Even if the meteor had a straight tail, from the evidence available, a scientist could not fully conclude it was actually a meteor.
There is always a possibility of it not being one. The wavy tail has only enlargened this margin.
Stuart needs to realise there is a point where scientific assesment needs to back off. If your right, your right, you should have enough confidence in your own assesment, to allow the debate to finish. This means not only to stop "baiting" for more info, but to actually disregard the "baiting" you are receiving.
Lets face it, if you were supplied with every bit of data to the event, you still could not confirm it as real. Therefore as hard as this may be, you can not disprove that is not a meteor.
Given that, I would assume the lighter path of, "I think not, but congrats if it is" approach a bit more site relevant... By all means in the eyes of science and given the correct environment, shread an image apart and reveal its flaws.
Maybe it is just me, but given the poster was not really claiming any fame, just posting an image, even if I knew the picture was a bit off, I still wouldn't smash the person down over it... Which is what you are doing, to someone whom doesn't work in this field.
On a side note, you do see to be almost "Trolling", as you know you are not is the same catagory of knowledge as the poster, your analysis has been posted, yet you still seem intent on pursuing this till the envitable end of
" OK, you right, it's not a meteor "...
Call it a day mate.
