You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] 17043431? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Wow, you are such a shill. You had me until the Whidbey Island missile. It is impossible that it could be a helicopter. Compare the image with other 20 second exposure of planes. If what you are saying is true, then that helo was flying 2,000 mph. Shill confirmed.

0
0

[–] 17043777? ago 

Yeah, I have like 40 pages worth of solid facts, and you use one article I linked to conclude I'm a shill, even though I literally described that article as 'almost unquestionably proves'... meaning I'm conceding that it doesn't 100% prove it's a helicopter. Ok.

Facts are facts. That article provides the facts for both the helicopter theory, and the missile theory. There is far more support for the helicopter theory.

Your 'compare to other long exposure shots', and '2000 mph' comments tell me you didn't even read it, because all that stuff is addressed within it. Glad to debate the facts if you want, but read the article first.

0
1

[–] 17051702? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

"If the mystery object was a missile, we would not expect the body of it to be captured on a long exposure shot."

Really? Try this:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6f/ab/13/6fab13850a19702d79f005a0d00a5941.jpg

The point is that you have the camera's location, and you can guesstimate a reasonable height for the helo. From this, you can determine perspective, and from that perspective (plus the exposure time), you can calculate a reasonable distance that a helo could travel based upon the image. Since you also have the camera's settings, you can go out and photograph similarly-lit objects (aircraft) traveling at known speeds. From one known-speed and two known-distances, you can calculate a reliable speed of the object at Whidbey, which you will then realize is moving too fast to even be a jet, let alone a helo.

The point is that you could be thinking for yourself and verifying these facts for yourself (as I did), but instead you are posting articles filled with inconsistencies, and that were likely fabricated by DS assets providing a cover story. Whether you are a shill or not, the point is that until you get better at researching and logical thinking, there is little point in reading all of your "40 pages of solid facts" when some of those "almost unquestionable solid facts" are so very easily destroyed by even a cursory review.

Also, the article never mentions the "speed" theory even once. So, that again, either makes me think that you are a shill, or that you need to work on your reasoning faculties. Maybe both.