Friday, November 19, 2010

Back to the Contrail

Per a tip in the previous post from a fellow blogger, here's Jack Cashill writing about the 'mystery missile':
Had the Chinese wanted to use more than words to show their ability to strip America of its creature comforts, they could not have chosen a more symbolic way than an EMP – electromagnetic pulse –attack on, say, a cruise ship like the Splendor.

As it happens, the Splendor lost its power early Monday, Nov. 8, some 44 miles offshore and roughly 200 miles south of San Diego. No media report that I could find questioned the official "fire in the engine room" explanation. It may even be true.
Leave it to Jack Cashill to put two and two together and venture where others dare to tread. He readily admits this may be nothing more than a coincidence but at the same time it's weird to have a massive cruise ship develop a strange engine room fire Monday morning then have a frenetic "mystery missile" story from the same general area break the next morning.

While there was plenty of press about the Splendor most of it was about the sick and bitter passengers and not what caused the fire, one that seemed to disable even the auxiliary power system. There was indeed a fire--passengers reported smelling smoke, and the NTSB will investigate, but while it's proper for the press to wait for results from such an investigation before conclusively closing their story lines, it's also prudent for them not to rely solely on the NTSB by running their own parallel investigations. It's one of the main reasons we have a free press. Then again it's also proper for them to wait for a reasonable explanation or do their own investigation before calling a contrail a missile launch.

Cashill's main point was to illustrate the relative lack of curiosity from the main press about these weird happenings (usually when Democrats hold the government) once a generally-accepted explanation is issued. Such was the case when the feds explained under Clinton that the PETN and RDX found on seatback upholstery, cargo area, and the cabin floor of TWA 800 was caused by a "bomb-sniffing dog training exercise" over a month earlier in St. Louis--as if it's completely normal for a passenger aircraft to fly around for weeks with traces of explosive residue on it. As Time pointed out at the time, that was enough to throw cold water on anything aside from a mechanical cause going forward and indeed, instead of doing any in-depth investigations into the dog claim most of the media lost interest beyond that point as the circumstantial evidence for terrorism was 'removed'.

Lo and behold, one of the TWA 800 skeptics who failed to buy that story (or the zoom-climb fantasy) is back to work on this event:
Glen Schulze, whose technical expertise proved very helpful in the TWA Flight 800 investigation, sent the FAA a Freedom of Information Act request within three days of the sighting.

In that Schulze has already experienced roadblocks unique to his own situation, allow me to cite his references for those who might be interested in following up on their own.
It's true he's an engineer; it's also true there are many engineers and architects convinced 9/11 was a conspiracy so his curriculum vitae doesn't necessarily make him correct. That said, he's certainly correct in issuing a FOIA on this event for the radar tapes as they could provide a conclusive answer to the mystery in short order. Has anyone in the mainstream press done so?

Personally I think the answer is going to be a contrail, as shown by this GOES satellite image taken about the same time as the mystery event..

Notice the feature is almost perfectly aligned with UPS flight 902 from Honolulu, and ends about 35 miles offshore, which would fit a descent out of the contrail-producing altitudes for an easterly arrival at Burbank Ontario. It was illuminated by the angle of the setting sun.

But there's absolutely nothing wrong with confirmation--about this or the cruise ship. That's what hard-hitting journalists used to win Pulitzers for doing. Well, at least sometimes.

MORE 11/20/10

This site gets more convincing every day. Has Beck seen it yet?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I doubt an EMP would not have gone unnoticed. I do believe we have not learned the cause of the Carnival Splendor's fire. I believe the ship has six diesel engines split in
two engine rooms (forward and aft). I believe each engine powers
one generator. The generators total can output over 50 megawatts
enough for a small city. I have not been able to find detailed
information on the Splendor design.

I read a post by the Ships Cruise Director who reported that while he
was on the bridge asking the Captain what to tell the passengers; the
chief engineer appeared totally soot covered and he told the Captain
that the Main Switching Board was
gone…finished…fiinished…finished. Then he took the Captain
aside and during that conversation the Captain picked up a stool and
flung it across the bridge. Later the Captain apologized.

I can not find that quotation today. I believe that quotation was on
Twitter under Carnivalcruises.

Unless there was a major design flaw in the ships design there is no
apparent reason why all the generators would fail.

Note also HAL complained that our NTSB could not investigate as the
ship is Panamanian. The Panama Coast Guard did invite the US Coast
Guard to help with their investigation. And the Coast Guard invited the NTSB to help them.

I sure wish the media would report on the cause and quit writing about toilets overflowing.
Lawrence Lewis
Cape Coral, Florida

A.C. McCloud said...

Thanks for the info Lawrence. I don't think it was an EMP either, but like you find it hard to believe there's no redundancy on such a massive vessel. And if they had aux power why was there basically no power?

Debbie said...

More today suggesting it was a Chinese missile:

FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
Experts:

Mystery contrail was from Chinese missile

'Muted response' was decision 'made by the president himself'

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=230425

My gut told me it was not a contrail....

Debbie
Right Truth
http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

A.C. McCloud said...

Debbie, I really think our friend Lawrence here, and Cashill, are onto the real mystery and maybe conspiracy (if one exists). Why and how could a cruise ship lose all power? What started the fire? And imagine that happening to an aircraft carrier.

As the contrail science guy points out--and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine--is the illumination of the contrail. It's consistent from end to end, an orangish color caused by the sun rays bouncing off the bottom of the plume. If the plume was coming off the ocean in the foreground it would not have been evenly lit. It's a case closed for me.

Yet in the frenzy over the contrail the press almost entirely avoided concentrating on the reasons why the Splendor was disabled. As Cashill says, there may indeed be no 'there' there, but we may never know because the story got lost in the contrail coverage. Interesting, that.