Marine0811
Active Member
Why doesnt anyone research missile impacts to rule out my pictures as being from the missile?
Why doesnt anyone research missile impacts to rule out my pictures as being from the missile?
I'm watching the Bryce thing carefully.
There is only one video which seems to show the explosion coming from the left. That is this video:
Please note this video has been edited.. a width adjustment or some sort of crop adjustment. It also likely has motion stabilization enabled on the camera. Here is an unedited copy (note the difference in dumpster size and shape) :
So there is some confusion it seems on how the explosion travels across the screen; which seems to be the big selling point of missile comes in explosion goes out.
I would like to point out that the direction that people seem to think they see a missile come from is actually the direction a good deal of the fireball and blast was directed. you can tell because there is a great deal of trees that are charred, more burned down homes, and more damage in this direction.
.There is a moment where overexposure from all of the cameras blurs the image, but the overexposure comes from the left side of the screen on the red lines
This is the direction the explosive force seems to have done the most damage.
This view is unique in that the explosion is not travelling mostly towards the camera like the orange camera FOV, or mostly away from the camera FOV as in the yellow lines. Nothing can be seen entering the explosion from the other two angles.
Why could it not be an optical illusion from the one camera angle; one where the expansion of the cloud and overexposure causes it to seem like something is moving inward but for that split second as the explosion happens?
You cannot toss out the other video angles which clearly show only an explosion and nothing entering.
Do you not see that big flash completely separate from the plant to the left? The same one you think is a lens flare, from the explosion, or from an AN cloud which you saw explained on youtube. If you put this much effort into researching missile impacts and signatures, you would know im telling the truth. You are argueing your theory against what I saw happen.
Im sure they did see the missile. This is a media cover up which is seen by the video altercations and lack of video. Why would the let people speak against what they are hiding? The feds knew the missile was coming. I guarantee they were already there or there shortly after the plant blew. Find their response time for me. Sweet dreams.
The sound cannot be explained without waveform analysis by an expert. I believe the sound is masked by a good deal of distortion from the small camera phone microphone diaphragm overloading, as well as preamp distortion from the camera recording preamp. The sound is not definitive proof of anything because the ear can be easily fooled. Special effects for movies are not what you think they are a lot of times. My friend produces sound fx for movies. He records some crazy stuff in his studio that sound entirely different once the eye is lead to believe something.These look to be the same video, everything is identical apart from the slow mo and the global leaks inset.
That and the sound, appear to be the entire basis of the missile theory, (apart from the litigation aspect)
I would not have noticed the flash coming in from the left unless someone slowed it down like they did. But it is quite clear and can be seen moving in toward the fire, which does not change until it is completely engulfed by the flash. Then... that is some explosion. If those guys had been any closer, I think they would likely have been injured.
So the overexposure on all images can only be accounted for by a very bright light source coming in?
If there were a low pressure area in that direction, would the blast not be inclined in the area of least resistance?
Are there stills of these different cameras at exactly the same time the flash appears?
Why don't you do it?
It's best to concentrate on one aspect of a complex situation at a time.
And why do you keep offering up these avenues?
I already have done it.
Because, it would be a lot faster if someone could just show the differences in other missile impacts compared to this one. It would dismantle every one of my claims. If most on here would put half as much work into looking at missile explosions, they will see why my pictures are so important.
Okay, perhaps I'm misunderstanding your original question. Would a sensible rephrasing be -
"Can anybody find footage / images of a known missile impact which doesn't look like the one under discussion here?" ?
Or even...
"I think this looks like a typical missile impact, can anybody find images / footage which prove it doesn't?"
Marine, I would like you to explain WHY not ONE person that was there saw 'your' missile. There is NO way in 'double hockeysticks' that a bunch of rural Texans that in general, don't like the federal government, could be shut up. if they saw a missile. They would LOVE to have something on the administration that they disapprove of.
There are multiple videos, and you can only find 'evidence' on one, when it is altered.
I see nothing in your posts, but a personal opinion from someone that wasn't there, and doesn't have a good understanding of the situation .
Because, it would be a lot faster if someone could just show the differences in other missile impacts compared to this one.
Notice you also see the missiles tail flash entering from left to right on the originals!
The worst thing you can do to a Marine is tell him it was all for nothing.
Explosions can be categorized into two general categories, as follows.
In a deflagration, the combustion or reaction wave propagates at a velocity less than the speed of sound. Although all combustion (fires) can be defined as a deflagration, the ignition of a fuel-oxidizer mixture or a suspended cloud of combustible dust in a confined environment typically causes a significant and rapid increase in pressure that can cause catastrophic damage. These explosions are typically associated with natural gas or propane releases (gas explosion), gasoline and hydrocarbon vapors (vapor explosion), finely divided fuels (dust explosion), and certain reactive chemicals . These events can occur immediately before, or immediately after a fire and can propagate throughout a facility. Therefore, an engineering investigation of the event typically includes the preceding and subsequent events.
In a detonation, the combustion or reaction wave propagates at a velocity faster than the speed of sound. Due to the very fast reaction, these explosions create a high-pressure shock wave that causes significant damage at large distances from the seat of the blast. Detonations which can create significant brissance, or fragmentation, of containment vessels, causing impact and penetration damage are typically fueled by solid or liquid fuels but can also occur in pressurized or oxygen-rich-gas environments. They usually are associated with blasting agents or munitions (high explosives). Certain chemicals can also be boosted into detonation with a proximate high-explosive charge. A fire within a chemical warehouse or storage area may also cause a deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT).
I'm geting the distinct impression we're being trolled.
Tomahawk cruise missile, notice... no tail flash.
Tomahawk cruise missile, notice... no tail flash.
Tomahawk cruise missile, notice... no tail flash.
Tomahawk cruise missile, notice... no tail flash.
Tomahawk cruise missile, notice... no tail flash.
What you're doing is all for nothing.
The tail flash is irrelevant because you don't have a burning fertilizer plant with gases within the smoke.
Thanks for finally researching missile impacts.
Then show another missile impact within a burning fertilizer plant that has gases within the smoke so we can compare it to your "missile picture"
Are you currently in the military? If so, I understand why you are in denial. I don't want to believe the government I worked for kills innocent civilians either.
Somebody had to. You certainly were not willing.
I agree. Mine doesn't have a the face of a vampire fire demon... get it?
No, I don't really "get it"
Well let me elucidate this matter for you.
You see a missile that nobody else can see.
You can't actually produce evidence of a missile.
That is all.
The only time I saw was on the T.V. broadcast which was altered afterwards.
I'm not the only one that saw the missile. My wife verified everything I saw before any suggestion.
There is more than enough to prosecute those guilty of these murders.
Many on death row are in on circumstantial evidence.
As the only Tomahawks are sea launched what you are saying is that a missile was launched from the Gulf of Mexico and traveled a considerable distance inland to West, Texas and nobody along the way saw it. Also could you provide your credentials you used to determine the videos were altered and your expertise in explosives and explosions? No other experts are coming up with your analysis. It is just bunk and I nominate for a title change to debunked.Wow, are you serious? I have never said I have seen the missile in any online video, all have been altered. The only time I saw was on the T.V. broadcast which was altered afterwards. I'm not the only one that saw the missile. My wife verified everything I saw before any suggestion. I don't think you know what evidence is. Many on death row are in on circumstantial evidence. There is more than enough to prosecute those guilty of these murders. You are now on ignore, you are a waste of my time.
Marine, do you have any additional evidence besides your blog and you and your wife's interpretation of the explosion as a missile attack?
No and that's why I am done here. Enjoy each others company stroking one another's ego's running circles for information that was already presented. Few of you are here to discover what is truthful, most are only hear to discredit your presuppositions of all conspiracy theories being false. Not one of you dismissed one of my claims. Not one of you could discredit my character or lack of sanity. You fail. Enjoy your site.
No and that's why I am done here. Enjoy each others company stroking one another's ego's running circles for information that was already presented. Few of you are here to discover what is truthful, most are only hear to discredit your presuppositions of all conspiracy theories being false. Not one of you dismissed one of my claims. Not one of you could discredit my character or lack of sanity. You fail. Enjoy your site.
Are you currently in the military? If so, I understand why you are in denial. I don't want to believe the government I worked for kills innocent civilians either. No, I don't really "get it" I don't understand how you lack caring for citizens murdered by our government.