Slashdot Mirror
Mystery Fireball a Concorde Contrail?
unassimilatible writes "Space.com is reporting that an unidentified fireball seen over Wales was not a meteor, as originally claimed by NASA. What was it, and does this throw into question NASA's credibility? The truth is out there..." A follow-up to this story.
This is what passes for a Slashdot story these days?
How does this dispel NASA's credibility? Upon initial inspection, a hypothesis is made. Upon further inspection, a different hypothesis is reached because of data being added to the situation (Concorde flight paths). Were someone to come forward and produce a very large blowtorch, yet another hypothesis could be reached.
What we have here is a lack of data, not lack of credibility. If anything, this should teach us to question the first, second and Nth hypothesis until it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
--trb
I don't have the exact quote handy, but I'm reminded of something Professor Arturo on Sliders said: "That may be good enough if you want to work in some third world country, like NASA, but it will not do in my class."
NASA... credibility... BAHAHAH!!!! Really, you kill me. Sniff. Chuckle.
I had noticed that NASA had already revised their interpretation within a day or 2 of the original report. If you look here, you will see that they reinterpreted it as a contrail reflecting the sun.
Don't you mean chemtrails?!
Oh, I guess you actually mean contrails. Darn.
Damn "500" errors. How many attempts will it take for me to submit this time?
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
This fire in the sky can only be a result of the rogue Bush Regime and its further gutting of the Clean Air Act, and aggressive ozone deplection in accordance with the demands of its corporate masters.
Just wait until these fireballs start raining down.
I, for one, welcome our new airborne incindiary overlords. Next time they are in your town, do not hesitate to invite them down for a barbecue, even if it is might be your own.
Now, let there be no doubt that NASA is collectively a hell of a lot smarter than me. But, seriously, you're telling me that a tiny little plane like the Concorde is releasing a huge, explosion-shaped contrail behind it?
Well, it's no wonder they decommissioned the damned things.
-Waldo Jaquith
Comment removed based on user account deletion
All together, now: BULLSHIT!
Seriously, if that kind of fireball came out of afterburning turbojets, then the last 50 years' worth of military aviators should have some comments about this. I'm pretty sure that the flames from a jet engine don't go very far before being obviously turned into steam and other byproducts. Of course, if the Concorde had managed to go sub-orbital and burned up on re-entry, then that's one thing, but I think we would have heard about that happening, by now.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Maybe it was Sun crashing and burning?
Honestly, now, have you ever seen a contrail in that shape? Every contrail I've seen is roughly conical, with the greatest density being immediately behind the airplane. The contrail disperses over time to look like a long and thin strip of cloud in the sky.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Looks hot, is actually freezing :)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
What explains the huge, billowing shape at the end? I've never seen a contrail shaped like that.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
So they're absolutely sure it's not a meteor, but only vaguely sure it's a contrail.
Sounds to me like just another person who needs to feel cool by trying to make others look bad.
1: "Cool, check out this picture of a meteor"
2: "That's no meteor, you idiot."
1: "Oh...what is it?"
2: "Uh...I dunno...Concorde? Whatever it is, it's definately not a meteor. Stupidhead NASA."
Really? Look at a contrail some time after the aircraft goes by. It is quite diffuse.
There could have been localized winds, stirring up that part faster then the rest of it.
Leading to a wider appearing cloud of ice particles.
Which then reflect the setting sun.
That is what it looks like to me.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
Seeing as how Nasa's findings were disputed after a second image of the 'fireball' was taken at a different angle, no, I'd say Nasa's credibility is just fine.
"Derp de derp."
I have seen diffuse contrails and they're pretty thin on vapor once they spread out. There is a much greater quantity of material in the cloud at the end of the trail than would be explained by diffusion. That's a pretty thick cloud of material. It's visibly not diffuse, and the fact that it reflects so much more sunlight (if you accept the reflection theory) than the rest of the trail is further proof that diffusion isn't the answer. The segment that is more diffuse should reflect less light per unit of area than the less diffuse segment.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
I might be paranoid but my first tought was that it might be a rocket that was in a mission to put a secret satellite out there that failed and burned into the atmosphere. Nasa knew exactly what it was but couldn't tell because the information is classified so they had to come up with a plausible anwser.
Sorry about the horrible orthograph
I have seen this before, but it was on a 747 and it was large enough to render the plane leaving the contrail invisible.
All it needed was a regularly scheduled flight using the same runway, thank you Sydney Airport, and the sun to be in the correct position to create the spectacular glowing contrail effect. I got to see it for several days running, before the morning sun shifted enough to stop the effect being visible from my location.
and the werewolves came...
and they ate him...
and they drank his beer...
The other night I saw a jet fighter do a dump-and-burn of their fuel. It was very impressive, very loud, very bright.. and it looked just like that photo. But I mean it still could be a UFO yeah?
I couldn't think of a sig.
They're still in service, and will be for a few days. Does anyone else find it amusing that it's already taking on the mythical aspects of Aurora?
maybe it was Occam's razor burning up on re-entry? All the calculations that suggested it could fly went out the window when it flew too close to the sun.
Explanation: Jon Burnett, a teenager from South Wales, UK, was photographing some friends skateboarding last week when the sky did something very strange. High in the distance, a sofa-sized rock came hurtling into the nearby atmosphere of planet Earth and disintegrated. By diverting his camera, he was able to document this rare sky event and capture one of the more spectacular meteor images yet recorded. Roughly one minute later, he took another picture of the dispersing meteor trial. Bright fireballs occur over someplace on Earth nearly every day. A separate bolide, likely even more dramatic, struck India only a few days ago.
Especially the part of totally dissing the theory of the meteor. I can see that bringing up other theories can be useful, but it appears as though some folks are trying to suggest that meteors don't enter the Earth's atmosphere (or so seldom that it is a geological event, not something mere mortals will ever witness).
Having viewed several exploding meteors myself, I will have to say that it really isn't all that unusual. In my case, I didn't have a camera handy, and the whole event was over so fast that the people in the car I was riding in didn't even notice it either.
One time, however, I was lucky to be in a desert "sleeping under the stars" during a Persied shower, and it was just like the 4th of July fireworks, with a couple of fireballs that lit up the sky brighter than a full moon. In that case the rest of the folks I was camping with also saw the fireballs.
That said, a daylight visible fireball entering the sky in the evening (which BTW is the trailing side of the Earth as it goes through the solar system... much harder for anything to come into the sky from that angle) is going have to be viewed with some skecticism.