Jeff Matthews Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 16 minutes ago, Mallette said: No clue or interest what the first sentence referenced... Dave Short story is some person/people started an anonymous account on 4-chan going under the pseudonym of "QAnon," or "Q" for short. Q, posing as someone embedded in our government with the highest level of access to classified information, has been fomenting a belief by (probably) millions of followers that most of the elites, including Hillary and Obama, are masterminding human trafficking schemes to satisfy, among other things, their sordid tastes for pedophilia. Q followers believe Mueller is a front - pretending to be investigating Trump, while secretly filing something like 30 - 40,000 sealed indictments against these pedophiles, sex traffickers and perhaps including your typical corrupt fraudsters, too. "Judgment day is nigh." If that's not enough, it is said that Trump has the loyalty of military generals, who plan to try all these people for their crimes in the military courts instead of civilian courts should the need arise. The need might arise because our civilian courts are filled with judges who are part of the Deep State and who protect and facilitate the traffickers and criminals. I'm thinking it's an amazing con that someone could get millions of people to go along with such a scheme. To engage in this level of fantasy would even make Walter Mitty seem like a relative dullard. 😉 YMMV. In either case, Trump could level with the public on this, and it would be a service to the nation. Letting it go on is just not what a world-class leader of the people should do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 8, 2018 Author Share Posted August 8, 2018 Not familiar with this issue, so no comment. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 2 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said: I'm thinking it's an amazing con that someone could get millions of people to go along with such a scheme. You think that is amazing? Check out the 2016 election. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 8, 2018 Author Share Posted August 8, 2018 Gents, no issue yet...but PLEASE don't make me lock my own thread. Stay on topic or stay away. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, Mallette said: Gents, no issue yet...but PLEASE don't make me lock my own thread. Stay on topic or stay away. Dave Heck, Dave. There's hardly anyone left around here to offend. 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2K Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 3 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said: Short story is some person/people started an anonymous account on 4-chan going under the pseudonym of "QAnon," or "Q" for short. Q, posing as someone embedded in our government with the highest level of access to classified information, has been fomenting a belief by (probably) millions of followers that most of the elites, including Hillary and Obama, are masterminding human trafficking schemes to satisfy, among other things, their sordid tastes for pedophilia. Q followers believe Mueller is a front - pretending to be investigating Trump, while secretly filing something like 30 - 40,000 sealed indictments against these pedophiles, sex traffickers and perhaps including your typical corrupt fraudsters, too. "Judgment day is nigh." If that's not enough, it is said that Trump has the loyalty of military generals, who plan to try all these people for their crimes in the military courts instead of civilian courts should the need arise. The need might arise because our civilian courts are filled with judges who are part of the Deep State and who protect and facilitate the traffickers and criminals. I'm thinking it's an amazing con that someone could get millions of people to go along with such a scheme. To engage in this level of fantasy would even make Walter Mitty seem like a relative dullard. 😉 YMMV. In either case, Trump could level with the public on this, and it would be a service to the nation. Letting it go on is just not what a world-class leader of the people should do. This explains the 2016 election results. Keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 8, 2018 Author Share Posted August 8, 2018 1 minute ago, Jeff Matthews said: Heck, Dave. There's hardly anyone left around here to offend. 😉 Not a question of offence. Question is TOS, which I have to enforce. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 1 minute ago, Mallette said: Not a question of offence. Question is TOS, which I have to enforce. Dave I know. I was just commenting in a tongue-in-cheek way that the TOS seem to have driven off almost everyone. It's becoming crickets around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 8, 2018 Author Share Posted August 8, 2018 44 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: I was just commenting in a tongue-in-cheek way that the TOS seem to have driven off almost everyone. It's becoming crickets around here. I understand. We did attempt an outside, no holds barred, moderator free environment which is still there. However, some folks key to the old places were no shows so it went to sleep as well. You know I love such discussions, even though I prefer other topics to politics most of the time, but this is no longer the place for such things. Good to go elsewhere for those non-audio "fixes" if enough others wanted to do so. As I said, it's still out there...just silent. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted August 8, 2018 Share Posted August 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, Mallette said: As I said, it's still out there...just silent. Yeah, I know. Sometimes, I wonder if we're just all "talked-out." It's not like I need to find a place to debate ad nauseum like we used to. Believe it or not, I like the topics you post (mostly, anyway), but you've been grazing in other pastures as far as I can tell. Your activity here has been waning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 9, 2018 Author Share Posted August 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said: Your activity here has been waning. Yes, but not due to social activities. Family and personal issues, plus my intensive involvement in civic issues and my NPO, are keeping me busy. Dave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbert Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said: Heck, Dave. There's hardly anyone left around here to offend. 😉 Where's our resident Snow Flake?, aka Karate Kid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 9, 2018 Author Share Posted August 9, 2018 12 minutes ago, Gilbert said: Where's our resident Snow Flake?, aka Karate Kid Good question. Really miss discussions with him. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codewritinfool Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 On 8/7/2018 at 8:22 PM, dwilawyer said: What am I missing? It was 50 KM above the base, that is the mesosphere, which is where meteors burn up. This, and besides, it was so fast (54,000 MPH is what I read) that it couldn't have been mistaken for an ICBM, at least I don't think so. ICBMs reach a ballpark speed of 16,000 MPH in space, IIRC, and are slowed to around 10,000 MPH way down in the atmosphere. Plus, they're estimating 2.x kilotons equivalent. The one over Russia was estimated at 400+ kilotons, so this was just a normal meteor burning up like normal. Just happened to be 50 km over a base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codewritinfool Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 On 8/7/2018 at 2:44 PM, Jeff Matthews said: On a side note, did you see the data collected for meteorites? They record the events for ones down to 55 grams. Interesting. Did you know that you can dredge your rain gutters with a magnet and pick up hundreds of meteorites? Pro tip: Put the magnet in a plastic bag first, then turn it inside out to keep the meteorites in the bag as you pull the magnet away. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 9, 2018 Author Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 hour ago, codewritinfool said: This, and besides, it was so fast (54,000 MPH is what I read) that it couldn't have been mistaken for an ICBM, at least I don't think so. It is my hope our defenses do not "think," but know. Neither you nor I can know what the potential speed of an unknown object or device means. Again, not being alarmist, simply not making assumptions based on what we do not know. Knowing something is not a conventional ICBM and knowing precisely what it is, or its intentions (if any) are two different things. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted August 9, 2018 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2018 20 minutes ago, Mallette said: It is my hope our defenses do not "think," but know. Neither PRECISELY. You don't want a misile alert system that sends up an alert every time a meteor enters the atmosphere. We don't want the Russians to have that kind of system either. Otherwise you will eventually have a situation where one or the other will say "whoops, my bad, that meteor that blew up 40 or so KM above us, we thought that was one of yours, please disregard the 3 we fired back in retaliation, let us make it up to ya." Meteors, whether they explode, or fireball or burn to dust, are not viable on radar for ICBMs (S band), or any other type of missile for that matter. There is a network of VHF radar stations that detect meteors (which is low frequency radar) including the ones that explode. They are moving so fast they create doppler shift and other spectra only viable on LF radar. It is my understanding they don't actually detect the actual meteor, but the trail of the meteor and the system calculates the height, speed, etc.. They can't see missiles. Likewise, our early warning systems focus on stuff that looks like a missle, presumably over a large range of size, speed altitude, etc. I would be concerned if a jet blew up 40,000' over the base, or crashed 400 miles away and they had no idea. But that didn't happen. A meteor blew up 43.something KM above the base (and apparently several miles uprange) and the fellas who are at a base that is mostly underground and designed to withstand, who knows what level of blast, didn't feel a thing. Our AGEIS destroyer ships using AN/SPY radar can blow a ballistic missle out of the sky (they start to see the missle 400 miles away, 1x per second horizontal sweep, 15x second vert sweep) and they use S band to find, and X to target, neither of those see meteors. Even if they could, a meteor traveling at 900 miles per second would appear as a dot and be gone on the next sweep. I guess the best analogy is the local weather radar, you want it to shows tornadic wind, rain fall, hail, etc. You really don't want it showing air traffic and meteor trails. Likewise, you don't want a missle defense system showing how hard it is raining 800 miles away. To my knowledge we know about every North Korean missle test within a split second of ignition, and we have not missed a single one yet. Seems like everything is working exactly the way it should be? I would be more concerned with the measly advance warning they have developed for tornados that do in fact kill people every year, or a total lack of predictability of earthquakes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted August 9, 2018 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2018 11 hours ago, Mallette said: Last word on this, unless something new develops. Even if all the reports and buzz were in error, once something like this penetrates to widespread, reasonably credible sites it is my belief that USAF or other DOD agency should respond in an official capacity...as in the police "Nothing to see here, folks. Go on with your business." Dave I thought they did? The articles say base commander was surprised at the calls asking if they were ok. The Australian reporter whipped this up, Even Fox News bit and repeated story without any checking. The "media" whipped it up and soon had AFB "struck by meteor." Finally someone decided to do some "reporting" and called to ask. Base commander said "Yep, were ok. Nothing to see here." They probably didn't feel or see anything, they are in 24 hours of Sun right now. Maybe you are right, maybe they should be a little more out front. My perspective is this was yet another bogus "new story" and we should give a base commander who lives underground and is probably one of first 5 targets of Russians a little slack and take into consideration he has more important things to think about that are within his control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted August 9, 2018 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2018 10 hours ago, Mallette said: Fully concur. No clue or interest what the first sentence referenced, but this part is what I was talking about. When a sensitive U.S. base is reported to have a near hit by something, DOD should say "It didn't happen" if it is fake news. To fail to do so is to create doubt. Dave So we should hire 1000 people to scan the tens of thousands of articles pumped out by all of the internet "news" sites to find inaccurate articles about the US Military and deny them? Why not put this where it belongs, on the media. Instead of Fox News repeating the Australian story, why didn't they call their Pentagon reporter and say "can you get someone to comment on this." The US Govt. reported the explosion, Rocket Ron, someone decided to look up the coordinates and noticed the US has a base near there, puts out an article "explosion" "hit" "impact" near AFB. The source, Rocket Ron's tweet was pretty clear it was 43+ KM above earth. Even I could figure out this was a non-event, and a relatively common occurrence. Space.com put a first year "reporter" on it who said the meteor "struck 43 KM NORTH of the base." Apparently the college sje just graduated from this year (yes really, 2018 grad) teaches that if something happens in the sky it is perfectly fine to say it is "North of here." Frankly, I would rather have the DoD and USAF looking for missles instead of looking for and correcting the bad reporting of recent journalism grads. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 9, 2018 Author Share Posted August 9, 2018 7 hours ago, dwilawyer said: So we should hire 1000 people to scan the tens of thousands of articles pumped out by all of the internet "news" sites to find inaccurate articles about the US Military and deny them? No, I said nothing like that. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.