Clouds over Mount Shasta - Dissipation Trail?

Mkitz

Member
I'm going to ask you to tone it down as you are approaching being impolite which is against the Posting Guidelines. You posted a claim with some evidence. Scrutiny is what happens here.
Thank you. Not used to some of the harsh tones, but will be kinder in the future.
 

Mkitz

Member
Let me try and provide something to consider regarding the vapor trail, at 8:31:36 the alleged and highly doubted vapor trail image was photographed. Coincident with a path extending beyond the vapor trail and in line with the trajectory of the object, at 8:32:13 the image below was photographed. It is in the frame immediately following the vapor trail, that a bright increase in the clouds with an enlogned appearance and an angle close to.angle of the vapor trail appears. It has the turbulence waves that curl up, behind a moving jet, previous member posted earlier, at least on one side. This was posted earlier. vp frame 2.jpg:):)
 

FatPhil

Senior Member.
Mkitz did not see the object through the viewfinder, Mkitz saw the object movement on the LCD screen.
The LCD screen is the viewfinder in this context. It may be digital, but it performs the task of a viewfinder, so is a viewfinder.
 
Last edited:

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
I would like to understand mountain clouds a bit more here; I'm a NorCal native and have seen similar formations on Shasta when driving I-5N to Oregon. This may inform further discussion of the phenomena Mkitz witnessed.

Ok, first: why do clouds form around mountains? Per the World Meterological Organization:
As airflow encounters a mountain or hill, it is forced to rise; this is referred to as orographic lift. If the flow is sufficiently humid, clouds form on the windward side of mountains and are called orographic clouds (Figure 2).
Put simply, the clouds initially form on the side of the mountain that faces the wind.
The type of cloud that forms depends on the air stability and moisture content. Air also rises up a slope due to daytime heating so both orographic and thermal lifting often work together to produce tall, vertically developed Cumulus clouds (Figure 3). Therefore, hilly areas are often cloudier than nearby lower land.
This doesn't apply here, the clouds in the photos aren't cumulous, given the information we have. Again, I'm not a meteorologist.
Clouds thin out and dissipate on the leeward side, where the relief causes descending motion and the precipitation is notably less (rain shadow). In the case of an isolated mountain, orographic clouds often have the form of a collar, surrounding the mountain or that of a cap covering the peak (Figure 4), both of which are fairly symmetrical. These clouds give little or no precipitation. In the case of a mountain barrier, observed from the leeward side,cap clouds indicate likely wave activity downstream. Sometimes, the clouds resemble a bank or wall that follows mountain contours. It is important to remember that their absence does not mean that waves are absent. Under drier conditions, waves may be present without cap clouds.
So on the leeward side, they thin out. The cap clouds are the "UFO" shaped ones that were pointed out earlier in the threads, the ones that look like giant hovering pancakes. This isn't what we are seeing here, either.
When the wind is strong, the orographic clouds formed near the summit may be observed streaming away from the mountain on the leeward side. This is a banner cloud and should not be confused with snow blown from the crest or peak.
I think this is what's at play here. This is the image that accompanies that blurb:
1670374205916.jpeg
Now, this image wasn't taken with the express intent of capturing the intricacies of cloud formations, and it wasn't zoomed in to capture hikers. But when I lean in I see vortices and waves that remind me of what we have in this image.

So now the question is: what were the weather conditions that day?
Of note: I am not a meteorologist. As far as I can tell, none of us in this thread are.
From Weather Underground on 6/28/2020, as measured from the Redding Municipal Airport Station at 7:53AM and 8:53AM: https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/KRDD/date/2020-6-28
DissipationTrailWeather1.png
So from the base of the mountain, we had a gentle breeze. That's the extent of my weather-finding abilities. Our contrail experts and cloud enthusiasts may be able to find more accurate data.
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
So from the base of the mountain, we had a gentle breeze.
In Redding, yeah, but that's in the foothills and around 75 miles or so south of Mt. Shasta. This site shows 8-10 mph with gusts to 20+. I think this is for the town of Mt. Shasta City, so still not what would have been happening up on the peak of the mountain:

1670376795929.png

The same site gives the wind directions. It appears to be from the Southeast blowing to the Northwest if I'm reading this right:
1670377400970.png

https://weatherspark.com/h/d/145219...ta-California-United-States#Figures-WindSpeed

Mkitz says the sun was behind the mountain when he took the photos:

all detail was undetectable because of the brightness from the sun behind the mountain

Here is the sun path Mt. Shasta City on that day:

1670377842209.png

So, I think the sun and wind over the mountain would have been something like this:

1670378753140.png
 

Attachments

  • 1670378425432.png
    1670378425432.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 16

Mkitz

Member
Name that bird or bug, as some. suggest. Lines mark dark spots, this is not sensor dust, only appear in this. frame and one previous frame with two spots. 14,000 to 15,000 feet. Curious if any ornithology types know species that fly high. Thanksname that bird.jpg
 

Mkitz

Member
Hi Deirdre, no, the dots would have been undetectable on the LCD. The object on the LCD an eighth of an inch in diameter, not likely to have been a bird. Thank you.
 

Mkitz

Member
The image posted is cropped and close to full resolution. I cannot tell what the dots are, I assumed birds. They are not artifacts of the camera. Thanks. Below are three hikers, see arrow. Similar crop to bird photo. Should give an idea of scale. Thanksthree hikers.jpg
 
Last edited:

Mendel

Senior Member.
Put simply, the clouds initially form on the side of the mountain that faces the wind.
Clouds are tiny droplets of water that condense out of the humidity in the air once a certain temperature/pressure threshold is reached. This means that near that threshold, cloud formation is very sensitive to small variations in pressure (or temperature). (Compare Ann K's post about hole punch clouds at the other end of the scale, where liquid droplets soludify to ice.)
Because of that, we can see where warmer and colder air get mixed by turbulence , since the colder air looks cloudy and the warmer air does not. As the warmer air cools down, further condensation occurs along the temperature lines that have been determined by the organic-looking mixing pattern.

This is what I think is going on after the aircraft has passed over the mountain.
 

Mkitz

Member
The object had no discernible color on the lcd. The object entered the lcd slightly below the right corner and moved at a slight downward angle toward the left lower corner. i did not say turbulence of a stationary object caused the cloud transformation There was a transformation in the clouds that lasted two hours. Whether this the transformation merely coincided with the or whether the object entering the area caused or is related to the transformation is the question. There are cloud formations present in the two hours that have no precedence and fit no known classification. I submitted some of the cloud formations to the Cloud Appreciation Society for posting and they did not respond or post them. Odd response from a group that is always posting unusual cloud shapes. The cloud started lenticular in shape and then rotated, find a lenticular cloud that does this. The laminar flow over the mountain has to have some force producing the rotation of laminar flow. Why has this not been reported. I have posted the protruding structure that emerged, it has no parallel. The lightning like shape posted where the cloud bifurcates in the underbelly of the cloud that opened up for two hours is without precedence. The continual display of changing complex forms is unprecedented. Find complex patterns in clouds beneath a lenticular cloud. The laminar flow is so fast and so powerful that it erases any patterns of clouds underneath it. The turbulence is in the nature of a lenticular cloud, it is how this turbulence was redirected into the two hour spectacle. Thank you for your questions. Wish I had the answer. I did not seek to uncover some mystery about Mt Shasta that morning. I just wanted to capture hikers on the mountain and you can imagine my surprise when the events unfolded, standing for two hours snapping shot after shot. My vantage point is about ten miles from the summit of Mt. Shasta and just west of Spring Hill. My property borders on I-5. Regards.0F828075-3BDC-456A-9D86-5041415DD7E7.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Mkitz

Member
was it white, or was it black?

I doubt that.


It looks to me like that pattern is behind the lenticular cloud, and behind the ridge.
Could be that it is, I was not up there, so I cannot say for sure where the turbulence occurred. It is likely that the upwelling from behind the ridge was responsible for many of the shapes we see in the underbelly of the cloud. The energy had to come from somewhere and that would be the slope behind the ridge. It could not be far behind the ridge because the laminar flow is typically very narrow in width and it is the peaks that wick the moisture from the air that causes the cloud to form. So we are on the same page, maybe a different ridge.:)
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
There are movements in the shapes and transformations that are verily unique. Consider how a relatively smsll lenticular cloud compresses and then rotates, fans out at the bottom, open up an area in the underbelly of the cloud that shows constantly changing forms. How often does a moisture flow last for two hours
Lenticular clouds can last for hours. None of your images show any cloud behavior that hasn't been seen before by diligent sky watchers.


 

Mkitz

Member
can you show me examples? area between lenticular and mountain show no patterns of interest. flow does not rotate or do anything interesting, no transformations. If you have such examples that would be very much appreciated by myself and others. We could move on from another ordinary occurrence. Thank you.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
can you show me examples? area between lenticular and mountain show no patterns of interest.
i already provided examples. btw, your heart cloud was already there, beginning to form, in the contrail picture. I think you are not studying pictures closely enough.
heart.png
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
can you show me examples? area between lenticular and mountain show no patterns of interest. flow does not rotate or do anything interesting, no transformations. If you have such examples that would be very much appreciated by myself and others. We could move on from another ordinary occurrence. Thank you.
This is not true. Its hard to see because they are sped up via time lapse but if you look closely or slow it down, you see very similar patterns to what you photographed. The patterns are very interesting.
 

Mkitz

Member
This is not true. Its hard to see because they are sped up via time lapse but if you look closely or slow it down, you see very similar patterns to what you photographed. The patterns are very interesting.
i did slow down top video and I don’t see the anything the stands out. Can you take a frame and blow it up? One that shows a distinct pattern? The rotation and compression I have not seen elsewhere. Thank you.
 

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
rotation 2.jpg
Rotation sequence
I, personally, cannot see any abnormal cloud behavior here. This looks very normal for mountain clouds to me.
I have a few questions, so I can better understand.
1: What is the delay between these photos? Are they 10 seconds apart or 1 hour?

2: Can you specify what is abnormal here? What specific movement of the clouds is strange here? Drawn arrows would be helpful.

3. If this movement is abnormal, what is normal? If you could sources, per Metabunk's rules, it would be ideal.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
What specific movement of the clouds is strange here? Drawn arrows would be helpful.
i think he thinks this part of the cloud is twisting around itself and he is looking at these lines that kinda look like a candy cane spiral and how they change from shot to shot. these scree n grabs are from @SR1419 's video above.
stripe1.jpg

stripe2.jpg
stripe3.jpg

if you change the vid settings to 4k and .5 speed its easier to see how the candy cane type stripes change as the cloud moves. but because this vid the whole cloud actually hits the ridge it is kinda interrupting the "spin" look of those lines, and the "wild patterns" part beneath Mkitz cloud show up on the left side of the mountain, since in this vid the turbulence is caused by the cloud hitting the ridge where in Mitz pics the turbulence is caused by hitting the back side of the mountain behind the ridge.


although the lenticular at the top does "spin" like a typical UFO in this timelapse. pretty fun.
6.jpg

7.jpg
 
Last edited:

Z.W. Wolf

Senior Member.
This is how I read this:

You saw an image on your viewfinder that passed across the viewfinder quickly.
Weeks later you discovered a formation in the clouds in your photo(s).
You made an assumption that the two were related. I believe this is a causal fallacy.
More specifically, an illusory correlation.

You assumed that the object was large and distant, and therefore traveling at highspeed.
But the linear speed of the dot on your viewfinder is also consistent with a small nearby object.

You've assumed that the persistant formation in the clouds is the result of an impact on Mt. Shasta. But cloud formation is a complex subject you know little about. Why would an impact cause this? You cite no scientific evidence. This seems nothing more than naïve speculation. In the two years since the incident, you haven't sought out an expert on the subject. Why?

You're piling assumption upon assumption and hanging onto these assumptions with a fair amount of asperity.

I suspect motivated reasoning. It's a crackerjack mysterious story, as opposed to a mundane story.

For those not familiar with the terms:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation
...illusory correlation is the phenomenon of perceiving a relationship between variables (typically people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists. A false association may be formed because rare or novel occurrences are more salient and therefore tend to capture one's attention.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning#:~:text=Motivated reasoning is the phenomenon,accurate reflection of the evidence.
Motivated reasoning is the phenomenon in cognitive science and social psychology in which emotional biases lead to justifications or decisions based on their desirability rather than an accurate reflection of the evidence.
 
Last edited:

Mendel

Senior Member.
This is how I read this:

You saw an image on your viewfinder that passed across the viewfinder quickly.
which had no color, but we still don't know if it was black or white (or transparent?).
if the moving dot was dark, it would be hard/impossible to discern once it had crossed the mountain ridge, so whether it flew past and behind the mountain, or landed on it, (or whether it was a nearby bug) would be a matter of conjecture.
You looked at the scene naked eyeball and saw a formation in the distant clouds.
You made an assumption that the two were related. I believe this is a causal fallacy.
I've pointed out a similar formation on the "15 seconds later" shot. A review of the preceding shots might establish whether more of that cloud turbulence was happening before the vapor trail appeared.
You assumed that the object was large and distant, and therefore traveling at highspeed.
But the angular speed of the dot on your viewfinder is also consistent with a small nearby object.
And the timing isn't established either! The dot and the trail showed up in roughly the same place, but did they happen at the same time?
You've assumed that the persistant formation in the clouds is result of an impact on Mt. Shasta. But cloud formation is a complex subject you know little about. Why would an impact cause this? You cite no scientific evidence. This seems nothing more than naïve speculation.
@Mkitz doesn't say that there was an impact, but has ignored my question intended to clarify the issue.
You're piling assumption upon assumption and hanging onto these assumptions with a fair amount of asperity.

I suspect motivated reasoning. It's a crackerjack mysterious story, as opposed to a mundane story.
Some people come here with something they can't explain. We love a good riddle, hypothesize explanations, and try to support them, based on established knowledge and on any information we can add (such as e.g. flight tracking).

Some people come here with something they believe they can explain, and want to have that validated. We're not generally interested in validating people's beliefs, we're simply going to find out what the available information tells us. This can be frustrating/aggravating, but I believe it's actually one of our strengths. It makes beliefs that we do validate more precious.
 

Mkitz

Member
I appreciate your skepticism and with a Ph.D. In experimental psychology I am well aware of problem of going from correlation to causation. However, in many instances where there is correlation there can also be causation. Correlation does not exclude causation. I said earlier that I did not know if it was just a coincidence. I was not interested in the clouds with my naked eyeball, the detail was blown out by the morning sunshine. My interest was to photograph hikers near the summit. To capture any detail i had to shoot at 1/4000th of a second, but this proved useful in freezing the motion of the clouds. To answer your question about the prior shape of the cloud, I will post below. It was a matter of seconds before the object appeared, so I don’t know how long that initial form persisted. I was photographing with manual focus and the camera has a feature called focus assist that turns The edges in the scene red when the object is in focus. This interfered with discerning the actual color. i never said the object impacted the mountain and judging from the speed it should have. The the path of the object on the lcd screen coincides with the vapor trail as does the time of occurrence. Yes, an object could have appeared miles closer than the vapor trail, there are hawks in the area dI’ve bombing for prey but the timing of the object with coincident path with the vapor trail, suggests the object I saw produced the vapor trail. I have searched the internet for lenticular clouds that behaved in rotation and detention of the tubular shape posted earlier and i have found no similarities.Most of the patterns have considerable complexity or complex geometry and just looking like a known object, like a whale or a heart. The only thing that we know of that could produce these forms is the wind being altered by the jagged ridge near the summit. Typically the ridge fractúres any pattern in the laminar flow and sometimes produces tendrils in the lee side of the laminar flow, which do appear in some images. It is completely in the realm of possibility that all of the shapes that persisted periodically for two hours were just wind formed, I don’t exclude that. It seems improbable to me, in the absence of previous occurrences, again not just a curious shape that clouds often take, but complex patterns coming and going for two hours.

i appreciate that in all the skepticism that I have not been accused of photoshopping everything and I know it all seems very improbable, especially since I received the lens in the mail the previous day and I started photographing just seconds before the object appeared. That my wife just happened to get me out of bed for mixing hair color. That I just happened to want to capture hikers to test resolving power of the lens. That I had my equipment set up and ready to go. That the brightness forced me to shoot at a high speed.

if for no reason other than a unique or rare meteorological event, the images are compelling. I shared some images with the Cloud Appreciation Society and they would not post any. I think they suspected the clouds had been manipulated and did post or respond. I don’t make a living on contrivances but on teaching students to ferret out the pounding indoctrination they receive in modern education. I teach critical thinking in a field that abhors it, psychology and forces the students to believe they are machines. My approach may have just cost me my job.

The cloud pattern In the vapor trail image was the shape of the cloud prior to the object. You can get an idea of progression of first few minutes.
 

Attachments

  • 2224455E-7CA9-41EA-B202-EB51970DC8AA.jpeg
    2224455E-7CA9-41EA-B202-EB51970DC8AA.jpeg
    132.1 KB · Views: 18
  • C88B6BDF-F7D3-4C47-9D5A-5DAE7BD2AF25.jpeg
    C88B6BDF-F7D3-4C47-9D5A-5DAE7BD2AF25.jpeg
    130.8 KB · Views: 14
  • 1E149F8F-450C-4E0E-9902-47AA2790259B.jpeg
    1E149F8F-450C-4E0E-9902-47AA2790259B.jpeg
    134.5 KB · Views: 14
  • 2682F1C2-2006-4CD9-8E58-65C926872C55.jpeg
    2682F1C2-2006-4CD9-8E58-65C926872C55.jpeg
    137.6 KB · Views: 14
  • C0B679EF-7566-4878-A9A0-AB38A89C2A0C.jpeg
    C0B679EF-7566-4878-A9A0-AB38A89C2A0C.jpeg
    115.2 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
i appreciate that in all the skepticism that I have not been accused of photoshopping everything and I know it all seems very improbable
why would anyone accuse you of photoshopping? they just look like clouds. doing beautiful things like clouds sometimes do (maybe often do on top mountains). None of it sounds improbable to me, we have a whole 18 page thread on "clouds you took yourself" where people were in the right place at the right time to grab beautiful cloud pics.

ps if a hawk was dive bombing prey it would still have to be closer to the camera to appear to be moving that fast across your lcd.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
...teaching students to ferret out the pounding indoctrination they receive in modern education...
Hmmm...the logician in me flinches a bit, at this...and probably doesn't
want to know more (fortunately it would be off topic, anyway).

While I agree with the majority here that the images certainly aren't unprecedented
or particularly hard to explain, I still really enjoy them. I love that majestic mountain, and
have hiked countless hours in its shadow (you can see it from a long stretch of the PCT).
It is photogenic in almost any circumstance.
So, yeah, I think your pics are delightful, if not some enormous scientific mystery.
 

Mkitz

Member
This is really a tough crowd. A hair on the lens would be present in multiple images and I do not know how the shadow a vapor trial would be different from a vapor trail. If no speaks out in interest of the cloud sequence and I can certainly withdraw my posti is I notice I had been awarded eight trophies, so someone is interested in the thread. I invite the criticism and have attempted to address the issues raised. Please read my last lengthy explanation and respond to the points I raised. Yes, beautiful cloud patterns exist, but what we see in these images is an unusual transformation of a lenticular cloud. If someone can show lenticular cloud rotating and producing complex patterns over a period of two hours, that would be helpful. I me appreciate the rich backgrounds and insightful comments from various members and think the discussion is mostly positive.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
A hair on the lens would be present in multiple images
not necessarily 15 seconds apart.

and I do not know how the shadow a vapor trial would be different from a vapor trail.
it means the actual vapor trail is NOT where you saw the object. it can be 15-20 miles away and 10,000-25,000 feet higher than your twisting cloud. (i'd have to work out the sun angles of that plane that went by at 9:14am and estimate wind direction (that blows the trail around a bit)

I had been awarded eight trophies,

https://www.metabunk.org/help/trophies/

so someone is interested in the thread
we're talking so we must be interested.

Yes, beautiful cloud patterns exist, but what we see in these images is an unusual transformation of a lenticular cloud. If someone can show lenticular cloud rotating and producing complex patterns over a period of two hours, that would be helpful.
sr1419 already did. and i posted photos. asking us to spend time to find a video (which YOU do not have yourself) where the cloud is EXACTLY at the altitude aboveish the ridge yours is, is asking a bit much. People have already kindly showed you examples similar or the same as yours. you say "unusual patterns" but i arrowed some of the same "structures" in SR1419s vid as you use as examples in your photos.

I think it's fair to say that you do not want to look closely and debunk yourself, and current members in this thread disagree with all your conclusions. So it seems any productive conversation is zugzwanged this point.
 

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
what we see in these images is an unusual transformation of a lenticular cloud
What we want is evidence that this is unusual. I ask again: what is the evidence that this cloud is unusual? Provide quotes and sources, please.

So, essentially, our skepticism here (and we are, by definition, skeptics here) is the following:
1. We don't have any evidence of the unidentified flying object you saw, because you couldn't capture it. This is totally understandable; 90% of my bird-in-flight photo attempts end up being empty sky, and I don't shoot on a delay or with a very complex, high-zoom lens. But without the evidence, we can't really consider the UFO. It could have been aliens, it could have been a horsefly, it could have been a flying beetle, it could have been a hummingbird.

2. We don't have any evidence that the photo you shot and found the trail in was actually close to the sighting of the UFO. Just because you think it happened right after doesn't mean it did. We often see this in UFO photographs on here: someone discovers something long after they took the photo. It muddies the waters of believability a bit, but again: I get it. I try to avoid glancing at details of my pictures all the time when I shoot. This, too, is understandable.

3. The dissipation trail could be many things, including a contrail shadow or a hair. We don't know if it actually correlates to the UFO, as outlined above.

4. You repeatedly claim that the cloud formation looks abnormal, but you have yet to provide any evidence of this. It looks normal to many of us, but abnormal to you, and without evidence from you, we are at stalemate.

edit: forgot a word
 

Mkitz

Member
What we have here is a fail to communicate. We already discussed the narrow band of laminar air over the mount condenses from the air in contact with the peak not miles away. I provided many images that Show the unusual rotation. Show me another instance where a lenticular cloud twists in form and extends a tube like structure. i will post more images of the cloud patterns. I have been a photographer for half a century and I know what a hair looks like on a lens, less so with the top of my head. A hair has one diameter, the vapor trail is wider at the tail and narrower at the front is unlikely to have a tapering within the short length of the vapor trail. What is normal about a lenticular cloud that rotates?
Please provide another example of this normal behavior of lenticular clouds. Some has to cause a rotation in the moisture in the laminar flow. There has to be a mechanism. The videos of laminar flows are constant in orientation.
I hope that we can at least agree the hair and contrail shadow can be ruled out. The. Bird, plane, bug etc can be ruled out. Something moved very fast through clouds to produce the vapor trail. i am putting my best effort to addressing your concerns, not ignoring them. I’ll post more later. Argentina Netherlands soccer match was amazing. Go ARGENTINA.
 

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
I provided many images that Show the unusual rotation.
You did, but posting a picture and saying "this is unusual" is not evidence. That is a subjective statement and is just as valid as my statement that, subjectively, this is not an unusual occurrence. We are at stalemate until you can provide us with proof that this is not an unusual occurrence.
When I say 'proof,' I mean something like an article that says "lenticular clouds cannot do X", then proof that the clouds in your picture are lenticular and are doing X.
Show me another instance where a lenticular cloud twists in form and extends a tube like structure.
We tried that and you shot them down, which is why you have to supply the proof for us. The burden of proof here, as far as I can tell, is not on me. I am not going to spend hours looking at pictures of clouds here, because I still don't even understand what is unusual about these clouds. I see what you mean about miscommunication: I don't know what the 'tube-like structure' you are referring to here is, or how a twisting cloud is unusual. That's why I'm asking for evidence.

Some has to cause a rotation in the moisture in the laminar flow. There has to be a mechanism. The videos of laminar flows are constant in orientation.
Again, I'm confused here. This could be on my end. You're saying that the videos you've seen don't show rotation? Could you perhaps supply us with a video, following the posting guidelines for posting videos as evidence, and provide us with timestamps and/or screenshots with detailed explanations of what you see, where it is on the screen, and why it proves that your photos are unusual?

I hope that we can at least agree the hair and contrail shadow can be ruled out.
I can't agree on that, no. We don't have enough information here to rule those out to my mind.

The. Bird, plane, bug etc can be ruled out.
Can't agree on that, either. We don't have any evidence of what you saw and there were literal miles of air through which something could have flown. Given the fact that no one else appears to have seen this but you--even though we do have evidence of hikers in direct line of sight--I'm staying with "something flew between the camera and the mountain." I believe that you saw it, I believe that it looked like it was far away, and I believe that you are being genuine here, but I don't believe that it was a large, fast, distant craft.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
We already discussed the narrow band of laminar air over the mount condenses from the air in contact with the peak not miles away.
if you are talking about this comment:
it means the actual vapor trail is NOT where you saw the object. it can be 15-20 miles away and 10,000-25,000 feet higher than your twisting cloud. (i'd have to work out the sun angles of that plane that went by at 9:14am and estimate wind direction (that blows the trail around a bit)

then you can spend some time familiarizing yourself with contrails (this would be the site to do that, as contrails are what this site was founded on :) )
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pair-of-dark-lines-in-philadelphia-sky-contrail-shadows.2652/

shadow.png





and ps.

We already discussed the narrow band of laminar air over the mount condenses from the air in contact with the peak

i dont recall anyone discussing it. i remember you telling us that without linking any scientific paper or article backing you up.
 
Top