Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 01:05am PT
|
He's busy preparing a massive rebuttal that will blow your socks off.
Better get ready ....
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 01:29am PT
|
This is one of only a couple of photos to reach the public media of the
Aurora's contrail. It was a Mach 6 pulsejet or pulse detonation wave engine.
There was a better photo published in Aviation Week but I didn't take the
time to look for it. It shows nice doughnuts more clearly. I do recall it
was taken over Idaho, lol.
An aviation enthusiast also recorded an exchange between ATC and
quite probably the Aurora, based on the speed with which it was handed off
by one center to the next. The skeptic would ask why a black project plane
would talk to ATC but the recording was verified by 'Aviation Week and
Space Technology' (the Wall Street Journal of the aviation industry).
The project appears to have been terminated in the late 90's.
ps
There may have been an accident with one in '93-94. There was a NOTAM issued
for a temporary Prohibited Area that lasted for months. The area was about
10 miles out on the extended centerline of Groom Lake's main runway
and the area was 5 miles in diameter. The Air Force said a 'helicopter'
had crashed. Uh, a 5 mile Prohibited Area and months to pick up the pieces
of a flipping helicopter? Right.
pps
Here's the one that shows the 'donuts' better:
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 09:21am PT
|
having checked all the records and what not, it's obvious that graniteclimber got ahold of my wife's income figure from two years ago. mariko is an administrator at a public university and it's public record. one of the bee newspapers posts salaries for the whole state of california. i don't have a problem with that--i'm the first to demand that kind of openness in the use of public funds. if it's any comfort, all UC employees took a seven percent cut in pay since then.
let me know, granite, if you'd like to discuss whether my wife is worth the money she's paid. i won't ask you to be fair about it and tell us what you do and how much you make.
it's interesting that you should resort to picking on my wife. that's a tried-and-true government dark op. there's a movie out on the subject now, fair game. anyone else who did what the white house did to valerie plame would be charged with treason. gives an idea of the shitty way things are done these days, and it's why i wouldn't dream of asking you to be fair.
most of my life, apart from a brief stint as research assistant at the same university, has been spent working in the private sector. if you really want to embarrass me, you could try to snoop the history of my sorry-ass paychecks, declining every year as i've gone from publishing to language translation to carpentry, each industry laying off older workers in favor of younger, cheaper ones, not a whit of benefits or security to be had. this is the story of the private sector, unless you happen to be an executive in the defense contracting sector of the private sector, where all the money comes from the taxpayer, but you won't find the salaries in the sacramento bee.
as a footnote to a discussion about our technically dazzling but humanly incompetent and morally compromised government, the pentagon announced awhile back that it was missing $1 trillion. that's $5,000 for every citizen of the country, somehow mislaid by the same people who can't intercept a hijacked airplane with 40 minutes lead time and can't assure us about what goes on 30 miles offshore our most populous region. put your snoopy talents to work on this one, gran. a trillion dollars. i'm dying to know. the date of the announcement was september 10, 2001.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 09:50am PT
|
By the way . . .
I have completed my quick study and graphics!
I put it into PPT and it looks nice.
I will be showing my colleagues, because surprisingly they want to know and its rocket science. A little peer review :-)
I will post up slides from it later when I get the chance.
Just a short message . . .
Can someone please call the DoD/Pentagon and let them know they can stop the charades now:
We know what we saw.
We know it was a missile of some kind.
We know where it was fired from.
We know the approximate time it was fired.
We know what direction it went in.
We know approximately what altitude it ascended to.
We can prove it all empirically with evidence of all kinds.
If it was not the DoD/Pentagon’s missile, well, it was someone's. Better get on that and figure it out. Yea, its kind of embarrassing, but better than telling lies.
Also would you please tell them while you have them on the phone to pull-back their missile debunkers on MSM who keep trotting out the commercial jet air-liner contrail myth. They are just looking really stupid. It’s embarrassing.
Edit:
Tony, 2.3 Trillion went missing. Donald Rumsfeld announced it at the Pentagon on 9-10-2001.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 10:50am PT
|
Can someone please call the DoD/Pentagon and let them know they can stop the charades now:
no, klimmer, no one can.
let me refer you to my previous post of possibilities here:
1. it was just a known airplane on a known flight path
2. it was a stray airplane and everyone's embarrassed because it violated a very vulnerable airspace
3. it was an american missile, lauched by mistake and everyone's embarrassed about that for obvious reasons
4. it was an american missile, launched on purpose and it's being denied for some reason we all ought to be trying to figure out here instead of working on #1 versus #3.
5. it was a missile launched by the chinese or some other entity playing rootin-tootin cowboy.
dingus is wrong about you playing us like strings, and i don't mind getting in your face about it. i think you're a half-baked bornagain, and you don't belong out here trying to make sense of the real world until you admit to yourself that god isn't going to be coming down on a cloud any day soon to straighten it out. i also think you should leave off this ridiculously technical discussion and pay attention to the human behavior involved. you're never going to keep up with ed on scientific doubletalk and you're boring the crap out of me trying. ed would have egg on his face the minute someone concedes this was a missile, which is never going to happen.
me, i think it's equally outrageous that it could have been an airplane without a credible government response to the widespread publicity it generated. if you've ever reported on government, you know that lack of forthright response means they're hiding something, a surer proof than your toying with vectors.
stop whining for "somebody please call up the pentagon" and talk about the motivation over an obvious embarrassment. i'm leaving out #1 above because it should have resulted in a routine announcement. it really shouldn't even have been a story, if the television newsroom did the fact-checking which usually gets done. the real story at this point is what the FAA told the fact-checker, which was probably something like, "it wasn't a cleared airplane on our radar at that moment, check with the navy and air force". once a situation like that unfolds, they can't cover their tracks. the reporter would remember what the FAA said at an unguarded moment.
i really doubt it's #2 either. air traffic control is good at what it does. that would leave us 3, 4 and 5. #3 is easily discounted. if the toothpick guy f*#ked up, the public doesn't even have to know. all you say is, "it was a missile in the normal test zone. didn't you get the message?" even if a message wasn't put out, news reporters don't even care any more. the federal manual of excuses is five inches thick and the public has heard it all. government incompetence <yawn> <yawn>.
so my money goes on #4 or #5. madsen may be 100 percent correct. china's denial may be a 100 percent lie. hu jintao would have called barack on the hotline and said, "neener, neener, you mofo, open yer legs a little wider so's we can send more containerships of crap to the walmarts". and barack, like the good little boy he's always been, would have asked, "how much wider?"
----------
um, i heard it was only a trillion. should we put a fact-checker on it?
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 11:26am PT
|
Be sure to include these pics for your colleagues, Klimmer. They should see all the evidence right?
Your sloppy work and blinders trapped you in a cloud way out in the pacific, these pics liberate you from your confinement.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 11:33am PT
|
interesting, that second pic, mono. you guys have to learn to read words instead of arguing with picture books the way they do in second grade.
as we've mentioned so tiresomely before on this thread, an airplane coming towards the observer would have continued to come towards the observer. a scenario like that second picture shows the airplane obviously coming towards the news guys. even if the contrail would somehow have magically disappeared, as graniteclimber likes to fantasize, still you have the airplane, backlit by the setting sun, getting closer and closer, to the point where it passes overhead, easily observed as the jetliner it's supposed to be.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 11:40am PT
|
The 'magic' of the disappearing plane happens when the object enters the post sunset area, Tony. It's so visible now because it is backlit and still producing a small contrail.
But Jeebus Tony, you are dumber than a rock. The pics show the object was not going in the direction,steepness or origin as Klimmer has 'proven'.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 11:48am PT
|
the LAX airspace is complicated, and the local control would route incoming aircraft on a bearing to their next position... so it wouldn't necessarily be coming in straight, especially there
klimmer has this thing with stereoscopic reconstruction of photographs, a technique which he doesn't fully understand, it is a strange fetish that satisfies some optical gratification mechanism in his brain...
as more images of that scene are posted, I believe that they will show that the most likely explanation is an aircraft.
my objection to klimmer is not that he has the hypothesis that it is a missile, but that he cannot support it with any credible information, (his stereoscopic reconstruction is not credible, and he has not responded to my questions, probably because he cannot) but he apparently has a "faith based" approach to science, tony too...
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:10pm PT
|
Mono,
You are pretty good at posting Bull Dung.
Please show me exactly where this image is taken from and what was the original website you found it at. I really can't trust what you do anymore.
http://consci.s3.amazonaws.com//skitch/Preview-20101115-165414.jpg
We need to know what perspective this is taken from.
Edit:
Ed,
You are seriously blowing smoke. I've posted the stereograms for all to look at and see for themselves. I'm hiding nothing.
I have shared them with colleagues here at work and they can easily see it too. The exhaust/vapor plume leans away from the coast in a N - WNW tilt back-lit by the setting Sun.
They see it too.
Stereo viewing does not lie. Plenty of parallax to easily see. The exhaust/vapor plume is massive and 177 miles off the coast and leaning away to the W - WNW just as I said it would. We can even exaggerate the parallax effect by taking images even further apart in the original video shot by the cameraman in the KCAL Helicopter. This exaggeration only increases the depth of field to see it even better. It will only increase the real effect.
Sorry Ed try again.
I'm really not sure why you are resisting and making up stuff about stereo viewing. I know it very well. You are making all kinds of claims yet not checking out any of the evidence. Makes me wonder why you are doing this???
I'm sharing the PPT with my colleagues, and I can see many of the details zooming into the GOES satellite image vertically that perfectly match the details of the exhaust/vapor plume seen from the oblique perspective from Long Beach Harbor. I've added all of this to my PPT.
I will post after my colleagues have had a very good look for themselves and check my work.
I will get back but it may be a while.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:18pm PT
|
Use your 'analytical' skills Klimmer. Identify characteristics of the pics which link them together as the same event. We know the lower pic was taken from Long Beach. We know the upper pic was taken from another position on land in the LA area. Contrailscience says it was from LAX.
No location for that pic in the greater LA area can can show the object going in the direction, steepness and origin you claimed.
Just trying to save you from embarrassment when the football coach sees your presentation.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:30pm PT
|
nice page of professionally concocted disinformation there, reilly, done in a very timely manner. i'll bet they're reading this very thread. do you notice that there still hasn't been any official announcement? i suspect that's because any official position would be extremely difficult to support. what we have instead are explanations in bloggerese.
leaving my stupidity out of it, please, explain to me why the old saw about the angle of incidence equalling the angle of reflection should not apply here. airplanes backlit by the setting sun wouldn't have a lit-up tail like your disinfo airplane, which looks to me like it's lit from the rear quarter so that the reflected light source, which appears to be the mid-day sun, can reach the observer. the videos show an emission of light brighter than the already muted light reaching the airplane through our lovely marine layer of smog. that's another good one for the scientists--reflections putting out brighter light than they receive.
you have to remember, jeebus-mono, that this plane was being observed by professionals in a news helicopter who quickly decided it was a missile. they would have been sensitive to all these obvious little effects you're pointing out, which any moron looking at a sunset would understand, and yet they were satisfied it wasn't an airplane approaching them. if they'd waited one more minute they would have seen it. this isn't an excited kid running inside to tell mommie what he saw, it's people who could lose some pretty good-paying jobs if they broadcast a gaffe such as you imply to the world. then it went to a newsroom which, as i posted, would have vetted the story before publishing it. things like this are not broadcast from the field. it went all the way to the pentagon, which certainly ought to have had every bit of information available from ATC, and their response was "dunno".
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:40pm PT
|
nice page of professionally concocted disinformation there, reilly, done in a very timely manner. i'll bet they're reading this very thread.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:50pm PT
|
Tony,
I don't recall implying or saying you were stupid. I only provided the link
in my capacity as a disinterested dissembler. The Contrailscience explanation
is altogether too neatly done, if you don't happen to like neat explanations.
As for the reflections all I will say is that given the complicated geometry
of the rear of a rear-engined plane like the MD-11 one could get some very
interesting reflective permutations some of which could conceivably contrive
to amplify a single light source.
Let's all rejoice that this UPS crew was awake after their long flight.
Back in the early 90's a FedEx flight from back east to LAX was 150 miles
or so west of LAX when they finally awoke! DOH!
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:55pm PT
|
k, reilly, fair enough, but i'd like to ask anyone here if they ever remember a jetliner shining like that through the sunset smog, looking like it has an afterburner going full blast. seems like we ought to have seen a lot like that. like you say, that "explanation" page seems very neatly done.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:59pm PT
|
It will be interesting to see how or whether this question is ever resolved.
However to me there is an underlying issue here that is much more interesting, having to do with how people treat each other regarding attempts to resolve a mystery.
There are much bigger and more important mysteries in the world that beg for understanding.
The likelihood of our coming to understanding is greatly reduced by people generating lots of rude and mutually disrespectful noise in the face of those trying to reason about uncertainties.
I realize that some of this passion is generated in response to those who have intentionally lied and cheated. Those people do need to be called to accounts in no uncertain terms. However identifying them is made all the more difficult when there is a lot of disrespectful noise being generated.
Perhaps we can develop a realization that those generating disrespectful noise are self-identifying themselves.
The bigger challenge is learning to work better together creating a shared communication environment characterized by mutual respect. I think that probably offers an improved path to unraveling the web of mysteries.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!