191–200 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MythBusters tested that, the outsides (of food) heat up first.
Oh well it must be the case then? Microwaves resonate with water molecules. If the surface is moist it will heat first. If not... Well it won't!
If they were tuned to water molecules, they’d be great at defrosting, and unable to do this: https://youtu.be/xwEQZw3KPWg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If liquid in your brain boils, wouldn't you also just turn blind (since the eyeball gets damaged by heat)
IIRC The pressure inside the eyeball is relatively high, and the fluid that is inside is very viscous - more like a gel. This could mitigate the effects.
Ok but Hacker News told me it was crickets and poor Russians was being demonized. Then, when I mentioned it again, butthurt users tried to bury it. Now we are back at it again?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From your first cite, there are some interesting tidbits to consider: Interesting to learn that USSR (& associated block) had set a safe exposure level of 0.010 mW/cm2, while in US the level was set in 1953 to, and remains at, 10 mW/cm2 for GHz freq. range. The paper notes (and it is worth quoting at length in the context of this thread): " It is essential to understand the historical context in which this episode oc…
This comment is the reason I come to HN. I wish I could offer one fifth of the utility of this commenter. Thanks!
He says that the US safe limit was arrived at by exposing hot dogs to radar transmitters and noting the lowest level at which they did not cook.
The Soviets did their experiments on developing chicken embryos in eggs and arrived at a much lower limit.
The Moscow embassy was subjected to a beam that was precisely set to the maximum safe US limit…continuously. Staff had to be rotated out every few months because they felt unwell.
Somewhere else I read that after the war, the US got all the good German rocket scientists while the Soviets picked up the electromagnetic experts. Dunno if this is true but would be interesting to find out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This presumes a conspiracy amongst officers forced into early retirement to create a convincing false narrative. What reason would the USIC have for lying about this? It seems unlikely that we would ever retaliate in kind, especially not after bringing attention to these incidents.
What reason would they have for telling the truth? A spy agency's official communications are always meant to elicit some response, it is never simply to disclose some information, since their default mode is to hoard information. In this case, their motive is obviously to create an image of Cuba as a devious enemy of the United States who is willing to hurt low level officers in chronic ways, a dishonorable enemy. T…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
again, what specifically would the US be trying to justify with such a false narrative around rew's? Not seeing the cost/benefit.
Their continued unilateral embargo of Cuba, deemed illegal by the UN, needs some constant justification. Especially in light of Cuba's diplomatic efforts in the rest of the world (most recently, dispatching Cuban doctors to help care for Covid19 patients all over the world, starting with the outbreak in Lombardia).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's categorically false to say intel agencies (or the slight "these people") never deal in truth. That is not how misinfo/disinfo works. Additionally, intel agencies play an integral role in providing truthful and accurate products, for govt and industry partners.
It would be more correct to say that they never deal in truth with the public. Of course they are a source of well researched and painstakingly obtained truths for government decision makers, but never for the public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their continued unilateral embargo of Cuba, deemed illegal by the UN, needs some constant justification. Especially in light of Cuba's diplomatic efforts in the rest of the world (most recently, dispatching Cuban doctors to help care for Covid19 patients all over the world, starting with the outbreak in Lombardia).
So according to this conspiracy theory, part of the mission was to evacuate all of our diplomats from Cuba to create the appearance that we were fleeing these supposed REW attacks?
There have been instances of false-flag operations, most notably the Gulf of Tonkin incident which served as pretext for an escalation of the Vietnam war. But it doesn't have to be to serve its purpose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their continued unilateral embargo of Cuba, deemed illegal by the UN, needs some constant justification. Especially in light of Cuba's diplomatic efforts in the rest of the world (most recently, dispatching Cuban doctors to help care for Covid19 patients all over the world, starting with the outbreak in Lombardia).
So according to this conspiracy theory, part of the mission was to evacuate all of our diplomats from Cuba to create the appearance that we were fleeing these supposed REW attacks?
Perhaps what they said happens to be absolutely true. Perhaps they have withdrawn their diplomats for fear of other attacks (e.g. poisoning, as Canadian authorities have apparently claimed). Perhaps they have withdrawn their diplomats in order to create some impression that they are in danger. Perhaps they have withdrawn their diplomats because they intend to do something that they think could put them in danger.
There are myriad possibilities, but until we get a chance to see classified reports or we get some independent reports about what is going on, we shouldn't speculate based on nothing more than the claims of spy agencies.
Edit to add: if the story would have been "Cuban intelligence agency reports how US diplomats faked symptoms to claim they were being attacked", would you believe this claim? Even as a Cuban? I for one would not - and just as I wouldn't believe this claim, I will also not believe the opposite claim from US intelligence.