Inlagd av: BroncoBilly | Mars 17 2023 2: 38 utc | 135
So you mean that the looming climate change caused by fossil fuel is a myth, or do I minunderstand you?

Posted by: Northern Eve | Mar 17 2023 17:55 utc | 204

I myself have been accused of being a Russian Bot. It is a convenient excuse to dismiss anything that they don’t like.

Posted by: Elmer Fudd | Mar 17 2023 18:41 utc | 206

@Tom_Q_Collins | Mar 16 2023 22:11 utc | 107
Fuel may have been dumped, but my partner watched the video and says that is not what happened. The interceptors were flying at low speed to match the drone which meant minimum throttle settings. They intended to create wake turbulence ahead of the drone, which is a legitimate interception techniques as no sane pilot will attempt to fly through it. To accomplish this he would have gone to full throttle, while executing a tumbling rising turn, in front of the drone before flying over it. This would create a winding fuel rich contrail, that would look exactly like the video without dumping fuel. It is quite likely that the drone was then thrown up and into the interceptor, or, even more likely, that parts that broke off the drone due to turbulence struck the pusher propellor (meaning that the drone did not strike either interceptor.
As I have repeatedly explained, the drone is fitted with a Hartzell variable pitch pusher propellor. It struck something in flight, so the propellor blades were facing normally when they were damaged. The strike not only damaged the blade but the hub. This most likely resulted in the oil pressure used to change pitch by setting the angle of the blades being lost. When this happens the blades rotate automatically to their feathered position (facing axially), minimizing drag. The damage to the blade was sufficient to overcome the spring bias, meaning that the air pressure forced the damaged blade to rotate into reverse thrust mode. While the damage to the tip meant that it did not create much reverse thrust, the combination of a damaged blade, a feathered blade and two operating blades would have created a horrendous imbalance that would likely have destroyed the transmission had the operator not aborted the flight.

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 19:16 utc | 208

@Bill Smith | Mar 16 2023 21:34 utc | 101
Please see my reply to Tom_Q_Collins posted at Hermit | Mar 17 2023 19:16 utc | 208.
My partner’s (a retired Air force pilot and OF-6 amongst other things) thinks that likelihood is:
1) No fuel was dumped or collision intended or occurred. The Russian interceptors intended the drone to turn away from turbulence. The drone operator underestimated the effect, and flew through the wake turbulence, resulting in damage to the drone and an access door or other component detaching and striking the blade (Most likely because it matches all the available evidence and statements, and assumes competence on the part of the interceptors).
2) No fuel was dumped or collision intended. The Russian interceptors intended the drone to turn away from turbulence. The drone operator underestimated the effect, and flew through the wake turbulence, resulting in the drone being thrown into an interceptor damaging the propellor. (Matches all the available evidence, contradicts Russian narrative, and assumes incompetence on the part of the interceptors).
3) No fuel was dumped. A collision was not intended. The Russian interceptors intended to upset the drone using airflow disturbance, and misjudged distances causing a collision and damage to the drone propellor or parts of the drone broke off, striking the propellor. (Matches all the available evidence, contradicts Russian narrative, and assumes incompetence on the part of the interceptors).
4) No fuel was dumped. A collision was intended by the drone operator. The drone was used as a weapon, flying into the interceptor causing a collision and damage to the drone propellor or parts of the drone broke off, striking the propellor. (Matches all the available evidence, contradicts both narratives, and assumes incompetence on the part of the interceptors).
4) No fuel was dumped. A collision was intended by the interceptors. The Russian interceptors intended to upset the drone using their tailhook, which caused the damage to the drone propellor or parts of the drone broke off, striking the propellor. (Matches all the available evidence, but contradicts both narratives, and assumes incompetence on the part of the interceptors).
5) Fuel being dumped is not a standard intercept practice, and contra the nonsense being spoken here, is unlikely to cause anything worse than a flameout and restart, so unless it was symbolic, there was no point to it. (Does not match the available evidence, contradicts both narratives, and assumes incompetence on the part of the interceptors).

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 19:49 utc | 210

@Northern Eve | Mar 17 2023 17:55 utc | 204
It is not “looming”, “from the year 3480 BC, emissions by people have been higher than the amount it takes to negate the natural trend for the temperature to fall. From 3480 BC, forcing due to activities by people was stronger than the natural fall in temperature that would have eventuated in the absence of such activities. This makes the year 3480 BC most significant as a climate marker, and it makes sense to regard this both as the base for the temperature rise from pre-industrial and as the start of the Anthropocene.” … “the rise from pre-industrial to 2020 could be as much as 2.29°C, which would mean that the thresholds set at the Paris Agreement have already been crossed and the rise from pre-industrial may well exceed 3°C soon, in turn effectively making 3°C the (new) threshold that should not be crossed, the more so since humans will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise,” Carana Sam (2023-03-11). We are now in the Suicene. Arctic-News.Blogspot.Com (Arctic-News is an academic blog representing about 100 geophysicists, paleoclimatologists, climatologists, environmentalists, etc.)

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 20:12 utc | 212

Richard Steven Hack | Mar 16 2023 21:55 utc | 104
We live in an oligarchy, and the oligarchs work assiduously to ensure that questioning their rule is so far outside the Overton Window that people attempting to contradict them ,are rejected as madmen. So what do you think they should be doing?

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 20:23 utc | 214

@Mr. House | Mar 17 2023 16:27 utc | 197
Perhaps you have not yet realized that the best lies contain no falsities. They simply force the recipient to reach a fallacious conclusion by framing facts in a misleading fashion. We know that “bats are considered as the natural host of SARS-CoV-2 (Chan et al., 2013; Ren et al., 2020b; Zhou P. et al., 2020). Generally speaking, the intermediate host of SARS-CoV is masked palm civet, whereas the intermediate host of MERS-CoV is dromedary camel (de Wit et al., 2016). Host receptors mediate the entry of SARS-CoV-2 via binding to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of S protein. MERS-CoV uses dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4, also known as CD26) whereas SARS-CoV utilizes angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) (Kuhn et al., 2004; Raj et al., 2013).” [Jie Zhao; Wei Cui;Bao-ping Tian (2020). The Potential Intermediate Hosts for SARS-CoV-2. Frontiers in Microbiology. VOLUME 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2020.580137. DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2020.580137]] and that CoViD 19 has been found in waste water from March 2019 in Barcelona (should it be called Spanish SARS?) [Allen Nathan; Landauro Inti (2020-06-26). Coronavirus traces found in March 2019 sewage sample, Spanish study shows. Reuters.]. We also know that the USA researched weaponizing SARS-COV-2 [James Odell, OMD, ND, L.Ac (2020,06-30). Gain-of-Function Studies and SARS-CoV-2 Virus (COVID-19) Emergence. Biological Medicine Institute], that it may have escaped their notoriously leaky facilities [Fowdy Tom (2021-03-31). A leak from a Wuhan lab or a US military one? As the US and China trade barbs over Covid’s origin, the world waits for answers. RT and that inoculations saved millions of lives and reduced the worst effects of the disease in hundreds of millions more Watson Oliver J PhD et al. (2022-09). Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study. The Lancet. ARTICLES| VOLUME 22, ISSUE 9, P1293-1302,. Any narrative, from any source, that fails to account for the above facts is inaccurate and possibly a lie.

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 21:38 utc | 216

The Definition of Self-Harm
van Brugen Isabel (2023-03-08). NATO Outlines How It Will Respond if China Supplies Weapons to Russia. Newsweek.
Delusional. Russia has no need for Chinese help, and Europe has nothing more it can give Ukraine that could possibly benefit it.
Dress Brad (2023-02-23). How the US could respond if China gives lethal aid to Russia. The Hill)
By attempting to implement sanctions on a powerful competitor, in the unlikely event that the attempt succeeds, the US ensures that its targets develop an organic capability to produce those things subjected to sanctions, and precludes the target or those affiliated with it (which now exceeds NATO in purchasing power at parity) from acquiring those things from the USA or it’s hegemony in future, destroying it’s balance of trade if not the entire industry sector and potentially their economies). Sanctions, after all, only punish the suppliers that obey the sanctions. In the more likely case that they fail, Whether the sanctions succeed or fail, they show the weakness of the USA and it’s failing hegemony. Succeed or fail, the attempt to implement sanctions invites reciprocation (which if carefully targeted could easily devastate the NATO economies without meaningfully affecting China) and will Continue to drive the substitution of the US dollar and collapse of it’s influence. And may result in the forcible reconnection of the PRC (Taiwan), or as bas for the US, the loss of access to RoC production.
Not that extreme self-harming stupidity ever presented a significant obstacle to the US or NATO.

Posted by: Hermit | Mar 17 2023 22:40 utc | 218

It stands to reason that as Ukraine loses and it becomes rational to say support should stop, we will be warned of Russian influence operations saying so. NATO is desperate to win its first war and can’t cope with losing again, so it will say anything to cover it up and deny it.

Posted by: Clubofinfo | Mar 17 2023 23:13 utc | 220

David Sanger at the New York Times, behind the false claims against Russia and against Iran.
Do you even have to look him up in Wikipedia to know which race he is?
They hate Russia for aiding pro-Palestinian Iran and Syria. But also because Putin forbids homosexual brainwashing of children in schools, and is anti-Marxist. “Ultimately this war is about LGBTQ rights!” as the Biden regime proclaims.
Above all they hate that Putin criticizes mass immigration as a force that is destroying the West – the socialists rely on non-White votes to maintain their control of White nations, so they can keep stealing White people’s money. As Whites keep abandoning the Left more every decade, the Left needs more and more Black, Arab, Afghan, Latino invaders to prevent democracy.

Posted by: Tenet | Mar 19 2023 14:26 utc | 222