OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

Spokesmen for the Navy, Air Force, and other military organizations said
they were looking into a video posted on the CBS News website that shows
an object shooting across the sky and leaving a large contrail, or vapor
trail, over the Pacific Ocean.

The video was shot by a KCBS helicopter, the station said Tuesday.

"Nobody within the Department of Defense that we've reached out to has
been able to explain what this contrail is, where it came from,"
Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said.

Lapan said that "all indications" are that the Department of Defense was
not involved within the mystery object, and that the contrail might have
been created by something flown by a private company.

Normally any missile test would require notification so that mariners
and pilots could be warned or air space closed, but that may not have
been done in this case, Lapan said.

"It does seem implausible, and that's why at this point the operative
term is 'unexplained'," he said. "Nobody ... within the Department of
Defense that we've reached out to has been able to explain what this
contrail is."

Missile tests are common off Southern California. Launches are conducted
from vessels and platforms on an ocean range west of Point Mugu.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

"We can confirm that there is no threat to our nation, and from all
indications this was not a launch by a foreign military," the statement
said. "We will provide more information as it becomes available."

NORTHCOM is the U.S. defense command and NORAD is a U.S.-Canadian
organization charged with protecting the U.S. from the threat of
missiles or hostile aircraft.

- - -

Ship-launched missiles with minds of their own, right out of sci-fi!

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 9, 6:27*pm, JR North wrote:
Prolly just a harmless amateur rocket club or lone guy. Plenty of 'em in
the wide-open areas. You can buy some honker rocket motors, not just the
weeny Estes variety.
JR


Rocket motors are rated in total impulse (newton-seconds) ranges. The
ranges are alphabetical, as in A, B, C, etc. (The Estes ones actually
started at 1/4A) Each range is a doubling of the last, so a C is 5 -
10 NS, a D is 10 - 20, an E is 20 - 40 NS. You get the picture, they
get big quick. :-

High Power Rocketry uses motors up to an O. A military Stinger
missile is reputed to be a K class motor. I've personally flown a
rocket that used an L, two J, and two I motors that combined put it in
the M range. Six inches in diameter, 13 feet tall, 30 lbs. Hit about
6,000 feet, and recovered on the field. Fun stuff, but I've been out
of that for some years now.

Do a search on Tripoli Rocketry Association, LDRS, TRA to get some
hits, video, and articles about this stuff. It can be very serious,
very expensive, and very fun. Before you say it's dangerous, just
remember that at least a few years ago, no one had been seriously
injured or killed flying these rockets. Several have been killed with
control line and R/C airplanes. These groups are self-governing to an
extent, with a certification process to allow access to the big
motors.

It's worth seeing a launch if you ever get a chance.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, HarryK wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:56:57 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:

It's worth seeing a launch if you ever get a chance.

We have (had) this thing called the space shuttle here in Florida.
Any idea what class that might fall in to? :-)

It's way cool watching it launch.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 9, 7:50*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:56:57 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote:

It's worth seeing a launch if you ever get a chance.

We have (had) this thing called the space shuttle here in Florida.
Any idea what class that might fall in to? * :-) *

It's way cool watching it launch.

Yes it is.

Even more cool is a Saturn V. A Shuttle launch is *mild* compared.

Supposedly riding on a Shuttle is like riding in a fast car. Riding
on a Saturn V is like being hit by a truck.

The Saturn V launches broke windows on the mainland. 7.5 million
pounds of thrust coming off the pad. Kerosene and LOX. Un-freakin-
believable.

Today's astronauts are no wimps, but they *can* be teachers and such
for a reason. Armstrong, Aldrin, Lovell, Shepard, and of course,
Glenn... all of them, had big, knobby ones. Amazing what they, and
NASA, did.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/9/10 8:27 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

Don't discount an amateur rocketeer that hasn't done his homework in
researching the FARs....






500 bottle rockets, rubber-banded together. :)

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 9, 8:27*pm, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, HarryK wrote:
On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, *wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.

Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

Don't discount an amateur rocketeer that hasn't done his homework in
researching the FARs....

It's actually pretty unlikely that an "amateur rocketeer" could have
gotten far enough to pull off something like this without knowing full
well what the implications are. Building a successful motor this big
takes quite a bit of perseverance, knowledge, and money. And you
can't buy one without a bit of vesting by your peers, which requires
the same knowledge.

They know what it was.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/9/10 8:44 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:31:07 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 8:27 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

Don't discount an amateur rocketeer that hasn't done his homework in
researching the FARs....






500 bottle rockets, rubber-banded together. :)

A lawn chair and a bunch of balloons can get you over 15,000 feet.....







At Warp
..000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000001,
maybe.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/9/10 10:28 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:20:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

NBC is saying this was just a commercial airliner contrail shot from
an angle that made it look like a rocket.

That really sounds far fetched..... I work at an airport and we do
enjoy watching contrails and discussing aerodynamics of same, given
appropriate metrological conditions.....

BUT, even with perfect metrological conditions, mistaking that for a
rocket/missile shot really tries the imagination....

If it was a missile, it was the S L O W E S T missile every
launched. Even the reflection off the object looks like the reflection
off of a plane at sunset. The optical illusion makes more sense than a
very very slow missile.

--
Spoofers can go to Hell in a handbasket

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 10, 8:50*am, The No Spoof Zone wrote:
On 11/9/10 10:28 PM, Gene wrote:





On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:20:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, *wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, * wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.

Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

NBC is saying this was just a commercial airliner contrail shot from
an angle that made it look like a rocket.

That really sounds far fetched..... I work at an airport and we do
enjoy watching contrails and discussing aerodynamics of same, given
appropriate metrological conditions.....

BUT, even with perfect metrological conditions, mistaking that for a
rocket/missile shot really tries the imagination....

If it was a missile, it was the * S L O W E S T * missile every
launched. * Even the reflection off the object looks like the reflection
off of a plane at sunset. *The optical illusion makes more sense than a
very very slow missile.

--
Spoofers can go to Hell in a handbasket- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The optical illusion could have been how slow it looked because it was
pointed west, down range... Either way NORAD can see me pick my nose
on my boat, they know what it was...

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

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.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/10/10 9:23 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Nov 10, 8:50 am, The No Spoof wrote:

Either way NORAD can see me pick my nose
on my boat, they know what it was...

Well, I would recommend you stop picking your nose.


--
Spoofers can go to Hell in a handbasket

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, HarryK wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:36:10 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, HarryK wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

Maybe it was this thing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xFh7...eature=related

or this.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHWB...eature=related

Bob Ryan, our local weatherman, says it's a contrail.

Ergo, it's a contrail. No doubt.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"Gene" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, HarryK wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

Maybe it was this thing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xFh7...eature=related

or this.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHWB...eature=related



snip...

Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

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/

An anti-conspiracy site on the internet. That's unusual.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"L G" wrote in message
...
bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 10, 8:35*pm, "YukonBound" wrote:
"L G" wrote in message

...

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, *wrote:

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) * The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

Is this "about boats"?

"Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying
pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html "

You should practice what you preach, eh?

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Nov 10, 8:35 pm, "YukonBound" wrote:
"L G" wrote in message

...

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

Is this "about boats"?

"Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying
pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html "

You should practice what you preach, eh?

Say hi to the 'sisters' for me.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/10/10 5:36 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

Maybe it was this thing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xFh7...eature=related

or this.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHWB...eature=related

Everyone is missing the obvious answer.

http://tinyurl.com/3sesc




--
Spoofers can go to Hell in a handbasket

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"YukonBound" wrote in message
...


"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Nov 10, 8:35 pm, "YukonBound" wrote:
"L G" wrote in message

...

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to
determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern
California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

Is this "about boats"?

"Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying
pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html "

You should practice what you preach, eh?

Say hi to the 'sisters' for me.

I thought the sisters hung around your joint.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

In article ,
says...

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Nov 10, 8:35 pm, "YukonBound" wrote:
"L G" wrote in message

...

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

Is this "about boats"?

"Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying
pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html "

You should practice what you preach, eh?

Say hi to the 'sisters' for me.

Nice insulting, Don. I hope Harry will admonish you for that.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

A lawn chair and a bunch of balloons can get you over 15,000 feet.....


------------
Don't forget the pellet rifle!

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"HarryK" wrote in message ...

On 11/9/10 8:44 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:31:07 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 8:27 PM, Gene wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching
a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

Don't discount an amateur rocketeer that hasn't done his homework in
researching the FARs....






500 bottle rockets, rubber-banded together. :)

A lawn chair and a bunch of balloons can get you over 15,000 feet.....







At Warp
..000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000001,
maybe.
---------
It happened http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Walters

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"Gene" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:20:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:21:10 -0500, HarryK wrote:

On 11/9/10 7:46 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a
statement jointly with the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, saying
that the contrail was not the result of a foreign military launching a
missile. It provided no further details.

Of course that implies that they know what it was - probably some
classified test.


Or, just as likely, they're clueless. But I agree that it was some sort
of U.S. military "exercise."

NBC is saying this was just a commercial airliner contrail shot from
an angle that made it look like a rocket.

That really sounds far fetched..... I work at an airport and we do
enjoy watching contrails and discussing aerodynamics of same, given
appropriate metrological conditions.....

BUT, even with perfect metrological conditions, mistaking that for a
rocket/missile shot really tries the imagination....

------------
One of the reports I saw referred to smoke in contrails. That and having
witnessed a BUNCH of launches from KSC and Cape Canaveral AFS nailed the
"official" report as BS for me.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"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.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article m,
says...

"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.

Read the article... Saw dozens of reports, experts "on both sides" and I
believe myself it was "message" from some axis power saying "see, we can
sit in your back yard and you didn't even know we were there". That's
why it went due west.

Fact is, every single airliner is tracked to the inch by the second. If
there was a flight there someone would be able to say "this was flight
such and such" here is it's flight path... But they can't, there was no
plane...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

mmmm.................... whoooo whoooo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:41:16 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

Read the article... Saw dozens of reports, experts "on both sides" and I
believe myself it was "message" from some axis power saying "see, we can
sit in your back yard and you didn't even know we were there". That's
why it went due west.

Interesting conspiracy theory but if fails the Occam's Razor test
which basically says that the simplest explanation is more likely to
be correct. The two most plausible (and simple) explanations are
that it was indeed a jet contrail observed from an unusual angle; or
two, that it was a classified US govt misile launch which take place
fairly often in coastal California. One of my old high school friends
is alleged to participate in that sort of thing (if they actually
exist). :-)

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 14:31:38 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:41:16 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

Read the article... Saw dozens of reports, experts "on both sides" and I
believe myself it was "message" from some axis power saying "see, we can
sit in your back yard and you didn't even know we were there". That's
why it went due west.

Interesting conspiracy theory but if fails the Occam's Razor test
which basically says that the simplest explanation is more likely to
be correct. The two most plausible (and simple) explanations are
that it was indeed a jet contrail observed from an unusual angle; or
two, that it was a classified US govt misile launch which take place
fairly often in coastal California. One of my old high school friends
is alleged to participate in that sort of thing (if they actually
exist). :-)

"They" refers to the existence of which - high school friends or that sort of
thing?

Just wonderin'.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Nov 11, 2:31*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:41:16 -0500, I am Tosk

wrote:
Read the article... Saw dozens of reports, experts "on both sides" and I
believe myself it was "message" from some axis power saying "see, we can
sit in your back yard and you didn't even know we were there". That's
why it went due west.

Interesting conspiracy theory but if fails the Occam's Razor test
which basically says that the simplest explanation is more likely to
be correct. * The two most plausible (and simple) explanations are
that it was indeed a jet contrail observed from an unusual angle; or
two, that it was a classified US govt misile launch which take place
fairly often in coastal California. *One of my old high school friends
is alleged to participate in that sort of thing (if they actually
exist). * :-)

I had a friend from my high power rocket days that is actually a
"rocket scientist". A few years ago he showed me some pictures of a
mobile Scud Launcher, with Scud, that is sitting complete right here
in the US. Was brought over intact and completely functional. At the
time it's existence and location was classified, so he couldn't tell
me where it was. A couple of pictures later was a shot of an
interstate entrance sign with a city in the background. He just
smiled... wasn't too far from where I live.

Point is that the gov does stuff like this all the time. Classified
launches, denial of existence, etc. If the general public knew what
was actually going on, most would probably freak out.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/10/2010 5:29 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

I thought we agreed to cut out this political nonsense. Didn't you get
the memo?

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/11/10 5:21 PM, HarryK wrote:
On 11/10/2010 5:29 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California

WASHINGTON (A) – The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.

has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?

I thought we agreed

ID Spoofer...again. When you ignore their other IDs here, they ID Spoof.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:07:25 -0500, John H
wrote:

"They" refers to the existence of which - high school friends or that sort of
thing?

Just wonderin'.

The high school friend definitely exists. :-)

Trying to confirm the existence of a classified launch is, uhhhh,
errrr, classified...

The issue as I understand it, is that most of the classified launches
are related to intelligence gathering satellites of various types.
These satellites use stealth coatings which make them difficult to
spot and track unless you know the exact orbital parameters. Some of
those parameters can be deduced from the time and location of the
launch so there is never any kind of pre-announcement or launch
confirmation (or so it is rumored).

Maybe the shadow knows for sure. :-)

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On 11/11/10 5:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:07:25 -0500, John
wrote:

"They" refers to the existence of which - high school friends or that sort of
thing?

Just wonderin'.

The high school friend definitely exists. :-)

Trying to confirm the existence of a classified launch is, uhhhh,
errrr, classified...

The issue as I understand it, is that most of the classified launches
are related to intelligence gathering satellites of various types.
These satellites use stealth coatings which make them difficult to
spot and track unless you know the exact orbital parameters. Some of
those parameters can be deduced from the time and location of the
launch so there is never any kind of pre-announcement or launch
confirmation (or so it is rumored).

Maybe the shadow knows for sure. :-)



And don't forget the Stealth Mufflers, attached to "muffle" the usual
rocket sounds. :)

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:22:19 -0500, HarryK wrote:

ID Spoofer...again. When you ignore their other IDs here, they ID Spoof.

Less said the better.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:25:10 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:07:25 -0500, John H
wrote:

"They" refers to the existence of which - high school friends or that sort of
thing?

Just wonderin'.

The high school friend definitely exists. :-)

Trying to confirm the existence of a classified launch is, uhhhh,
errrr, classified...

The issue as I understand it, is that most of the classified launches
are related to intelligence gathering satellites of various types.
These satellites use stealth coatings which make them difficult to
spot and track unless you know the exact orbital parameters. Some of
those parameters can be deduced from the time and location of the
launch so there is never any kind of pre-announcement or launch
confirmation (or so it is rumored).

Maybe the shadow knows for sure. :-)

Damn straight, He knows.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

Crotchedy Harry wrote:
In ,
says...

wrote in message
...

On Nov 10, 8:35 pm, wrote:

"L wrote in message

...


bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0500, wrote:


Pentagon can't explain 'missile' off California


WASHINGTON (A) The Pentagon said Tuesday it was trying to determine
if a missile was launched Monday off the coast of Southern California
and, if so, who might have fired it.


has sarah palin been playing with grown up toys again?


That is off-topic Bob.

You're 'off topic' Kruger.
Post when you have something to say about boats.

Is this "about boats"?

"Those things are impressive.
Some in this country think Canada would be better off buying
pilotless
aircraft instead of the new F-35 planes we are considering.
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...jets-ccpa.html "

You should practice what you preach, eh?

Say hi to the 'sisters' for me.

Nice insulting, Don. I hope Harry will admonish you for that.

Don't count on it. He needs a friend.

OK...who has been playing with the buttons?
 

YukonBound wrote:


"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article m,
says...

"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.

Read the article... Saw dozens of reports, experts "on both sides" and I
believe myself it was "message" from some axis power saying "see, we can
sit in your back yard and you didn't even know we were there". That's
why it went due west.

Fact is, every single airliner is tracked to the inch by the second. If
there was a flight there someone would be able to say "this was flight
such and such" here is it's flight path... But they can't, there was no
plane...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

mmmm.................... whoooo whoooo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU
Nothing boat-related to post, dummy?