Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
zoser

Israel - UFO or Missile?

724 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

I am awaiting responses from direct inquiries to sources in Israel and Lebanon.

Earl, I published a link to an eyewitness in Uzbekistan, sorry you didn't see it.

Sorry I missed the UZ link, too. I have tried in vain to get anything from Uzbekistan and other nations to the south of Kazakhstan.

so far, nothing. seems strange to me. it is so easy to get links from Israel. LOTS of them.

Early, your comment that the missile would have been seen halfway from KY to SS is another example of how easily your imagination gets your rationality into trouble.

I thought it was logical. sorry. I though the best chance to see the plume would be at the apex.

Now, if you say they saw it somewhere else, fine, provide a link. Is it over 400 kilometers when it hits the point you refer to?

If not,,, then it won't be seen in Israel. tell me more, please. Link works better.

BTW, I calculated the distance from Tel Aviv to Zhezkaghen (halfway from KY to SS) as 2033 miles. Oh, oh.

For weeks you have been insisting that a missile fuselage would be invisible 2000 km away, when everyone else has been trying to tell you it was the missile's exhaust plume, backlit by the sun, that was visible.

I'll work with that. fine. I don't think you'll see the plume either, except for maybe a microdot. but we'll see.

And that plume only exists for the first several minutes of flight -- afterwards, the missile and its warheads are coasting, not emitting highly-visible plumes.

Be careful, Jim, because if it appears in only the first few minutes, 1st stage missiles are no where as good at moving the missile

through miles and therefor it may not come up enough. I have done calculations using height of missile as being 800 miles because Badsekov insisted that is how high the missile went (without evidence, of course). so now we have to decide how high the missile was when you believe the plume was seen. I will wait for that. I also think that from 2100 miles away, the plume will be TINY if not invisible.

BTW, anyone look at weather maps for the night of June 6 in that area? I bet not.

And that period -- which is immediately followed by the several-second reentry vehucle spin up that causes the brief spiral to appear -- occurs over the lower Volga Valley -- quite easily in the roughly described line of sight from that Israeli witness.

I will look up lower Volga Valley.

In the meantime, I did post in here, based soley on witness accounts, both Pat-El and Levi were not looking at directly at Kazakhstan that night, I can relay that info to you again if you wish. (north Galilee - Dov Har/Mt Hermon) - that leads to russia - somewhere between Kazakhstan and Ukraine

NOT over central or eastern Kazakhstan -- nothing would be expected to be visible from the missile in that phase of its flight.

Ok, and can we come to some agreement as to what the altitude of the missile is when it is in Volga Valley area

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"which quickly spread and took half of the sky."

Wow, that's a lot bigger than the descriptions from Israel. It must mean the folks in Iran were CLOSER to the object than folks in Israel.

Isn't that they way you interpret, Earl?

Also, folks in the Caucasus and Iran and Uzbekistan got videos that showed the twisty early atmospheric ascent of the missile [the twists are from high altitude winds at different directions several minutes after missile passage -- the missile climbed straight]. Nobody in Israel or Jordan got that flight portion, because it was still too low and hadn't risen above the curve of the Earth as observale at the GREATER range in Israel or Jordan.

Right?

Jim I put this article in here as a matter of surprise because I never saw anything quite like it.

I hastened to point out that the date of their reports (June 8) is not the date of the Israel apparition, June 6.

I don't know what to make of it. really. I just can say it is reliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Do you have any uploads of the latest spirals Earl?

Zoser that link shows vids however they are hot links and there is no way to know where the vids were shot.

You can look at it two different ways: 1) everything is accurate. that being the case it does absolutely nothing to take away from an apparition over Israel 2 nights before, while at the same time, these NEW apparitions cannot be explained away by a Russian missile that was launched 2 days earlier. that means you now have SEVERAL more apparitions that have to be explained that are not a missile.

or 2) the author of the article was drunk when s/he wrote it LOL

Sooooo.... Unless I find any more such evidences, I'm ignoring it.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earl,... the government payed desinformation specialist kicking the free thinkers saucer shaped butt.

How about that!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earl,... the government payed desinformation specialist kicking the free thinkers saucer shaped butt.

How about that!?

well, geez, hazzard, that would be kinda' blunt but.... LOL

I don't know, man. I don't know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as per our discussion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2UTTKh_Topol-M

The Topol-M is a cold-launched, three-stage, solid-propellant, silo-based or road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile.[7] The missile's length is 22.7 m and the first stage has a body diameter of 1.9 m. The mass at launch is 47,200 kg, including the 1200 kilogram payload. Topol-M carries a single warhead with a 800 kt yield [2] but the design is compatible with MIRV warheads. According to chief designer Yury Solomonov, the missile can carry four to six warheads along with decoys.[8] Its minimum range is estimated to be 2,000 km and the maximum range 10,500 km

-------------------------------------------collaboration

Apparently these folks see the term "minimum range" exactly as I do:

----------------------------------------------

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-432077.html

Found this;

http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.139/missile_detail.asp

"Both versions were constrained by a minimum range of 600 km (373 miles) and an accuracy of 550 m CEP."

And this:

http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.26/missile_detail.asp

"The CSS-5 can deploy its 600 kg payload with a minimum range of 500 km (311 miles) and a maximum range of 2,150 km (1,336 miles)."

Which shows missiles do have minimum ranges, but it varies from missile to missile, assuming the references are accurate. Yes I realise the second one isnt really an ICBM, but I suspect the point stands.

Otara

---------------------------

Now, here is the really objective reaction to this "minimum range" information by the Russian Missile Conspiracy Theorists :

boonY: --- [FACE PALM} don't you know what estimate means????

JimO: --- "There is no minimum, it is zero"

Psyche: - "I don't read it that way."

-------------------

three respondents, three different reactions, ALL OF YOU PLAYING --- DUCK,,, DODGE,,, AND HIDE.

the people above had NO PROBLEM reading it the way I did, it is obvious. and they do not even know we exist so they are "objective" in that sense.

face it, there is a minimum to any ICBM, especially and included, the wonderful and amazing, Topol-M. it is 2000 km

It may be an estimate, yes boonY, but until it is refined more, it STANDS, that so far, The Topol-M cannot be fired from Kapustin Yar and be expected to land down in Sary Shagan testing range, it goes to far by a considerable margin.

Strong evidence that the Topol-M that was fired thenight of June 6, 2012, from Kapustin Yar is a

MYTH

we can all agree to disagree, but this is a case where it is not Ok to disagree without LINKS.

As badseko said to me, "get an education, learn about google and get some links"

So I did. your turn now.

-------------------------

In another matter,, Jim Omberg-the-poster has informed us that the Topol-M Missile that was fired on June 6 from Kapustin Yar was seen in Israel when it was in the Volga Valley region of Russia/Kazakhstan, NOT at the missile's apex, as I suspected, which is much further east into east central Kazakhstan.

Now that I know that the Volga River and Volga Valley are in Russia and the Western portion of Kazakhstan that borders Russia, I sit in awe and wonder..... REAQLLY!?!? right near Kapustin Yar itself.

Did Jim throw that information out just because I showed the Yigal Pat-El and Natan Levi were not even looking at Kazakhstan when they saw the apparition, they were looking WEST of Kazakhstan into Russia? that would be very near the Volga Valley region. AMAZING find, JimO. amazing.

interesting development. I wish Jim had been forthcoming about that location all along. Coincodence?

So, I now wonder how JimOmberg-the-poster can back that up AND show that in that very beginning of the missiles run, that it made it HIGH enough for the plume to be able to be seen on the Israeli border.

I get a very strong sense of "slipping, sliding, and avoiding" on these two issues in here, not a sense of objectivity at all.

I also think the "Russian Missle Conspiracy Theory" is taking yet another hit.

I've asked Jim for links.

and if anybody knows of any links that says that ICBM's do NOT have minimum ranges, I would like to see that.

One last note: When you see that an ICBM must have a minimum range of 5,500 km to be considered an ICBM, what they mean by that is this: the maximum range of a missile must be a minimum of 5,500 km - or, you must be able to go 5,500 km to be considered a true ICBM.

with that said, each missile - each ICBM missile has its own "minimum range"

the minimum range for the Topol-M is 2000 km and although I said earlier the Peacekeeper has a minimum range of 3,000 miles, my bad, I meant the Minuteman ICBM has a minimum range of 3,000 miles, which is the missile Badsekov cited his stats from.

look them up yourselves. I know it is not t realm you will enjoy but if you are objective you will want to be certain on all these issues

---------

One last issue here,,,

I did a re-calculation. we have been using an estimate of 1500 miles form Israel to the missile plume being seen.

the distancce from Tel Aviv to Zhezkaghen is 2033 miles. Zhezkaghen being the mid point in line from Kapustin Yar and Sary Shagan testing base, which is just about where the missile reached its apex or zenith.

Now if we use something much closer to Kapustin Yar as where the missile was,,, the distance INCREASES.

I have yet to figure that out, but I will, but expect a value of about 2,300 miles.

2300 miles...? and it is seen so big in Israel ppl clal the police????

Excuse me while I ROFLMAO all over the place.

Peace love dove, y'all. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

as per our discussion:

http://en.wikipedia....-2UTTKh_Topol-M

The Topol-M is a cold-launched, three-stage, solid-propellant, silo-based or road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile.[7] The missile's length is 22.7 m and the first stage has a body diameter of 1.9 m. The mass at launch is 47,200 kg, including the 1200 kilogram payload. Topol-M carries a single warhead with a 800 kt yield [2] but the design is compatible with MIRV warheads. According to chief designer Yury Solomonov, the missile can carry four to six warheads along with decoys.[8] Its minimum range is estimated to be 2,000 km and the maximum range 10,500 km

[...]

Other sources do not mention minimum range.

[...]

face it, there is a minimum to any ICBM, especially and included, the wonderful and amazing, Topol-M. it is 2000 km

It may be an estimate, yes boonY, but until it is refined more, it STANDS, that so far, The Topol-M cannot be fired from Kapustin Yar and be expected to land down in Sary Shagan testing range, it goes to far by a considerable margin.

Strong evidence that the Topol-M that was fired thenight of June 6, 2012, from Kapustin Yar is a

MYTH

[...]

According to article, two main reasons for launches from Kapustin Yar to Sary Shagan and not from Plesetsk to Kura (Kamchatka):

1) radar equipment on Kura does not allow to track maneuvers of separated warheads;

2) americans spy such maneuvers from Alaska.

Edit: spelling

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as per our discussion:

http://en.wikipedia....-2UTTKh_Topol-M

The Topol-M is a cold-launched, three-stage, solid-propellant, silo-based or road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile.[7] The missile's length is 22.7 m and the first stage has a body diameter of 1.9 m. The mass at launch is 47,200 kg, including the 1200 kilogram payload. Topol-M carries a single warhead with a 800 kt yield [2] but the design is compatible with MIRV warheads. According to chief designer Yury Solomonov, the missile can carry four to six warheads along with decoys.[8] Its minimum range is estimated to be 2,000 km and the maximum range 10,500 km

-------------------------------------------collaboration

Apparently these folks see the term "minimum range" exactly as I do:

----------------------------------------------

http://boards.straig...p/t-432077.html

Found this;

http://www.missileth...sile_detail.asp

"Both versions were constrained by a minimum range of 600 km (373 miles) and an accuracy of 550 m CEP."

And this:

http://www.missileth...sile_detail.asp

"The CSS-5 can deploy its 600 kg payload with a minimum range of 500 km (311 miles) and a maximum range of 2,150 km (1,336 miles)."

Which shows missiles do have minimum ranges, but it varies from missile to missile, assuming the references are accurate. Yes I realise the second one isnt really an ICBM, but I suspect the point stands.

Otara

Really Earl? Your source is wikipedia. So who estimated that number?

Isn't the difference only around 50 miles? Your own link say's the Missile is "road-mobile". They may have driven it a few miles to the west. But that doesn't matter because it is not the Missile that hits the target it is the Warheads the Missile releases along it's trajectory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other sources do not mention minimum range.

According to article, two main reasons for launches from Kapustin Yar to Sary Shagan and not from Plesetsk to Kura (Kamchatka):

1) radar equipment on Kura does not allow to track maneuvers of separated warheads;

2) americans spy such maneuvers from Alaska.

Edit: spelling

let me ask you something, if "another source" does not mention minimum range, does that mean, does that mean it does not exist? that would seem to be the author or editor's choice but clearly the term exists and it has MEANING

and I do not know why you are making mention of WHY they launch from Kapustin Yar. really.

at this moment, I am not challenging that because everyone in here is in agreement with JimOmberg-the-poster.

No problem.

I did mention that the RUSSIANS said it was launched in the north of Russia, the South East of Russia, and from a mobile Launcher - in addition to Southern Russia (Kapustin Yar implied)

Obviously I believe NONE of them but I will let posters in here choose their own launch site, of course.

I have to give you all EVERY,and I mean EVERY benefit of the doubt.

the sure sign of closed minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

we can all agree to disagree, but this is a case where it is not Ok to disagree without LINKS.

As badseko said to me, "get an education, learn about google and get some links"

So I did. your turn now.

<snip>

Yes, I indeed did and while you are certainly trying, I can by all means of respect see that you still need some more. The Topol-M may have a minimum operational range within certain operational specifications, however (as Jim also explained earlier), you can fire a rocket up at a higher angle of attack and let it come down at much lesser distances. You could even fire it straight up and have it come down into your launch area. Not very effective testing, but certainly possible. That is what I mean by educating yourself. Read up on ballistics and missile technology, then I think you would see a lot of this in a completely different light.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really Earl? Your source is wikipedia. So who estimated that number?

Isn't the difference only around 50 miles? Your own link say's the Missile is "road-mobile". They may have driven it a few miles to the west. But that doesn't matter because it is not the Missile that hits the target it is the Warheads the Missile releases along it's trajectory.

My source *for now* is wikipedia, yes. Funny, you did not vet JimOmberg's info when he chose RuTube.ru for a "source"

If you all had a source to challenge me, than by all means get it in here.

the difference is "only" about 50 miles...? do you rally think if they had perfect tollerance they would attempt a firing like that?

it is way too close for comfort.

my friend, mobile launcher is one of the options, yes.

the russians said that it was launched form a mobile launcher. too bad they also said from the north of russia, the south east of russia, and southern russia.

it is difficult to figure out what is going on when they lie all the time. and I suspect that is a tactic of theirs.

in telling you four launch sites they really told you NOTHING

in the meantime, Jim says "Kapustin Yar", so ya know what...? that is what we all must agree to.

don't jump my bones, I don't believe ANY of them. go protest to JimOmberg

you make an interesting point about the warhead. don't know about it. in this launch, however, the russians clearly would have to worry about where that missile goes. that is an absolute must

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I indeed did and while you are certainly trying, I can by all means of respect see that you still need some more. The Topol-M may have a minimum operational range within certain operational specifications, however (as Jim also explained earlier), you can fire a rocket up at a higher angle of attack and let it come down at much lesser distances. You could even fire it straight up and have it come down into your launch area. Not very effective testing, but certainly possible. That is what I mean by educating yourself. Read up on ballistics and missile technology, then I think you would see a lot of this in a completely different light.

Cheers,

Badeskov

I wondered where you went.

Badsekov, to be blunt at this point, I am very leery and do not really believe that. Why?

because if that was the case there would be no need to publish a minimum - it would always be as Jim says, ZERO

So I am leery.

I can't prove it either way,, I am leery of that statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered where you went.

Unfortunately work took it's toll.

Badsekov, to be blunt at this point, I am very leery and do not really believe that. Why?

because if that was the case there would be no need to publish a minimum - it would always be as Jim says, ZERO

So I am leery.

I can't prove it either way,, I am leery of that statement

Please do be blunt. Admittedly, I have not looked into the numbers behind the minimum range, but I am guessing that it is based on it meeting certain operational specifications, specifications that can be compromised on during testing.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To Lost_Shaman and JimOmberg,,,

first,,, I posted some "perspective" results that I made from very simple calculations.

1) Shaman, you first. You kept telling me I was wrong but gave me no "right" except for some ubiquitous, general term, like point source or something, as opposed to an exact mathematical answer, which you hinted that there is not one. [sigh]

2) Jim, you told me that you "corrected" my math. I did miss the post - sorry.

but I will tell you both this, I was RIGHT ON THE MONEY

http://www.1728.org/angsize.htm

try it. I stick to that figure of about 1/40,000th BTW, it is accurate. (B767 scenario)

now, if you do not know how to use the calculator, I will give you instructions.

here is how it goes.

you have a 6" x 6" card at 10 feet away. (example)

place a card it at 20 feet away. what size must it be to look identical in size in the viewfinder of a camera?

the answer is the very simple 12" x 12"

However, that quadruples the area - but pixels on the screen remain the same

the first card is 36 square inches, the second is 144 square inches. - 4:1

Now, in a picture it is hard - if not impossible to distinguish between the two.

in real life, however, "depth perception" will tell you the two are NOT the same. ten-four?

I make mistakes,,, I do not believe this is one of them.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I`ll just go up and Look ,I bet I can tell what it really was !

post-68971-0-76067000-1343441677_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I`ll just go up and Look ,I bet I can tell what it really was !

The blind archer from Korea could figure it out what it is ROFLMAO!!

good evening to ya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we here at UM in this threadhave a new revelation to share in, thanks to poster JimOmberg.

the Chronolgy is this:

1) We have been operating under the *assumption* that Kapustin Yar is the launch site of this alleged Topol-M missile launch of June 6, and the landing spot was in Shary Shagan in southestern Kazakhstan. I assumed, - SILLY ME, that the missile hit its zenith midpoint, and that is most likely where the Israeli men would see the plume of the missile. Again, silly me.

2) I have posted in detail how Dr. Yigal Pat-El and observer Natan Levi of Israel - based on their location and statements, were actually looking in the direction of a location west of Kazakhstan. that made their view point off by about 30-35 degrees (west), which is non-sensical, at best. Not proof of anything as of yet, but it SHOULD raise a serious red flag in here with all posters.

Psyche101 seemed to be the ONLY one that delved into it. so be it.

3) I then posted, to get a more accurate measurement of how far the missile at its zenith is from Tel Aviv (Pat-El), to following:

The midpoint between KY and SS (launch and land sites) is a city called Zhezkaghen.

The distancce from Tel Aviv to Zhezkaghen is 2033 miles, the height of the missile is 800 miles, so demands Badsekov.

Therefor, the distance from Dr Yifgal Pat-El in Tel Aviv to the missile is - 2184 miles, also a very red flag item for us to ponder.

You know how to make both red flags go away...? Well, congratulations JimOMberg-the-poster!! Igt is very simple!

Two nights ago, after all this time - 7 weeks, JimOmberg made the *astounding* revelation that the Topol M missile was actually seen by Israeli's when the missile was in the Volga Valley - the Volga River Valley to be more precise.

I told JimOmberg I would look into it and get back.

I'M BACK

Here are my NEW calculations, based on Jim's testimony. It seems the western edge of Volga Valley is WEST of Kazakstan, in RUSSIA!! how cool is that! So Jim is basically saying the Israeli's saw the missile close to where it was launched, Kapustin Yar.

Wonderful!

The distance form Tel Aviv to Kapustin Yar is 1403 miles, which is 630 miles less than the the distance to the zenith point, Zhezkaghen. Congratulations, Jim. Nice save.

We don't know how HIGH the missile was when it came into view, Jim is likely checking into that. we don't know how far in the south east direction it traveled when it was seen, either, but very likely, the half-random figure of 1500 miles that I threw out as example long ago, is looking pretty accurate, according to this new data.

however, the location of Kapustin Yar itself is very closely in line to the view vector that Dr. Pat-El saw his apparition.

Natan Levi obviously is looking close to the correct loation as well.

Once again, congratulations JimOmberg, for deleting both red-flag pieces of evidence in one fell swoop, ALMOST.

I say "almost", Jim, because you forgot one thing.

LINK

...... or it didn't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Lost_Shaman and JimOmberg,,,

first,,, I posted some "perspective" results that I made from very simple calculations.

1) Shaman, you first. You kept telling me I was wrong but gave me no "right" except for some ubiquitous, general term, like point source or something, as opposed to an exact mathematical answer, which you hinted that there is not one. [sigh]

2) Jim, you told me that you "corrected" my math. I did miss the post - sorry.

but I will tell you both this, I was RIGHT ON THE MONEY

http://www.1728.org/angsize.htm

try it. I stick to that figure of about 1/40,000th BTW, it is accurate. (B767 scenario)

now, if you do not know how to use the calculator, I will give you instructions.

here is how it goes.

you have a 6" x 6" card at 10 feet away. (example)

place a card it at 20 feet away. what size must it be to look identical in size in the viewfinder of a camera?

the answer is the very simple 12" x 12"

However, that quadruples the area - but pixels on the screen remain the same

the first card is 36 square inches, the second is 144 square inches. - 4:1

Now, in a picture it is hard - if not impossible to distinguish between the two.

in real life, however, "depth perception" will tell you the two are NOT the same. ten-four?

I make mistakes,,, I do not believe this is one of them.

Earl,

If you had payed any attention to trying to comprehend what I was telling you in those posts of mine talking about this you'd know where and how you are making a mistake. The Human Eye can't see the Angular size of an object after it's Angular size is less than about 1 arc minute. After that you see the object as a POINT SOURCE! It's Angular size can be very very super small, but you will still see a point source if there is enough Light reflecting back towards your eye's to be detected.

All the Stars in the Sky are seen as point sources. They all have incredibly small Angular sizes! Angular sizes so small that they make your B767 example at 1500 miles look like a GIANT object! You WILL see it as a point source IF there is enough Light reflecting back towards Earth for your Eye's to register. Go look at the Stars. All are point sources. Yes, some look bigger and brighter and some look smaller and dimmer. The difference to your Eye's is the amount of/or intensity of the Light entering your Eye's and not the objects true Angular size or Distance.

You can't look at the Night Sky and point out big bright Stars and say they are bigger in Angular size and closer to Earth and that small looking dimmer Stars have a smaller Angular size and are further away from Earth! You'd be completely wrong!

Why? Because your Eye's see objects smaller than around 1 acr minute in Angular size as point sources. Point sources are not "Microdots" Earl! Angular size size and Distance can not be determined by observing a point source. This is the important part here that your seeming to ignore.

Earl re-read this post if you need to and understand what I'm trying to tell you here. I'm not making any of this up. The same is true for Camera's and Telescopes except the difference is the Angular size of the devices resolution limit that may be larger or smaller than the ~1 arc minute resolution limit of the Human Eye @ 20/20 vision.

You keep asking for links. Forget links! Go outside before Dawn, find Jupiter and estimate it's Angular size Earl. Then wait 30 minutes as the sky starts to birighten and do that again. If you see Jupiter as being smaller after the Sky gets brighter, it isn't because the Planet grew smaller or drifted further away is it? You don't need a link for this, go out look at the Sky and see for yourself what an object like Jupiter (a POINT SOURCE) looks like. Look at the Stars and see what point sources look like.

I'm trying to help you understand this Earl.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let me ask you something, if "another source" does not mention minimum range, does that mean, does that mean it does not exist? that would seem to be the author or editor's choice but clearly the term exists and it has MEANING

[...]

I'm no expert on ICMB's, but, as logic dictates and as badeskov mentioned, min range would depend on operational specs (hm... if you would vent more thrust, min range would decrease, isn't it?).

[...]Obviously I believe NONE of them but I will let posters in here choose their own launch site, of course.

[...]

Here is the problem: all sources south of Kazakhstan (Kapustin Yar - Sary Shagan "line") give us left-right direction, while all sources north of that line - right-left. Do you have any source that would show right-left, say, from the same Israel, Turkey, Syria, etc?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we here at UM in this threadhave a new revelation to share in, thanks to poster JimOmberg.

the Chronolgy is this:

1) We have been operating under the *assumption* that Kapustin Yar is the launch site of this alleged Topol-M missile launch of June 6, and the landing spot was in Shary Shagan in southestern Kazakhstan. I assumed, - SILLY ME, that the missile hit its zenith midpoint, and that is most likely where the Israeli men would see the plume of the missile. Again, silly me.

2) I have posted in detail how Dr. Yigal Pat-El and observer Natan Levi of Israel - based on their location and statements, were actually looking in the direction of a location west of Kazakhstan. that made their view point off by about 30-35 degrees (west), which is non-sensical, at best. Not proof of anything as of yet, but it SHOULD raise a serious red flag in here with all posters.

Psyche101 seemed to be the ONLY one that delved into it. so be it.

3) I then posted, to get a more accurate measurement of how far the missile at its zenith is from Tel Aviv (Pat-El), to following:

The midpoint between KY and SS (launch and land sites) is a city called Zhezkaghen.

The distancce from Tel Aviv to Zhezkaghen is 2033 miles, the height of the missile is 800 miles, so demands Badsekov.

Therefor, the distance from Dr Yifgal Pat-El in Tel Aviv to the missile is - 2184 miles, also a very red flag item for us to ponder.

You know how to make both red flags go away...? Well, congratulations JimOMberg-the-poster!! Igt is very simple!

Two nights ago, after all this time - 7 weeks, JimOmberg made the *astounding* revelation that the Topol M missile was actually seen by Israeli's when the missile was in the Volga Valley - the Volga River Valley to be more precise.

I told JimOmberg I would look into it and get back.

I'M BACK

Here are my NEW calculations, based on Jim's testimony. It seems the western edge of Volga Valley is WEST of Kazakstan, in RUSSIA!! how cool is that! So Jim is basically saying the Israeli's saw the missile close to where it was launched, Kapustin Yar.

Wonderful!

The distance form Tel Aviv to Kapustin Yar is 1403 miles, which is 630 miles less than the the distance to the zenith point, Zhezkaghen. Congratulations, Jim. Nice save.

We don't know how HIGH the missile was when it came into view, Jim is likely checking into that. we don't know how far in the south east direction it traveled when it was seen, either, but very likely, the half-random figure of 1500 miles that I threw out as example long ago, is looking pretty accurate, according to this new data.

however, the location of Kapustin Yar itself is very closely in line to the view vector that Dr. Pat-El saw his apparition.

Natan Levi obviously is looking close to the correct loation as well.

Once again, congratulations JimOmberg, for deleting both red-flag pieces of evidence in one fell swoop, ALMOST.

I say "almost", Jim, because you forgot one thing.

LINK

Earl,

By all means of respect, but posters here are actually trying to give away knowledge here for free. And I suggest you take it. LS has explained, very well I daresay, the meaning of point sources and what that means to seen by the naked eye. Jim has explained, from the best of his knowledge (and I have no doubts that it is vast), the technology of ICBMs and Russian geography. You have yet to poke any holes in any of that. Instead you hang on to some ridiculous idea that it could not be a missile for reasons I cannot even begin to fathom.

Frankly, you seem to avoiding facts.

...... or it didn't happen.

Dude, you have to be kidding.

Cheers,

Badeskov

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

3) I then posted, to get a more accurate measurement of how far the missile at its zenith is from Tel Aviv (Pat-El), to following:

The midpoint between KY and SS (launch and land sites) is a city called Zhezkaghen.

The distancce from Tel Aviv to Zhezkaghen is 2033 miles, the height of the missile is 800 miles, so demands Badsekov.

Therefor, the distance from Dr Yifgal Pat-El in Tel Aviv to the missile is - 2184 miles, also a very red flag item for us to ponder.

How do I demand that the altitude of the missile is 800 miles? I demand nothing. However, from physics it is a reasonable assumption. You are correct, we do not know the altitude, but from a ballistic trajectory we can guess pretty well. Basic physics.

By all means of respect, but you have entered this discussion showing a rather profound lack of knowledge in not only missile technology, but also basic physics. If I were you I'd listen to what posters here are actually saying and take that into consideration.

Cheers,

Badeskov

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earl,

If you had payed any attention to trying to comprehend what I was telling you in those posts of mine talking about this you'd know where and how you are making a mistake. The Human Eye can't see the Angular size of an object after it's Angular size is less than about 1 arc minute. After that you see the object as a POINT SOURCE! It's Angular size can be very very super small, but you will still see a point source if there is enough Light reflecting back towards your eye's to be detected.

All the Stars in the Sky are seen as point sources. They all have incredibly small Angular sizes! Angular sizes so small that they make your B767 example at 1500 miles look like a GIANT object! You WILL see it as a point source IF there is enough Light reflecting back towards Earth for your Eye's to register. Go look at the Stars. All are point sources. Yes, some look bigger and brighter and some look smaller and dimmer. The difference to your Eye's is the amount of/or intensity of the Light entering your Eye's and not the objects true Angular size or Distance.

You can't look at the Night Sky and point out big bright Stars and say they are bigger in Angular size and closer to Earth and that small looking dimmer Stars have a smaller Angular size and are further away from Earth! You'd be completely wrong!

Why? Because your Eye's see objects smaller than around 1 acr minute in Angular size as point sources. Point sources are not "Microdots" Earl! Angular size size and Distance can not be determined by observing a point source. This is the important part here that your seeming to ignore.

Earl re-read this post if you need to and understand what I'm trying to tell you here. I'm not making any of this up. The same is true for Camera's and Telescopes except the difference is the Angular size of the devices resolution limit that may be larger or smaller than the ~1 arc minute resolution limit of the Human Eye @ 20/20 vision.

You keep asking for links. Forget links! Go outside before Dawn, find Jupiter and estimate it's Angular size Earl. Then wait 30 minutes as the sky starts to birighten and do that again. If you see Jupiter as being smaller after the Sky gets brighter, it isn't because the Planet grew smaller or drifted further away is it? You don't need a link for this, go out look at the Sky and see for yourself what an object like Jupiter (a POINT SOURCE) looks like. Look at the Stars and see what point sources look like.

I'm trying to help you understand this Earl.

I do , of course get the sense that you are trying to help me understand.

I also have to try to accept the fact that as an air vehicle moves away from an observer, basically, it does not get smaller and smaller. and that no matter how far away it is, it will always be a point source to the human eye.

yah.

I have a very hard time with that.

what if the object was a fly at 100 miles?

well, just saying?!?!?! everything has limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only trolls can be this intentionally obtuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on ICMB's, but, as logic dictates and as badeskov mentioned, min range would depend on operational specs (hm... if you would vent more thrust, min range would decrease, isn't it?).

yes, IF the Topol M truly vents thrust. you have only taken someone's word for that. have you seen that in a dependable link?

Also, if it was capable of venting thrust, would they not take that into consideration in defining the minimum range, that is define minimum for when thrust vents are wide open?

Here is the problem: all sources south of Kazakhstan (Kapustin Yar - Sary Shagan "line") give us left-right direction, while all sources north of that line - right-left. Do you have any source that would show right-left, say, from the same Israel, Turkey, Syria, etc?

No and if that remained in my original text, I am sorry, I meant to take that section out. I must have forgotten and I appologise

Only trolls can be this intentionally obtuse.

I thought you were taking a hike?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earl,

By all means of respect, but posters here are actually trying to give away knowledge here for free. And I suggest you take it. LS has explained, very well I daresay, the meaning of point sources and what that means to seen by the naked eye. Jim has explained, from the best of his knowledge (and I have no doubts that it is vast), the technology of ICBMs and Russian geography. You have yet to poke any holes in any of that. Instead you hang on to some ridiculous idea that it could not be a missile for reasons I cannot even begin to fathom.

Frankly, you seem to avoiding facts.

Dude, you have to be kidding.

Cheers,

Badeskov

can you see a fly from 100 miles?

who's kidding???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.