Clouds over Mount Shasta - Dissipation Trail?

[Ravi]

@Mkitz

Could you please repeat the initial question that you want to discuss? I am lost, completely. I see lots of beautiful images and thanks for that, but what is your goal, because I sense you have one.

 

[Mendel]

@Mkitz

Could you please repeat the initial question that you want to discuss? I am lost, completely. I see lots of beautiful images and thanks for that, but what is your goal, because I sense you have one.

on a winter summer morning, MKitz's camera detected an object moving from the upper right corner towards the ridge and outlined it in red; MKitz did not see the object directly or on the viewfinder screen (he couldn't tell whether it was white or black), only the red outline added by the camera software

MKitz proceeded to take a picture on a delay; when he (weeks?) later looked through the pictures, he reconstructed the picture showing the "vapor trail" streak as that picture taken seconds after the object passed
View attachment 56387

the picture after that shows what might be an incomplete turbulence signature from a fixed-wing aircraft in line with the streak in the previous frame, as well as "fractal turbulence" on the right (that I think must have formed before the object passed, and is not near where it passed).

MKitz then observed this fractal turbulence expanding and moving, for 2 hours.

MKitz hypothesized that the passing of the object caused the turbulent cloud patterns to appear, and would like to see this hypothesis validated.

There is no evidence or explanation proferred how any object, passing or "ending up" on the mountain, might cause such a cloud phenomenon. (and no evidence that any airborne object actually set down on the mountain)

there is also a claim about the speed of the object, which would profit from estimating the length of the "trail", and suffers from us not knowing for what length of time the object was observed. There is unfortunately no video evidence.

---

• Absent evidence or explanation, Metabunk is not going to conclude that a passing object caused the 2-hour cloud pattern.
• Members who have voiced an opinion feel that while the cloud pattern may be rare, it's not evidence of unnatural causes.
• @Mkitz does not agree, and therefore the discussion is at an impassé.

 

[FatPhil]

@Mkitz

Could you please repeat the initial question that you want to discuss? I am lost, completely. I see lots of beautiful images and thanks for that, but what is your goal, because I sense you have one.

The Gish Gallop has been replaced by the Gish Gallery.

 

[Mendel]

You also wouldnt remember the exact time you saw the blob to link it to the contrail picture.

something like "it was the third picture I took" or "it was one of the first pictures I took" would suffice to make a probable connection

 

[Ravi]

Thanks for the feedback @Mendel.

 

[Mendel]

Thanks for the feedback @Mendel.

I thought it was time for another summary. Let's hope @Mkitz agrees with it.

 

[Mkitz]

something like "it was the third picture I took" or "it was one of the first pictures I took" would suffice to make a probable connection

Hi all, I observed a fast moving object on the lcd of the camera. It is not difficult to remember the trajectory, later I discovered a trace or trail, whatever you want to call it, that was coincident with the time, roughly, the first images I captured that morning and it was coincident with the the object that raced across the lcd screen. To imagine that the this vapor trail was produced by anything other than the object, at roughly the same time and same place, is highly improbable to impossible. Yet, this has been the suggestions from many of you, that the trace was a contrail shadow, bug, hair and so on. I made an estimate of the speed based the fact the object on the. lcd was lasted at best one second, figuring then the length of the trail and from this I concluded it was hundreds of miles an hour. It is unlikely that anyone would direct an aircraft downward into a mountain at that speed or any, and at that angle. In fact, the turbulence associated with lenticular clouds is generally avoided by pilots. To me this was a anomalous event and was followed by another anomalous event, the unprecedented cloud formations. My logic leads me to connect the two events, could it be correlation and not causation, yes, of course. However, when an highly improbable event, object descending is followed by another highly improbable event, the transformation of the lenticular cloud and the patterns that followed, it is not unreasonable to imagine that they are connected. I do not see images or videos that anyone has posted that show the images that day were ordinary, they remain unprecedented. If I posted the images without a discussion of the vapor trail, they represent a phenomenon that is highly unusual, lenticular clouds don't behave in this manner. If I have no credibility in the account of the object I presented, there is nothing more I can do to remove your doubt other than what I have said about who I am. I have enjoyed the discussion and I have benefitted from your expertise. Thank you.

 

[deirdre]

something like "it was the third picture I took" or "it was one of the first pictures I took" would suffice to make a probable connection

but it wasn't.

The two images I posted above at Tinkersailor's request, showa major a transformation in the cloud that rotates, compresses itself and which ultimately results in the cloud extending out a tube like structure. I do not see any cloud elsewhere posted on the internet doing this and following with complex cloud patterns for two hours

I honestly don't know what you mean by the above. (compresses itself then becomes a tube.). I think I and you and other people have provided examples of what i see in your pictures.

and how we are supposed to prove the time length of timelapse videos? (ie. "for two hours"). I agree with Mendel, we're at an impasse. One more quick question:


@Mkitz Do you see the exact same striations (roll) in the top cloud here?:

 

[NorCal Dave]

At 72 years of age and deep religious faith, .... We live a world of of the collective denial of the beautiful and the transcendent

Morey, I think this is where we're at a fundamental impasse. If I read this correctly, your deep religious faith includes a belief in the "transcendent". This corresponds with other statements you made such as (I've edited for brevity post #55):

Is there an energy shaping the transformations? I believe there is.

It is not random, of that I am certain. Something organic, something intelligent and something of living presence is at play. The universe is magical once you can break away from the hypnotic spell of the senses that can never accept snything greater than themselves. Harder than stone and darker than night. If the cloud patterns bring no joy and we get so caught up into forcing reality to conform to our expectations, than that is the way it has to be. Deirdre, thanks for a prova stive discussion. Embrace the magic, it is nothing to do with me. Cheers.

I think we are doomed to talk past each other. I, and others here will continue to try to discern what common or natural causes can explain what you remember seeing and the photos you've shared. I, and I think many others here, are materialists. Many of us have done the religious thing and find it no longer explains the world in a satisfactory way.

I do not feel the need to invoke aliens, ghosts, interdimensional beings, paranormal activity, angles, magik, or in this case as we're talking about Mt. Shasta, the Lumerians to explain the natural world.

Your claim seems to be that a supersonic object zipped over the mountain leaving a millisecond vapor trail and then ensconced itself near the peak and proceeded to spend 2 hours making unprecedented formations in the clouds. This is your starting point for the debate you wish to have, correct?

It appears you're asking us to debate what transcendent form of intelligence caused this "miraculous" event. You're asking us to discuss magik. Again, as this is Mt. Shasta, you're asking us to discuss the Lumarians, though you never mention them.

We're on different wavelengths and I think will continue to go in circles and talk past each other.

You see evidence of a transcendent, organic intelligence at play on Mt. Shasta. Sorry, but I see clouds.

 

[Mendel]

I think we are doomed to talk past each other. I, and others here will continue to try to discern what common or natural causes can explain what you remember seeing and the photos you've shared. I, and I think many others here, are materialists. Many of us have done the religious thing and find it no longer explains the world in a satisfactory way.

you don't have to be a materialist to be looking for natural causes

it's perfectly theologically compatible with many Christian denominations, and with other religions, too

religion is there to explain people, it's not Earth Science 101

 

[deirdre]

religion is there to explain people, it's not Earth Science 101

well God did part the red sea in Exodus.

 

[Mkitz]

Morey, I think this is where we're at a fundamental impasse. If I read this correctly, your deep religious faith includes a belief in the "transcendent". This corresponds with other statements you made such as (I've edited for brevity post #55):




I think we are doomed to talk past each other. I, and others here will continue to try to discern what common or natural causes can explain what you remember seeing and the photos you've shared. I, and I think many others here, are materialists. Many of us have done the religious thing and find it no longer explains the world in a satisfactory way.

I do not feel the need to invoke aliens, ghosts, interdimensional beings, paranormal activity, angles, magik, or in this case as we're talking about Mt. Shasta, the Lumerians to explain the natural world.

Your claim seems to be that a supersonic object zipped over the mountain leaving a millisecond vapor trail and then ensconced itself near the peak and proceeded to spend 2 hours making unprecedented formations in the clouds. This is your starting point for the debate you wish to have, correct?

It appears you're asking us to debate what transcendent form of intelligence caused this "miraculous" event. You're asking us to discuss magik. Again, as this is Mt. Shasta, you're asking us to discuss the Lumarians, though you never mention them.

We're on different wavelengths and I think will continue to go in circles and talk past each other.

You see evidence of a transcendent, organic intelligence at play on Mt. Shasta. Sorry, but I see clouds.

but it wasn't.



I honestly don't know what you mean by the above. (compresses itself then becomes a tube.). I think I and you and other people have provided examples of what i see in your pictures.

and how we are supposed to prove the time length of timelapse videos? (ie. "for two hours"). I agree with Mendel, we're at an impasse. One more quick question:


@Mkitz Do you see the exact same striations (roll) in the top cloud here?:
View attachment 56659Deirdre, Very keen eye, yes, I see a slight rotation. I should have been more clear, that it is a rotation that leads to a complete transformation of the lenticular cloud, and I think this is very unique. A transformation that goes from the lenticular below, the dark image, to the elongated structure in the brighter image. I have a closer view of the structure that was formed in the third image. The last image was part of the initial rotation of the lenticular and preceded the tube like structure. So to be clear, we are not just talking about a rotation, but rotation, compression and the formation of a new structure. The symmetry and definitive nature of this tube is unparalleled in any images of clouds. Since these are just clouds, surely, lenticular morphing in such a manner should be common. I think it is apparent that we need to provide an explanation of the dynamics of wind, with the interaction of mountain surfaces, that can provide such an exact formation. How does a constant laminar flow produce this shape, when most of the times it is a static lenticular? The fanning out or fan like structure on the bottom of the last image, I have not been able to find elsewhere. Maybe someone with more access to cloud formations could provide a parallel.

 

[Mkitz]

well God did part the red sea in Exodus.

Could not agree more.

 

[Trailspotter]

Trailspotter. There are some pints you raise that are the result of not having thread very closely. I never referred to the vapor trail as a dissipation trail and have no idea what the latter refers to. I never said the vapor trail was captured long after the object was gone. I caught the vapor trail within seconds of the object piercing the clouds. The vapor trail is present in only one image and the dynamic nature of the area where the vapor trail was captured, erased the vapor trail immediately. The patterns that were captured in one frame, over the two hours were mostly gone in the next and you see that in the screen shots I uploaded of the sequence of multiple frames. The way the called vapor trail is wide at the back and narrow at the front is consistent with fast movement of an object through a cloud. You are certainly entitled to doubt, but it would be best if you got your facts straight. Go back in the thread and you will find the member who said dissipation trail. I appreciate being challenged and many comments have been useful in making me realize the uniqueness of the events that unfolded that morning. No one however has yet produced complex patterns under a lenticular cloud and there seems to be a lot of dancing around the issue. Yet, I am accused of being evasive. Thank you just the same.

@Mkitz
Firstly, I'd like to introduce myself, in the same way like you did.
I am a scientist with PhD in physics. I am only marginally younger than you are and have been doing research for 40+ years and counting. Over this time, I have authored and co-authored 100+ publications in leading scientific journals and peer-reviewed thousand papers, written by other researches. While evaluating a new paper, I always start with my own analysis of the presented data and only then proceed to the authors' conclusions to see whether they are fully supported by these data or not.

I apply the same professional approach to my hobbies, one of which is condensation trails, a.k.a., vapour trails. My interest in them began at the end of 2009, when I discovered the Contrail Science site, a predecessor of Metabunk. I have been spotting, filming and researching contrails since. I recorded their formation and evolution over different time scales, dependent on the environmental factors. I compared my results with observation of others and checked for their agreement with published works by the specialists in the field. I believe that I have acquired a fair knowledge of the subject to say that a trail-like streak in your photo is not likely to be a vapour trail. First of all, a vapour trail does not form inside a cloud, where all excessive water vapour has already condensed in small droplets or tiny ice crystals. A passage of an object through a cloud may result in precipitation of these into larger droplets or crystals, which then fall down, leaving a gap in the cloud, called dissipation trail or, shortly, distrail. 'Dissipation Trail' is the title of this thread. As its opening post is attributed to you, it was my assumption that you also chose the threads' title. It seems to be more suitable than 'Vapour Trail', but still is incorrect. Dissipation trails do not have straight edges and tapered shapes. Vapour trails may have them in the immediate vicinity of the moving object that would be present at the tapered end. Alas, there is no one present in the photo.

Regarding your narrative. I question it because you presented it two and half years after your observation. It is a long time to remember all fine details, but an ample one to consolidate the narrative in one's mind as the "real" event. But what really frustrates me is that there could be many images of Mt Shasta taken at the same time from different perspectives by other people and webcams, but to find them now is a hassle. These could give us independent information on what was going on there.

Fortunately, @deirdre already found a youtube video (see post #128) that very likely was taken at the same time by probably the same group of hikers that feature on some of your photos. They reported gusts of wind at the top of the mountain, but saw nothing unusual. There is one moment in their video with a turbulent pattern similar to those you filmed on the day:

Yours so-called unusual cloud patterns appears to be an air turbulence, tearing up the top of a cloud sitting behind the mountain ridge.

 

[Mkitz]

NorCal Dave, yes, my experience is conviction is stronger than facts. I think the transformations are of such an unusual nature that defy explanations with just the simple dynamics of wind. These are transformations that are too complex or be just just the movement of wind, and I have yet to see any parallel. I try and keep an open mind and an open to the ideas that this is just wind without any influence of the Lemurians.
Just so you understand, psychology has been trying to explain the human mind in mechanistic terms for one hundred years and it has utterly failed. We have no explanation for neural basis of intelligence, thinking, consciousness, memory, perception, creativity, emotions, beauty, free will, problem solving and the list could go on. If we were machines, by at the very fact that machines always have simple explanations or they are easy to understand, once you know the parts, we should have been able to explain everything, it should not be complicated. We have the parts and can account of nothing. For psychology to hold on to a mechanistic view of mind that cannot generate a model of memory or perception, it just plain stubbornness. It is not science, it is psychology playing the role of an influencer, to convince others that their existence is meaningless, When did it become fashionable to surrender our ability to analyze, question and think critically, to glorified government bureaucrats. If people invested time to figure things out themselves, they would see how easy they have been manipulated to not think.
Charlie Brown says, "trust the science" is the most anti science statement ever. Questioning science is how you do science!" If Charlie can figure this out, why cannot we? Why does the field of psychology put a blanket of silence around questioning the materialistic paradigm. Thank you.

 

[NorCal Dave]

NorCal Dave, yes, my experience is conviction is stronger than facts.

I personally strive for the opposite view. I try to let the facts lead me to my convictions and having arrived there, those convictions are open to change should the facts change. I think that in more extreme cases, a "conviction is stronger than facts" view leads to things like Flat Earth, or worse.

And here we differ in a way that makes discussing your central claim. You have the conviction that a supernatural something is causing the cloud patterns while I don't see the facts to support that.

Just so you understand, psychology has been trying to explain the human mind in mechanistic terms for one hundred years and it has utterly failed.

This, as is the rest of the paragraph following this statement, getting way off topic for this thread. Metabunk tries to keep threads focused on specific claims. In this thread the central question you have raised is, roughly: "Are these cloud photos unique and unprecedented and if so, are they caused by an object you saw that may have left a vapor trail?".

Discussing what psychology has or hasn't discovered about the workings of the human mind is beyond the scope of this thread.

However, there is a sub-forum here on Metabunk called ChitChat, that is often allowed to be more open ended. You may be able to start a thread there. If you would like to engage in a discussion along the lines "Has modern Science robs us of our Transcendences?" or something like that, I bet you would get some interesting takes

 

[deirdre]

@Mkitz comment 212: (coding got messed up ) in black
my text response in greenbold

"Deirdre, Very keen eye, yes, I see a slight rotation.

Awesome, that's great

I should have been more clear, that it is a rotation that leads to a complete transformation of the lenticular cloud,

no, i get that. the cloud does different things at different times (but really so does my video example)

and I think this is very unique.

cool.

A transformation that goes from the lenticular below, the dark image, to the elongated structure in the brighter image. I have a closer view of the structure that was formed in the third image. The last image was part of the initial rotation of the lenticular and preceded the tube like structure. So to be clear, we are not just talking about a rotation, but rotation, compression and the formation of a new structure.
yea, ill bypass this because im still confused what you mean by "structure" ps. i see no structure anywehre in pic #3...i think too many pics in one comment is confusing me? and your pic1 and 4 are the same pic. (which is really abnormally identical to the video of the roll i posted.)

The symmetry and definitive nature of this tube is unparalleled in any images of clouds.
again, i dont understand what you are seeing.

Since these are just clouds, surely, lenticular morphing in such a manner should be common. I think it is apparent that we need to provide an explanation of the dynamics of wind, with the interaction of mountain surfaces, that can provide such an exact formation.
They aren't just clouds. they are humidity and thermals and cold pockets and wind and a mountain [and its various crevices] interacting in different ways. Here is the Flckr Mt. SHasta "group". 17 pages of photos, some spectacular...not one matches any other.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/mountshasta/pool/page5

a pic from page 5 very similar to yours, her camera capability and filters are a bit different...but still very similar.

How does a constant laminar flow produce this shape, when most of the times it is a static lenticular?
I dont understand the question you are asking me. and i'm not a meteorologist so likely couldnt answer you even if i did understtand the question.

The fanning out or fan like structure on the bottom of the last image, I have not been able to find elsewhere. Maybe someone with more access to cloud formations could provide a parallel."

all those pics look the same to me so i dont know what you mean by "the fanning out in the last picture". sorry.

I think you should upload your pics, or a few to Flickr, they are pretty pics and would add to the Mt.Shasta group. I did enjoy looking up and at pretty clouds. Appreciate the you starting this thread so i could have the distraction of beautiful scenes.

 

[tinkertailor]

Hi Tinkertailor, thank you from the inquiry. I posted these earlier, the top image preceded the bottom image by quite a few frames. The image with the vapor trail shows how the lenticular cloud appeared at the beginning of the two hour sequence. It is more typical of a lenticular shape and it transformed into the imagesm below. The lenticular clouds typical have a static shape, no doubt often very beautiful. I have yet to find a rotation of the entire lenticular cloud. The lee side can have rotor clouds. It is interesting to think of what will cause a large air mass to begin to rotate, what force is driving the rotation, there has to be a force to produce the rotation. How often have we seen the fanning out or layers at the bottom of the first image? Hope this helps.

Unfortunately it doesn't. I would really love a picture with some kind of concrete (i.e., visual) indicator of what the 'tube' you're seeing is here. Description isn't enough, I'm pretty sure I'm looking at a totally different part of the cloud than I should be. Judging by her post above, Deirdre also doesn't know what a 'tube' is here. I keep staring at the image and can't find a tube.

Would it be possible for you to visually demonstrate with an arrow, a circle, some kind of mark on the image?

 

[Mkitz]

Unfortunately it doesn't. I would really love a picture with some kind of concrete (i.e., visual) indicator of what the 'tube' you're seeing is here. Description isn't enough, I'm pretty sure I'm looking at a totally different part of the cloud than I should be. Judging by her post above, Deirdre also doesn't know what a 'tube' is here. I keep staring at the image and can't find a tube.

Would it be possible for you to visually demonstrate with an arrow, a circle, some kind of mark on the image?

The first image shows the fanning out or layers in the rotation. The second image followed the first a few frames later and I have marked the part I called tube. The third image is just otherworldly. Thanks

 

[Mkitz]

@Mkitz comment 212: (coding got messed up ) in black
my text response in greenbold

"Deirdre, Very keen eye, yes, I see a slight rotation.

Awesome, that's great

I should have been more clear, that it is a rotation that leads to a complete transformation of the lenticular cloud,

no, i get that. the cloud does different things at different times (but really so does my video example)

and I think this is very unique.

cool.

A transformation that goes from the lenticular below, the dark image, to the elongated structure in the brighter image. I have a closer view of the structure that was formed in the third image. The last image was part of the initial rotation of the lenticular and preceded the tube like structure. So to be clear, we are not just talking about a rotation, but rotation, compression and the formation of a new structure.
yea, ill bypass this because im still confused what you mean by "structure" ps. i see no structure anywehre in pic #3...i think too many pics in one comment is confusing me? and your pic1 and 4 are the same pic. (which is really abnormally identical to the video of the roll i posted.)

The symmetry and definitive nature of this tube is unparalleled in any images of clouds.
again, i dont understand what you are seeing.

Since these are just clouds, surely, lenticular morphing in such a manner should be common. I think it is apparent that we need to provide an explanation of the dynamics of wind, with the interaction of mountain surfaces, that can provide such an exact formation.
They aren't just clouds. they are humidity and thermals and cold pockets and wind and a mountain [and its various crevices] interacting in different ways. Here is the Flckr Mt. SHasta "group". 17 pages of photos, some spectacular...not one matches any other.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/mountshasta/pool/page5

a pic from page 5 very similar to yours, her camera capability and filters are a bit different...but still very similar.
View attachment 56673


How does a constant laminar flow produce this shape, when most of the times it is a static lenticular?
I dont understand the question you are asking me. and i'm not a meteorologist so likely couldnt answer you even if i did understtand the question.

The fanning out or fan like structure on the bottom of the last image, I have not been able to find elsewhere. Maybe someone with more access to cloud formations could provide a parallel."

all those pics look the same to me so i dont know what you mean by "the fanning out in the last picture". sorry.

I think you should upload your pics, or a few to Flickr, they are pretty pics and would add to the Mt.Shasta group. I did enjoy looking up and at pretty clouds. Appreciate the you starting this thread so i could have the distraction of beautiful scenes.

Thank you, Deirdre

 

[Mkitz]

I personally strive for the opposite view. I try to let the facts lead me to my convictions and having arrived there, those convictions are open to change should the facts change. I think that in more extreme cases, a "conviction is stronger than facts" view leads to things like Flat Earth, or worse.

And here we differ in a way that makes discussing your central claim. You have the conviction that a supernatural something is causing the cloud patterns while I don't see the facts to support that.



This, as is the rest of the paragraph following this statement, getting way off topic for this thread. Metabunk tries to keep threads focused on specific claims. In this thread the central question you have raised is, roughly: "Are these cloud photos unique and unprecedented and if so, are they caused by an object you saw that may have left a vapor trail?".

Discussing what psychology has or hasn't discovered about the workings of the human mind is beyond the scope of this thread.

However, there is a sub-forum here on Metabunk called ChitChat, that is often allowed to be more open ended. You may be able to start a thread there. If you would like to engage in a discussion along the lines "Has modern Science robs us of our Transcendences?" or something like that, I bet you would get some interesting takes

Thank you, Norcal Dave, I will consider your suggestion.

 

[Mkitz]

Notice the pattern that appears, disappears and reappears, it is marked. These are over many frames between. I suggests this is not a random occurrence. Bit curious I think.

 

[FatPhil]

a few frames later and I have marked the part I called tube.
View attachment 56680

How's that different from @deirdre's "a pic from page 5 very similar to yours, her camera capability and filters are a bit different...but still very similar." pic?

Why was your only response to deirdre's post "Thank you, Deirdre", rather than addressing her points within, namely that your photos do not demonstrate anything that hasn't been seen and captured before?

There's no doubt your photos are beautiful, don't get me wrong, they demonstrate features of fluid dynamics that some people get utterly obsessive over:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Hyc3MRKno


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zI9sG3pjVU

but that's all, there's nothing not explained by fairly mundane, but not explicitly solvable, laws of physics.

 

[deirdre]

These are over many frames between.

you need to start labeling your pics with either their actual numbers, or their timesframes.

and post unmanipulated pics. the last one in your line there looks like it has some wicked sharpening filter applied to it.

The second image followed the first a few frames later and I have marked the part I called tube.

pic on right is from my video https://www.metabunk.org/threads/dissipation-trail.12794/post-285157 my video grab doesnt go any further to the right, but it likely continues to taper like yours does.

The first image shows the fanning out or layers in the rotation.

pic on left is my pic from post #217 above https://www.metabunk.org/threads/dissipation-trail.12794/post-285196


edit:broken attachment link

 

[Mick West]

In the meantime tahe claim has been made that we have see these cloud patterns all before. Well, look at the images below and show the equivalents. I have searched but do not have experience of. many here. Thank you.

They appear to be Altocumulus 'supercilium', which is currently an informal classification.

Article:

'Supercilium' are short-lived cloud features, which appear in turbulent airflow over, and to the immediate lee of, steep mountain peaks during periods of strong mountain summit level winds.

Source: https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wea.4322?af=R

And lenticular verging on asperatus - for the smoother clouds.

Here's the two types of cloud together.

As others have said, there doesn't seem to be anything unnatural going on here. The cloud structures are much too large to be influence by a passing plane.

If you give a precise time of the photo with the "contrail", then perhaps a plane could be identified.

 

[deirdre]

If you give a precise time of the photo with the "contrail", then perhaps a plane could be identified.

@flarkey did that. the camera says 9:31. Mhitz claims infers he did change his time when the clocks changed so the real life time is 8:30.

This flew past at 1314UTC = 9.14am PST Local.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/clouds-over-mount-shasta-dissipation-trail.12794/post-284702

June 28th 2020 at 9:31 a.m. That could be an hour off, since camera was set on Denver time and my home in California is an hour earlier. So 99% probability it was 8:31 a.m. Pacific time.

 

[deirdre]

ps @Mick West mhitz says he is just west of this hill here at 3000 feet. that view (west of hill) does line up with the blue circle photos on top that hill on GOogle maps.

add:map link

so "contrail" mark round about here, i think.

 

[Mkitz]

This is the view from my living room in Mt. Shasta, in the foreground is Spring Hill, my lot borders on I-5 and Spring Hill directly across the highway. The first part of the morning the camera was aimed to the left of Thumb Rock, the area marked in the image below. Toward the latter part of the two hours, I shifted the camera to the right and those include Thumb Rock. Address, 1530 Cedar View Lane, just so you all can figure out that I was there, not somewhere else. Your mapping is a bit off, wish I had a bit more credibility. My home is protected my Lemurians. Below is google map. Thanks.

 

[deirdre]

Your mapping is a bit off, wish I had a bit more credibility.

you dont need credibility, we can see the bumps in the mountain profile. the guys can match things themselves because of all the FLat Earth thread practice. I was just helping him save time by getting him close.

 

[Mkitz]

you dont need credibility, we can see the bumps in the mountain profile. the guys can match things themselves because of all the FLat Earth thread practice. I was just helping him save time by getting him close.

sounded like they could line up my location with the ridge or thumb rock, whatever.

 

[deirdre]

sounded like they could line up my location with the ridge or thumb rock, whatever.

yup. they can.

 

[NorCal Dave]

My home is protected my Lemurians.

Maybe so, but I don't think I would go around doxing myself on a public forum. You have time to edit your post and remove your address.

I don't think anyone here doubts that you took the pictures from your place. Near Spring Hill and I5 is about as exact as needed. No need to invite the internet to your house.

 

[deirdre]

Cloud starts to rotate, unmanipulated and very pleasing to the eye, after the vapor trail. Enjoy,
View attachment 56403

Mkitz what is the timestamp of this photo, please.

 

[Mkitz]

Mkitz what is the timestamp of this photo, please.

8:42 a.m. thanks

 

[deirdre]

8:42 a.m. thanks

nice. can you post all the Original pics with timestamps so i can tell them apart, starting with the contrail through that pic?
i'm seeing a pattern i'm interested in but i'm not sure.

 

[deirdre]

8:42 a.m. thanks

ps. by 8:42 you mean 9:42 camera time, right?

 

[Mkitz]

ps. by 8:42 you mean 9:42 camera time, right?

Time stamp is 9:42, but camera on Denver time, one hour later. Thank you.

 

[Mkitz]

nice. can you post all the Original pics with timestamps so i can tell them apart, starting with the contrail through that pic?
i'm seeing a pattern i'm interested in but i'm not sure.

Hi Deirdre, that is a big task your are asking. I can post a select few. I noticed on my computer the time stamp is broken to seconds, so can give you, I.e. 8:31:12. Let me know what you trying to establish. Remember my time stamp is one hour off, I live in Denver. Thank you b

 

[deirdre]

Hi Deirdre, that is a big task your are asking.

why? how many are there?

Remember my time stamp is one hour off,

maybe. maybe not. you never testified that you did consistently change your camera time when the clocks change twice a year.

 

[Mkitz]

why? how many are there?


maybe. maybe not. you never testified that you did consistently change your camera time when the clocks change twice a year.

I said in the very early posts, that my time stamp was off, set on Denver time. I have never changed the time stamp since I set it, the first time I set up the camera. Time stamps mean nothing to me, this is not a camera used for forensic investigations. Is there an investigation?