Do the experiment. Take a straight wire or a pen or something long and thin and move it around . See if there is any place you can put your head where that straight horizontal thing looks curved and vertical.


Wind patterns move the comtrail, also the plane could be making a turn. It’s a mistake to think the trail is straight. It’s most likely an optical illusion.

104 yasharki  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:01:26pm

re: #94 LudwigVanQuixote

“It is not possible to make a straight horizontal trajectory look like an arcing vertical trajectory from miles away.”

Take a basketball, put a ruler on it, you’ll see how it’s horizontal at a point where it touches the ball, and vertical further away :)

105 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:02:24pm

BBL

106 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:02:35pm

re: #101 Slumbering Behemoth

If you would, please, focus on the top of my pen here for a moment…
:flash:

*blinks* Who are you and what am I doing here with all these scaly creatures??

107 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:02:46pm

Stupid physics.

108 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:04:06pm

re: #94 LudwigVanQuixote

FWIW, I’m not buying the contrail explanation either. The plume extends right almost to the horizon for one thing, which means the visible base of the “contrail” would be an enormous distance away (200+ miles) if it were coming from a high altitude aircraft in horizontal flight. Its density and width at the point are not consistent with that kind of distance compared to the top of the plume.

109 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:04:11pm

re: #104 yasharki

“It is not possible to make a straight horizontal trajectory look like an arcing vertical trajectory from miles away.”

Take a basketball, put a ruler on it, you’ll see how it’s horizontal at a point where it touches the ball, and vertical further away :)

Of course that doesn’t apply to the earth. Everyone knows the earth is flat. And held up by elephants. On a turtles back…

110 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:04:49pm

Quick! Look at my Karma!

111 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:06:08pm

Now we’ve done it. We have to downding him now. /

112 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:06:39pm

re: #110 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Quick! Look at my Karma!

I ain’t falling for that one again. I couldn’t sleep for weeks the last time.
/fool me once, shame on me…

113 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:10:17pm

Big freakin’ banner on Drudge…


Appears to have been launched at sea…
VIDEO…

MYSTERY ‘MISSILE’ OFF CA COAST; PENTAGON ‘NO CLUE’

114 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:10:45pm

re: #109 DaddyG

Of course that doesn’t apply to the earth. Everyone knows the earth is flat. And held up by elephants. On a turtles back…

*rolls eyes* Puhleeze. Everyone knows it’s round and its axis rests on the horn of an ox, and on the vernal equinox it tosses the earth from one horn to the other. That’s why at the exact moment of the vernal equinox an egg placed in an upright position… (insert more Persian New Year mythology).

See? Simple. It’s all about the physics (of the ox’s horns). //

115 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:11:02pm

Halliburton Fails to Give Gas Drilling Data, EPA Says

The environmental agency is gathering data for a congressionally mandated study on the effects of fracturing on drinking water. The agency issued requests for information to the nine companies in September.

“Halliburton has failed to provide EPA the information necessary to move forward with this important study,” the agency said in the statement. “As a result, and as part of the agency’s effort to move forward as quickly as possible, today EPA issued a subpoena to the company requiring submission of the requested information that has yet to be provided.”

Teresa Wong, a spokeswoman for Houston-based Halliburton, didn’t immediately respond to an e-mailed request for comment.

116 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:11:17pm

re: #114 CuriousLurker Heretic!

117 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:11:20pm

If this were a contrail; the lower, spreading part would have to have been visible for many minutes before the video was taken. That is because the aircraft would have to be quite close to have the kind of angular velocity we see in the video.

118 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:11:40pm

re: #113 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Big freakin’ banner on Drudge…

Appears to have been launched at sea…
VIDEO…

MYSTERY ‘MISSILE’ OFF CA COAST; PENTAGON ‘NO CLUE’

And it’s all POTUS’s fault. Somehow.

119 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:12:05pm

Anybody watch Conan last night. It was good to see him back on the air.

120 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:13:22pm

re: #119 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Anybody watch Conan last night. It was good to see him back on the air.

Heard he had some good lines.

“Welcome to my second annual first show.”

“I’ve decided to call the show Conan so it will be harder to replace me.”

121 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:13:58pm

re: #119 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

122 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:13:59pm

re: #102 bloodstar

But it’s not a straight line…

Curvature of the earth… remember we’re talking multiple tens of miles, which can induce a fairly significant curvature effect.

Just a point I thought worth making

And given that the missile is in the air and so is the viewer - the curvature of the Earth really doesn’t matter in terms of this at all. Bothe the viewer and the trail are in a flat Euclidean space. Also, the scale is about 30 miles. Given the diameter of the earth, how much of a distortion do you think the curvature could have been even if it did matter? Ill give you a hint - divide 30 miles by pi times that diameter.
re: #103 Killgore Trout

Wind patterns move the comtrail, also the plane could be making a turn. It’s a mistake to think the trail is straight. It’s most likely an optical illusion.

Except for that to be true, the thing would have to be coming towards the viewer and we clearly see the shiny ass of the burning engine!
re: #104 yasharki

“It is not possible to make a straight horizontal trajectory look like an arcing vertical trajectory from miles away.”

Take a basketball, put a ruler on it, you’ll see how it’s horizontal at a point where it touches the ball, and vertical further away :)

Yes, except that for that to be the case, you need the scales to be on the order of the curvature of the basket ball. In this case the basket ball is the Earth and that would put the end of the contrail somewhere in Japan.

You also would need to have the thing coming towards you, yet we clearly see the engines pointing it away.

Come one people just think geometrically!

123 yasharki  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:14:34pm

re: #109 DaddyG

And thanks for all the fish :)

124 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:15:03pm

re: #121 DaddyG

Saw that movie ten times. I loved it.

Krull was baaad.

125 Ron Paul  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:15:34pm

It was probably Mythbusters.

126 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:16:11pm

re: #125 Ron Paul

It was probably Mythbusters.

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Salami Rocket v.3

127 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:16:45pm

re: #125 Ron Paul

It was probably Mythbusters.

I don’t think that’s a complete impossibility.

128 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:17:43pm

re: #124 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Saw that movie ten times. I loved it.

Krull was baaad.

Krull was the one with The Beast, fought with the Glaive and had a young Liam Neeson in a supporting role.

Kull was the Conan ripoff featuring Kevin Sorbo.

129 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:18:18pm

re: #108 Shiplord Kirel

FWIW, I’m not buying the contrail explanation either. The plume extends right almost to the horizon for one thing, which means the visible base of the “contrail” would be an enormous distance away (200+ miles) if it were coming from a high altitude aircraft in horizontal flight. Its density and width at the point are not consistent with that kind of distance compared to the top of the plume.

As per your how far is far, LA in the foreground means, that the distance to the missile was at least as far away as the point of view of the helicopter above LA to the horizon at that point. I can absolutely believe the 30-35 mile estimate from that shot alone given the size of LA and the fact that the helicopter was around 1/4 to 1/2 a mile up.

As to this comment - great point on the contrail - and you may be right about the amateur launch of something really big. If amateurs pulled off something that big though DHS just shit its pants.

130 Kilroy01  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:18:25pm

My guess is someone in the US Navy fat fingered a sub launched ballistic missile.

Why not announce it?

I think they’d want to find the, up to 10, nuclear warheads first.

I’m just saying.

131 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:19:07pm

re: #128 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Thulsa Doom.

What a dumb-ass…

132 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:20:50pm

re: #130 Kilroy01

My guess is someone in the US Navy fat fingered a sub launched ballistic missile.

Why not announce it?

I think they’d want to find the, up to 10, nuclear warheads first.

I’m just saying.

Given the launch protocols and the fact that the sub has to be at launch depth and keys turned and orders verified and all, I don’t think that is possible as an accident.

I could see it from a veridical launch tube of a surface vessel though.

133 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:21:12pm

I can’t see this being accidental. Anything that size (especially with nuclear warheads) would almost certainly require a launch code and a couple of level headed officers with keys before it was even ready to launch.

134 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:21:20pm

re: #125 Ron Paul

My brophew (a nephew my Mom and Dad raised) and I threw a five pound container of coffee creamer on a bonfire.

Lit up the Western Hemisphere. Learned it from Mythbusters.

135 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:22:40pm

re: #134 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Surface area. It’s a beautiful thing.

It’s also why I really limit what the Boy Scouts have near bonfires.

136 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:22:59pm

re: #122 LudwigVanQuixote

Except for that to be true, the thing would have to be coming towards the viewer and we clearly see the shiny ass of the burning engine!


It is coming towards the camera. what you see as the burning engine is actually the setting sun reflected off the plane.

137 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:23:28pm

re: #135 DaddyG

Surface area. It’s a beautiful thing.

It’s also why I really limit what the Boy Scouts have near bonfires.

anything other than marshmallows, chocolate and graham crackers is asking for trouble…

138 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:23:34pm

re: #130 Kilroy01

Not a chance. Way to many safe guards built into the system for that to ever happen.

139 researchok  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:00pm

re: #132 LudwigVanQuixote

Given the launch protocols and the fact that the sub has to be at launch depth and keys turned and orders verified and all, I don’t think that is possible as an accident.

I could see it from a veridical launch tube of a surface vessel though.

I’ll bet someone misread the memo

‘Test to take place 350 miles offshore’.

Instead launch took place 35 miles offshore.

140 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:07pm

re: #136 Killgore Trout

It is coming towards the camera. what you see as the burning engine is actually the setting sun reflected off the plane.

Then why is the top part of the plume illuminated?

And what about the more important question of projective geometry?

Why do you believe this?

141 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:10pm

re: #131 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Thulsa Doom.

What a dumb-ass…

You know, if I had a cult of mind controlled freaks under my command, I would not be telling the cute ones to jump off cliffs!

142 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:14pm

re: #136 Killgore Trout

It is coming towards the camera. what you see as the burning engine is actually the setting sun reflected off the plane.

not buying it…no contrail like any of hundreds I’ve gazed at across New Mexico

143 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:25pm

re: #137 ralphieboy

anything other than marshmallows, chocolate and graham crackers is asking for trouble…

Even then. A flaming marshmallow on a pointy stick is a formidable weapon. (note lack of sarc tags)

144 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:24:56pm

re: #138 Bubblehead II

Not a chance. Way to many safe guards built into the system for that to ever happen.

Plus, the DoD has never been averse to pinning the blame on someone when they can manage it.

145 Steve Dutch  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:25:02pm

The contrail explanation is unsatisfying. Contrails remain relatively narrow and straight for some distance behind the aircraft. This one flares out immediately.

146 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:25:19pm

re: #134 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

My brophew (a nephew my Mom and Dad raised) and I threw a five pound container of coffee creamer on a bonfire.

Lit up the Western Hemisphere. Learned it from Mythbusters.

They tell us on every show not try that stuff at home.

Sorry Jamie. Sorry Adam. We blew up the mountain.

147 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:25:47pm

The biggest issue I have with this is that claiming it’s a missile, it’s almost impossible to figure out what it is because the brain is too busy trying to fit it into a ‘missile profile’ In addition, a missile launch is a *big* deal. if it’s visible 35 miles away we need some high quality images of it. everything we’re getting is all video shot with video and we can’t tell much from it.

48 hour rule?

148 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:25:47pm

re: #143 DaddyG

Even then. A flaming marshmallow on a pointy stick is a formidable weapon. (note lack of sarc tags)

accuracy after launch is questionable tho

149 Ron Paul  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:26:00pm

re: #134 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

My brother in law sets off 2 liter bottles wth toilet cleaner and tinfoil.
I will miss him.

150 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:26:56pm

re: #140 LudwigVanQuixote

Then why is the top part of the plume illuminated?

And what about the more important question of projective geometry?

Why do you believe this?

Because it’s most likely true. Occam’s Razor and all that.

151 Kragar  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:27:13pm

re: #143 DaddyG

Even then. A flaming marshmallow on a pointy stick is a formidable weapon. (note lack of sarc tags)

No match for a poo stick

152 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:28:59pm

re: #150 Killgore Trout
Occam was a fence sitter.

153 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:29:03pm

re: #151 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

No match for a poo stick


[Video]

Easier to just carry the dog poo around on your shoe.

154 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:29:15pm

re: #142 albusteve

not buying it…no contrail like any of hundreds I’ve gazed at across New Mexico

I agree. Up here in the Rockies, I’ve seen all sorts of contrails… contrails from the black op chemtrail dustings… contrails from UFO’s taking off from one of the underground bases hidden in the mountains… even a contrail created by Dan Zekeberg one night when he and his drunk friends set a Bic lighter against the ass of a farting cow…

None of them looked like this… this is a missle.

155 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:30:35pm

I just wonder how bad the crow population will take a hit when they realize this is indeed a contrail.

156 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:31:09pm

re: #152 DaddyG

Occam was a fence sitter.

Watch it! He has a razor.

157 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:31:59pm

re: the missile off LA, Google San Nicholas Island
/the info isn’t original with me

158 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:32:05pm

re: #150 Killgore Trout

Because it’s most likely true. Occam’s Razor and all that.

But it isn’t occam’s razor. For what you are saying to be true, the oddly shaped contrail would have to be thousands of miles long and stay in the air for hours without dissipating, yet being miles wide at the end of it somewhere in the middle of the Pacific.

I repeat, do the test yourself with something long and thin like a chopstick. Find any place where you can put your head, given a horizontal trajectory that would reproduce that curve and not have to have an amazingly long chopstick - in this case on a scale significant compared to the size of the Earth.

But of course if that were the case, the thing would also have to be really really big to see the actual craft itself because it would be nearly in orbit.

159 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:32:33pm

re: #154 Walter L. Newton

I agree. Up here in the Rockies, I’ve seen all sorts of contrails… contrails from the black op chemtrail dustings… contrails from UFO’s taking off from one of the underground bases hidden in the mountains… even a contrail created by Dan Zekeberg one night when he and his drunk friends set a Bic lighter against the ass of a farting cow…

None of them looked like this… this is a missle.

that was no cow, that was his wife

160 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:33:01pm
This one flares out immediately.

The meteorologist specifically commented about high velocity winds aloft.

I agree - once you’ve been told its a missile… it’s really hard to shift your inner mind to conceive it’s something else.

161 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:33:09pm

My theory is as follows. The plane is traveling through an air mass that was conductive to creating a contrail, then as it pass through into dryer air, the contrail became much smaller and non noticeable. The last part of this video shows what I’m trying to explain

Throw in some fairly strong winds and you’ve got curvature thrown in.

162 Kilroy01  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:33:45pm

re: #132 LudwigVanQuixote

No argument that it is highly unlikely. As no one is talking, something happened.

A surfaced launched missile is far more likely. The Navy has already denied being in the area.

The US has launched a missile by mistakes before. (Though this was only a conventional air to air missile and not a nuclear release).

href=”[Link: articles.latimes.com…]>Us missile hit Turkish ship…

163 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:34:00pm

re: #132 LudwigVanQuixote

VERTICAL! Charles it is your fault I am sloppy with the spell checker! I blame you!

164 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:35:07pm

re: #162 Kilroy01

No argument that it is highly unlikely. As no one is talking, something happened.

A surfaced launched missile is far more likely. The Navy has already denied being in the area.

The US has launched a missile by mistakes before. (Though this was only a conventional air to air missile and not a nuclear release).

href=”[Link: articles.latimes.com…]>Us missile hit Turkish ship…

We have no reason to believe the missile was carrying a nuke at this moment. If it was, God help us all, because we have some nukes out there somewhere.

165 DaddyG  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:36:32pm

re: #163 LudwigVanQuixote

VERTICAL! Charles it is your fault I am sloppy with the spell checker! I blame you!


You have misspelled a word and according to interwebs rulez you have now forfeited the entire debate. Good day sir!

/

166 Kilroy01  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:37:43pm

re: #164 LudwigVanQuixote

We have no reason to believe the missile was carrying a nuke at this moment. If it was, God help us all, because we have some nukes out there somewhere.

But it would explain the silence. Having the warhead back before announcing the accident would make it much less of a PR disaster

167 Political Atheist  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:37:44pm

re: #122 LudwigVanQuixote

Teaching spatial relationships on this scale will help folks get your other lesson Ludwig. My first guess was a global prompt strike test, but I was wrong.

168 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:38:43pm

re: #161 bloodstar

My theory is as follows. The plane is traveling through an air mass that was conductive to creating a contrail, then as it pass through into dryer air, the contrail became much smaller and non noticeable. The last part of this video shows what I’m trying to explain

Throw in some fairly strong winds and you’ve got curvature thrown in.

So how do you explain that for what you are saying to be correct the trail would have to be thousands of miles long?

169 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:39:42pm

This is funny to me, ‘cuz I actually tried drinking one of these. I poured the whole thing down the drain after one sip.

Honest Four Loko Commercial
12% alcohol, 100% awful
.

170 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:41:46pm

re: #167 Rightwingconspirator

Teaching spatial relationships on this scale will help folks get your other lesson Ludwig. My first guess was a global prompt strike test, but I was wrong.

This is one of those things that I can’t explain over the webs - either people can see it or they don’t. It is kind of like hearing tonalities music, either people can hear the pitch and match it or they can’t.

The best thing for them to do like I am begging them to is to try it with something really long and thin and then try to remember the scales involved.

171 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:42:33pm

Reasons for it being an aircraft:
1) no US missiles fired from the area according to NORAD and US Navy;
2) meterologist claims conditions permit optical illusion giving the appearance of a missile launch;
3) speed of object may not track as a missile; and
4) no sonic boom recorded or witnessed

Reasons for it being a missile:
1) contrail mimics those of other rockets;
2) ballistic arc to contrail shows range and height;
3) towards end of video, the object displays what can be described as the rocket exhaust - something not possible if it was an aircraft - where you normally don’t see such exhaust at distance

I haven’t seen any related items noting the witnessing of a sonic boom so that potentially mitigates against it being a missile, but given the distance involved that may not have been heard.

On balance, I’m leaning towards a missile or rocket of undetermined origin. It could be a secret DARPA style project along the lines of a hypersonic vehicle. That could explain why no one at NORAD is able to confirm - it’s a black project and they can only confirm that it wasn’t a threat to the US.

Still, the possibility that it was a unknown entity that fired the object that close to the US coast and no one seems to know who or what it was is disconcerting to say the least - especially if it instead of arcing out to sea it was fired at, and hit, somewhere in Los Angeles.

172 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:42:39pm

re: #164 LudwigVanQuixote

We have no reason to believe the missile was carrying a nuke at this moment. If it was, God help us all, because we have some nukes out there somewhere.

1. Stop panicking.
2. Stop speculating about the worst.
3. Wait for you military to investigate.
4. When they release their findings:
If, and only if, it is the worst.
panic your ass off.
else
grab a beer and ruminate about lost opportunities and great women.
5. Remember to leave all future panic to the TPers. They have the practice.

173 Kilroy01  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:42:56pm

re: #138 Bubblehead II

With a name like Bubblehead II I’ll take your word on issues regarding submarines.

Is there any reason a sub would ever need to get rid of a malfunctioning missile in this way?

174 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:43:32pm

re: #169 Slumbering Behemoth

That’s the shit inside of “Happy Fun Ball”.

175 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:44:47pm

re: #173 Kilroy01

With a name like Bubblehead II I’ll take your word on issues regarding submarines.

Is there any reason a sub would ever need to get rid of a malfunctioning missile in this way?

To make room for more beer kegs?

176 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:45:02pm

Also the sun reflecting off of it must be wrong. The footage was around sunset - in the west. LA is in the foreground. The viewer is in LA. The sun is BEHIND the missile.

177 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:46:18pm

re: #174 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I can tell by the absence of a sarc tag in your post, you have tried that gawt-awful shit.

I’d drink a case of Bud before I took another sip of that crap.

178 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:47:40pm

re: #176 LudwigVanQuixote

Also the sun reflecting off of it must be wrong. The footage was around sunset - in the west. LA is in the foreground. The viewer is in LA. The sun is BEHIND the missile.

I thought he said this footage was “from around dawn.”

179 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:47:54pm

My Sister-In-Law’s an Officer in the U.S. Army. On her Facebook page she has a picture of a notice duct-taped to the wall in the bathroom. The notice says…

“If we do not replace the toilet paper rolls; the Terrorists win. Do you hate America?”

That’s funny as hell.

180 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:48:11pm

re: #172 b_sharp

1. Stop panicking.
2. Stop speculating about the worst.
3. Wait for you military to investigate.
4. When they release their findings:
If, and only if, it is the worst.
panic your ass off.
else
grab a beer and ruminate about lost opportunities and great women.
5. Remember to leave all future panic to the TPers. They have the practice.

I am not panicking. I was telling someone else that we have no reason to believe there is a nuke involved at this moment. I am utterly certain it is a missile or a rocket though.

In the best case, it was one of ours (military, government or private) and there was a serious miscommunication.

In the middle case it was one of ours, military and launched by accident.

In the worst case, it was someone else’s - which includes an amateur group that could launch something that big with no one knowing.

181 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:48:31pm

re: #178 prairiefire

I thought he said this footage was “from around dawn.”

Sun sets in the West.

182 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:48:51pm

re: #177 Slumbering Behemoth

Nope… didn’t try it… read the label. Before the ink was eaten away.

183 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:50:39pm

re: #157 pre-Boomer Marine brat

re: the missile off LA, Google San Nicholas Island
/the info isn’t original with me

So I did….

[…]

McDowell points out that the US Navy runs a base on San Nicolas Island, which lies 120 kilometres west of Los Angeles. Small rockets are launched there every few weeks, he says.

He says some of the rockets are used as targets for tests with the Airborne Laser, a Boeing 747 jet with a nose-mounted laser designed to shoot missiles downMovie Camera. “They’ve been flying this 747 around and using it to fire at little rockets they’ve launched from San Nicolas,” McDowell says. “So you can imagine if this helicopter is zooming off the California coast a bit away from LA, near the San Nicolas area, and this thing goes up right next to it, the crew would go, ‘Oh my goodness, what is that?’”

But a spokesman at the Missile Defense Agency, which launches those rockets, told New Scientist it was not one of their tests.

Howdy pBMb!

185 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:54:19pm

re: #183 wrenchwench

Hi there.

An ABM launch from San Nicholas is a very long stretch, but the visual evidence matches. That is a frickin’ missile plume, and it sure looks like the origin point is way out over the horizon (further than 35 miles.)

186 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:54:49pm

re: #173 Kilroy01

Fire in either the missile compartment or the torpedo room would be about the only reason to jettison a weapon. Notice I said jettison, not launch. When a missile (or torpedo) is jettisoned they are not armed. In the unlikely event that a rocket motor ignited while in the tube, well you could kiss the Boat and crew good-by.

187 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:55:04pm

re: #183 wrenchwench

Oh, and by the way, this wasn’t a “small rocket”.

188 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:55:41pm

re: #187 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Oh, and by the way, this wasn’t a “small rocket”.

How wide do you think the chem trail is?

189 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:56:44pm

re: #188 prairiefire

How wide do you think the chem trail is?

I have no idea.

190 Charles Johnson  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:57:27pm

If it really was a missile, I’m sure we’re going to be hearing more about it.

I do think the meteorologist’s explanation sounds plausible, and he’s speaking as someone who’s seen similar optical illusions.

It’s the 48-hour rule again. With this much interest there’s bound to be more info coming soon.

191 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:58:03pm

Having lived in Southern California from 1963 to 1981, and having seen many trails from different kinds of launches, as well as thousands of contrails in many different weather conditions, I’m going with contrail.

192 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 12:58:38pm

re: #190 Charles

See 184 for a more detailed explanation and pics of previously noted illusions

193 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:00:26pm

re: #190 Charles

It’s the 48-hour rule again.

I agree.

194 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:00:38pm

re: #168 LudwigVanQuixote

So how do you explain that for what you are saying to be correct the trail would have to be thousands of miles long?

You realize that’d be physically impossible to see? assuming that the plane was flying 5 miles up, the curvature of the earth would conceal the contrail at just under 200 miles. If the plane is flying lower, you that number drops quickly (under 180 miles for 4 miles up)

It’s not thousands of miles, I promise

195 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:02:18pm

re: #190 Charles

If it really was a missile, I’m sure we’re going to be hearing more about it.

I do think the meteorologist’s explanation sounds plausible, and he’s speaking as someone who’s seen similar optical illusions.

It’s the 48-hour rule again. With this much interest there’s bound to be more info coming soon.

Then the end of the trail could not reach to the horizon without being very, very long.

While there can be some cases, where what he is saying might be possible - the scale involved with LA in the foreground makes this impossible. This isn’t just physics, this is a matter of geometry.

196 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:02:43pm

Got a soldering iron running in the back room.
Later, all.

197 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:04:37pm

re: #171 lawhawk

It could be a secret DARPA style project along the lines of a hypersonic vehicle. That could explain why no one at NORAD is able to confirm - it’s a black project and they can only confirm that it wasn’t a threat to the US.

$20 on this. Perhaps an Aurorahad to do an emergency restart after a flameout?

198 JeffFX  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:04:59pm

re: #196 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Got a soldering iron running in the back room.
Later, all.

I do not want to know what that’s a euphemism for.

199 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:06:14pm

re: #194 bloodstar

You realize that’d be physically impossible to see? assuming that the plane was flying 5 miles up, the curvature of the earth would conceal the contrail at just under 200 miles. If the plane is flying lower, you that number drops quickly (under 180 miles for 4 miles up)

It’s not thousands of miles, I promise

Well I was referring to the thousands of miles in terms of the earlier ruler and basketball analogy.

So let’s say from the altitude of the chopper, the distance to the horizon is something like 100 miles.

1. Contrails from jets aren’t that long!

2. Contrails from jets aren’t shaped like that. It is clearly conical from the light and shadow.

3. You see the engines of the bird!

200 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:07:22pm

re: #198 JeffFX

I do not want to know what that’s a euphemism for.

This
I have four of them

201 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:07:44pm

Gone for the day

202 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:08:46pm

re: #199 LudwigVanQuixote


1. Contrails from jets aren’t that long!

2. Contrails from jets aren’t shaped like that. It is clearly conical from the light and shadow.

3. You see the engines of the bird!


All wrong. Jet contrails from some angles look like missile trails (with pictures and stories from 2008 and 2009)

203 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:08:52pm

re: #200 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Doing SMD rework?

204 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:10:31pm

re: #170 LudwigVanQuixote

This is one of those things that I can’t explain over the webs - either people can see it or they don’t. It is kind of like hearing tonalities music, either people can hear the pitch and match it or they can’t.

The best thing for them to do like I am begging them to is to try it with something really long and thin and then try to remember the scales involved.

Why do you assume a contrail would be long and thin, that it wouldn’t get pushed around by wind differentials, spread out, have come from an aircraft performing a slow turn or gaining altitude for a trans-oceanic flight? You’re making a ton of assumptions here.

re: #140 LudwigVanQuixote

Then why is the top part of the plume illuminated?

And what about the more important question of projective geometry?

Why do you believe this?

It could be due to reflected light from the sky, the sky is a large diffuse light source, especially at sunset. Incident reflection can also come from a setting sun off an object high above the horizon when the sun is near or below it. You could be interpreting that as a bright engine when it’s not, or it could be a rocket engine, I don’t know.

Your assuming a straight trajectory when planes often fly in defined corridors, perform turns, change altitude, etc.

Because I don’t lend much weight to assumptions based on speculation and eye witness interpretation only, absent any actual instrument data, facts, or concrete evidence. I don’t know what’s going on in that video / photograph, and I’m certainly not positive that we’re looking at a missile or rocket. We don’t even know the focal length of the lens being used, whether pinch or barrel distortion is being induced or if this was truly captured by aspheric optics. We don’t know the size or resolution of the capture chip, and thus the angle distended by a single pixel. There is just too much we don’t know to definitively say this is a missile launch.

205 superjan  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:11:09pm

Anyone checked if Michael Jackson is still in his grave?

206 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:11:19pm

OY! Charles, you really should not have updated that it being an airliner was likely.

Aside from all the geometry arguments, we presumably know who was flying airliners around LA at that time. It would not all all be hard to identify the airliner.

While we are at it, the Pentagon would not be busy being interviewed and having no information, or acting like they were worried it is a missile. They would be the ones pushing the airliner story first.

I will give 5% chance I am wrong on this - but the whole LA in the foreground shot seals it for me.

207 Charles Johnson  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:13:32pm

re: #206 LudwigVanQuixote

I can’t say for sure, and I’m not making any final judgment, but this post has some photos of jet contrails that look VERY similar to the ‘missile launch.’

[Link: uncinus.wordpress.com…]

208 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:13:51pm

re: #204 goddamnedfrank

1. A jet contrail is long and thin compared to the rest of the sky.

2. People keep shifting goalposts around. The claim is a mostly horizontal trajectory.

3. The angles and the geometry just don’t work for what you are saying.

4. I can’t believe I am arguing this.

209 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:15:04pm

re: #188 prairiefire

How wide do you think the chem trail is?

Don’t confuse contrails and chem trails. You’re too reasonable for that.

210 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:17:10pm

re: #197 wlewisiii

$20 on this. Perhaps an Aurorahad to do an emergency restart after a flameout?

Wow, I started following the wiki links and I had no idea some of this stuff actually exists. The lines of Blackbird are quite beautiful (in an uncomfortably threatening way). The X-43 looks like a paper airplane, heh.

211 lawhawk  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:21:09pm

re: #210 CuriousLurker

Come to NYC and you can see the A-12 Blackbird up close and personal (that’s a version of the SR-71) at the Intrepid. It’s an absolutely gorgeous plane.

212 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:22:02pm

re: #207 Charles

I can’t say for sure, and I’m not making any final judgment, but this post has some photos of jet contrails that look VERY similar to the ‘missile launch.’

[Link: uncinus.wordpress.com…]

It is interesting because what you posted actually makes the same mathematical argument I am.

The math is even looks correct.

The difference is that the shots there are taken from the ground, while the shots in question here are taken from the air.

Do the math they have there with a different origin and you will show my side is vastly more likely.

Now, we know when the LA chopper was in the air, where it was and the direction it was looking at. They are also reporting that this came from 35 miles off the coast. They formed that estimate by knowing these things.

Geometry aside, from the above if you know where you are looking, in LA at what time and it was an airliner - it would be pretty easy to call LAX and ask if was an airliner. Maybe CBS and the News services would be all sloppy and fail to do that.

But it would be in the interest of the pentagon for many reasons to do that first.

213 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:24:25pm

The sun is below the jet - not behind…
Or we’d never see satellites at night. think about it.

Stop assuming we are on a flat surface.

214 CuriousLurker  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:26:56pm

re: #211 lawhawk

Come to NYC and you can see the A-12 Blackbird up close and personal (that’s a version of the SR-71) at the Intrepid. It’s an absolutely gorgeous plane.

You know, I’ve been past the Intrepid dozens of times, but have never actually visited it. I’ll have to correct that one day soon, if only to see the Blackbird. Thanks.

215 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:29:11pm

re: #213 Samita

The sun is below the jet - not behind…
Or we’d never see satellites at night. think about it.

Stop assuming we are on a flat surface.

The sun is below the jet because it is rising at dawn.

216 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:31:27pm

try dusk and setting, but yes - someone said you’d not see a reflection on the jet because it’s behind it.

Which is false - because while the sun is in the background - it’s clearly what would be below and allow the reflection of light from the sun to the viewer.

217 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:32:07pm

re: #215 prairiefire

The sun is below the jet because it is rising at dawn.

Does the sun rise over the ocean from LA?

218 Feline Fearless Leader  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:33:25pm

re: #211 lawhawk

Come to NYC and you can see the A-12 Blackbird up close and personal (that’s a version of the SR-71) at the Intrepid. It’s an absolutely gorgeous plane.

There’s also a SR-71 in Dayton, OH at the USAF museum at Wright-Patterson. Pity the lighting conditions were not conducive to the camera I had at the time. All the photos came out so dark my brother asked whether it was actually a stealth plane or not… :p

219 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:35:34pm

re: #217 LudwigVanQuixote

Does the sun rise over the ocean from LA?

It rises over the hills of LA, to reflect out onto the ocean. But, I think the sunlight can reflect onto the bottoms of the clouds over the ocean.

220 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:36:32pm

re: #209 wrenchwench

Don’t confuse contrails and chem trails. You’re too reasonable for that.

Heh, I hope.

221 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:37:08pm

into the California sunset was captured on video by a KCBS news helicopter flying over Los Angeles at around 5 p.m. Pacific time.

Please keep the facts straight.

222 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:38:57pm

re: #211 lawhawk

Come to NYC and you can see the A-12 Blackbird up close and personal (that’s a version of the SR-71) at the Intrepid. It’s an absolutely gorgeous plane.

there is one at the Kalamazoo Air Zoo as well

223 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:42:52pm

OK so here are some shuttle launch photos just to show what a vertical trajectory looks like from far away.

Note this was taken from the air:

[Link: www.strategypage.com…]

This was taken from much further away:

[Link: www.elliott.org…]

So was this:

[Link: www.flickr.com…]

[Link: www.tripadvisor.com…]

224 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:44:11pm

So, like I said, I will give a 5% chance I am off on this. But do look at the photos in my 223.

225 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:44:16pm

Dissipating contrail.

[Link: www.airliners.net…]

Direct view of contrail at altitude.

[Link: www.airliners.net…]

226 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:45:35pm

re: #225 Gus 802

Dissipating contrail.

[Link: www.airliners.net…]

Direct view of contrail at altitude.

[Link: www.airliners.net…]

Nice and good point - why is there not the central line in the contrail from the multiple engines in the footage we care about?

227 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:47:26pm

re: #226 LudwigVanQuixote

Nice and good point - why is there not the central line in the contrail from the multiple engines in the footage we care about?

The separation isn’t always visible from a distance. Also depends on weather conditions up there. Would be nice to see a HD video of what the chopper pilot taped.

228 Gus  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:48:27pm

re: #226 LudwigVanQuixote

Nice and good point - why is there not the central line in the contrail from the multiple engines in the footage we care about?

Like this.

[Link: www.airliners.net…]

230 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:49:53pm

Guy goes skydiving for the first time. Pulls ripcord… nothing. Pulls emergency ripcord… nothing again.

Plummeting toward the earth… sees something coming up toward him… as he gets closer he sees it’s a man flying upward. Yells to the man, “Do you know anything about parachutes?!”

The man flying upward yells, back… “No! Do you know anything about gas stoves?!”

232 albusteve  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:54:31pm

could Lizards clone themselves?….who’s first?
[Link: news.nationalgeographic.com…]

233 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:56:33pm

Fine… I will accept as possible that abnormal weather conditions allowed for teh contrail to stay in the air much longer than usual and produce an exceptionally long contrail.

I will bring it down to 50% sure.

However, I am not wrong about the geometry.

234 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:58:53pm

keep going ;) - I see full sky length contrails all the time in AZ. and my kids have been claiming they were rockets for years, esp the ones with a straight over head trajectory.

235 Amory Blaine  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 1:59:01pm

Jet Contrails!!!1!!!1
Fluoride!!!11!!!!!
Seeds!!!11!!

236 marsl  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:01:06pm

Perhaps today, in North Korea Television (or Iran Television), someone is showing this images, elucidanting their peoples how a sub from the People Navy or the Mahdi Navy was capable of firing a missile to the US… without the US ever realized what it was or who it was.

Hell, even if one of our subs (diesel electric, with almost 20 years of use) was capable of “sinking” the USS Eisenhower without any knowlege of the american task force, why could not be someone else?

237 prairiefire  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:06:05pm

I think I am going to stay confused and drive everybody crazy./

238 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:18:37pm

What a world, huh?

Some things look like other things.

239 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:19:49pm

Cankles McCellulite?

240 funky chicken  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:22:28pm

CHEMTRAILS!

/prison planet

241 Political Atheist  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 2:46:44pm

re: #212 LudwigVanQuixote

IMHO-
Do not expect candor (for now) from the pentagon. First thing-You can bet it was not a foreign missile, given the sheer lack of a military alert, or flotilla on the hunt. Next-If it’s classified, our interests are best served by this remaining unclear. Third, they may or may not want to verify an airliner right away as to not reveal how well they can assess unknown targets. ATC can do that. They will not if it was classified. Lots of ATC guys saw lots of air force planes doing things and going speeds that are or were classified. Heck the F-117 had a special retractable reflector so ATC would not vector aircraft too close too them on transit flights and cause a hazard. You can bet that reflector looks different in the radar data than a Lear jet. The Blackbird would fly across the US, as would perhaps Aurora. The ionized trail of very high flight does leave quite a radar signature…

242 MurphysMom  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 4:00:29pm

That was no ordinary missile. It was a Nazi missile.
That was the Tea Party’s Dark Mark.

243 Steve Dutch  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 4:23:00pm

A contrail’s not out of the question but:
1. All airliner contrails I’ve seen show paired trails immediately behind the plane from the two sets of engines. In some cases the trails remain distinct for a long time.
2. All the wind-deformed contrails I’ve ever seen are pretty uniform in width and opacity, though they have fine structure. They look distinctly flat, as you’d expect from a line source sheared in a single plane.
3. The mystery trail is distinctly shaded and three-dimensional in appearance, something I haven’t seen in contrails. A few pictures on the linked pages show something similar, but in all cases it’s a shadow cast on another cloud deck. This trail seems to be in a clear sky.

It’s a shame nobody can be bothered to post good images or video.

I agree all the comments on trajectory, point of launch, etc. are total crap. All we know is the apparent elevation of the object as seen from the camera vantage point. Without other views, we know nothing about distance from the camera. We don’t know if it was moving toward or away from the camera or whether it was climbing or not. To estimate distance, you have to know the size. To estimate size, you have to know distance. If you know neither, you have nothing.

244 tradewind  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 5:16:58pm

That was no missile… it was the citizens sending up a flare.//

245 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 5:34:05pm

The whole thing is bad news, and we’ve been projection weakness for way too long.

246 tradewind  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 5:40:27pm

re: #245 Ojoe
I have to say, it doesn’t really look that different from other forms of exaggerated contrails I’ve seen .

247 tradewind  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 5:41:02pm

re: #245 Ojoe
But the second half of your statement, …
definitely.

248 ironcladbarrel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 7:07:44pm

OK, OK….if it WAS a jetliner, airplane, etc,…then why hasn’t the flight number or airliner been disclosed???

249 ironcladbarrel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 7:15:10pm

re: #248 ironcladbarrel

or did someone already answer this question?

250 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 7:16:32pm

re: #248 ironcladbarrel

re: #249 ironcladbarrel

You’re at the bottom of a very stale thread. Ask upstream in one of the fresh ones.

251 ironcladbarrel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 7:20:21pm

re: #250 Decatur Deb

sorry, my bad. got here a little late. Please have a beer, on the house!

252 ironcladbarrel  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 7:43:49pm

re: #62 LudwigVanQuixote

OK, OK…if it WAS a jetliner, airplane, etc,…then why hasn’t the flight number or airliner been disclosed???

253 samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 8:50:45pm

re: #252 ironcladbarrel

OK, OK…if it WAS a jetliner, airplane, etc,…then why hasn’t the flight number or airliner been disclosed???

You’d have to have someone calculate within fair degree of accuracy the location and altitude of the jet (based on interpolated location of the camera and direction), then have access to historical radar data and be able to categorically reduce it to a specific flight.

Find me someone with both the knowledge and access who cares enough to bother to do it when is just as easy to watch the idiots blather on about a non-existent missile launch. The military isn’t going to conjecture and once they’ve determined it wasn’t a missile - which would be near instantly - it’s not their problem.

There have already been some people who’ve taken a rough shot at it. But without explicit data to confirm it - it’s all just foofoo

254 Samita  Tue, Nov 9, 2010 9:36:58pm

AWE808 Arrived Tue 10:14AM HST Tue 06:45PM MST US Airways Boeing 757-200

[Link: flightaware.com…]

do the math on when this flight would have been approaching and over LA.
Look at the flight path - imagine it’s contrail directly approaching LA at dusk.
the correlation is so close that if there had been a missile fired - This plane would have been it’s target - O.o


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Melting of Juneau Icefield Rapidly Accelerating, Study Concludes The melting of Southeast Alaska’s Juneau Icefield, source of more than 1,000 glaciers, is accelerating, shrinking 4.6 times faster than it was in the 1980s, according to a new study. Researchers tracked snow levels in the nearly 1,500-square mile ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 116 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
The Good Liars at Miami Trump Rally [VIDEO] Jason and Davram talk with Trump supporters about art, Mike Lindell, who is really president and more! SUPPORT US: herohero.co SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!LOS ANGELES, CA squadup.com SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.comSpotify: open.spotify.comJoin this channel to ...
teleskiguy
4 weeks ago
Views: 930 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0