Title: STARTLING! Experts: Missile was CHINESE - President KNEW IT. Systems Failed. Cover-up! Source:
YouTube URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WGcSuGojYA&feature=player_embedded#! Published:Nov 20, 2010 Author:Joseph Farah Post Date:2010-11-20 22:59:39 by buckeroo Keywords:None Views:1364 Comments:70
Poster Comment:
ROTFL about anything that WND publishes ... next up, Farah's lackey, Jerome Corsi PhD is going to provide technical comment on this STARTLING event.
Well, I was sure startled. Yep. Startled is the word for it.
I could only stand about 1 1/2 minutes of this crap. In that time I heard the words "experts" and "speculated" more than once. I was startled at how idiotic this vid was. I was uber-startled. Startled startled startled!
BTW, have you ever noticed that words like "startled" sound idiotic and a little funny when overused? I find that to be most startling.
If it was a "missile" how come the visual flight path is so slow; more than that, how come the contrail clearly shows a slight "zig-zag" path as opposed to a straight trajectory?
And besides, buck, neither aircraft nor ballistic missiles generally "zig-zag."
They may change course, (as this missile did) and high altitude winds traveling at high speeds commonly displace contrails and missile exhaust trail from the axis of travel.
Go to NOAA or the National Weather Service to find the various directions and speeds of wind overhead where you live.
But that doesn't account for the "zig-zag" that we see in contrails, mon chere.
Yes, it does and primarily coming over the Southern California coast wherein major airports controlled by the FAA are constantly ensuring course corrections for approaching aircraft for air traffic considerations.
Missiles don't "zig-zag"; in today's world, anyway.
Let's take a flip/side to your post. Can you substantiate an apparent observation by some helicopter traffic watcher's own ten minute recorded video?
Ten minutes of recording in a single off-shore direction (looking WEST) with a missile at typical Mach 5-6-7? How is that? What is the apparent horizon distance at say 1,000 feet by a helicopter pilot? Say 30 miles? Or is it 1,000 miles?
#43. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo, Buckmonster Fullofit, all (#38)
It's interesting in that people who know missiles are commenting how the plume in the video footage looks clearly like the plume of a solid fuel booster.
Last I checked airliners don't use solid fuel boosters.
Are you aware of any airlines that get a little "extra pizazz" by using a solid fuel booster to give the passengers a REAL ride?
Me neither.
Funny thing though, the similarities between the plume of a solid fuel shuttle booster and the one in the video. I guess it must just be another one of those amaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazing coincidences that buckie invariably rattles on about.
Funny thing though, the similarities between the plume of a solid fuel shuttle booster and the one in the video. I guess it must just be another one of those amaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazing coincidences that buckie invariably rattles on about.
It's all the fault of La Niña, didn't you know that?
#46. To: FormerLurker, Buckmonster Fullofit, buckeroo, Nostradumbass, all (#45)(Edited)
It's all the fault of La Niña, didn't you know that?
Damn! I should have known. The temperature and currents in the ocean water totally changes the formation of a plume from a solid fuel missile booster and the angle at which it confoobulates with the clouds.
Damn! Foiled again!
Does he really expect people to buy this shit? Or is it just to create a confusion factor by throwing in disrelated terms and phenomena?