"W1TEF" wrote in message ...

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:45:51 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 11/10/10 6:23 AM, W1TEF wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

That's because it's not a missile - it's a contrail.

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/

Maybe.

No maybe about it.

Not to mention a contrail from a jet usually spreads out a ways behind
the aircraft. The front of the trail is usually thin until the wind
spreads it... This trail was thick right off the ass of the missile, and
make no mistake, it was a missile, as it headed west downrange... oh,
and they know what it was too...

Did you read the freakin' article Scott?

Unmentioned in this whole thing is that nobody HEARD anything. If a
missile supposedly as large as this one supposedly was (ICBM), you
would have heard it - even from 35 miles away. Those things aren't
quiet.
---------
If you're upwind you probably wouldn't hear it, especially in a place with a
lot of noise pollution.