391–400 of 943 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The military isn’t allowed to shoot down drones in the US. There was a WSJ story last month about drones flying over Langley for 2 weeks. All the general could do is stand on the roof and watch
Yeah they can only shoot down unidentified weather balloons.
A lot of people here are writing this off as hysteria. I don't know if this is anything nefarious or not, but I would note that being suspicious of these things is often a good thing, not a bad thing. Even Michael Shermer, the famed skeptic, wrote a book on how suspecting conspiracy is often a valid default stance. Abstract from his book: "One reason that people believe these conspiracies, Shermer argues, is that eno…
I do find it rather hard to make sense of the antagonism here. My only guess is people feel the need to distance themselves from the "sheep" and do so by ridiculing them from their ivory tower. In some cases it's the same thing, but there's a political bent added to it ("some people" from "that side"). Sad to see what HN is slowly devolving into.
Almost no chance these are not US military. The drones have been appearing very consistently, if there were the slightest concern of foreign military drones, then military jets would have been scrambled to intercept - there have been no such reports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hiding in plain sight is also a thing.
So is sowing mass hysteria and deepening distrust in authorities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are assessed by the Pentagon yesterday to not originate in the US or any other nation To be clear, they stated that “these are not US military drones”, and that they have no evidence that they are from a foreign entity or adversary, which is very different from what I interpreted you as saying.
You interpreted me as saying?
[flagged]
I mean there were 12 drones following a Coast Guard lifeboat. Doubt the Coastguard crew mass hysteria'd themselves into thinking 12 nearby 737s were following their boat (unless they just raided some Colombian drug submarine prior to coming into port). https://apnews.com/article/fbi-drones-new-jersey-a978470fa3b... And the official government response is super odd. Police were following a drone (that is totally safe…
Somebody died near where I live because LifeFlight aborted after a drone was spotted by the heli. Firefighters abort flights for drones too, it's really serious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What 'commercially available' aircraft can operate for at least 6 - 7 hours, sized up to 6 feet, not always detectable by FLIR, evade detection by helicopters, don't always use lights, have a range of at least 15 miles, are not obeying FAA line of sight regulations for night flights (all per the statewide briefing provided to NJ legislators yesterday: https://x.com/DawnFantasia_NJ/status/1866896860578717994 ) , and a…
> are assessed by the Pentagon yesterday to not originate in the US or any other nation To be clear, they stated that “these are not US military drones”, and that they have no evidence that they are from a foreign entity or adversary, which is very different from what I interpreted you as saying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are assessed by the Pentagon yesterday to not originate in the US or any other nation To be clear, they stated that “these are not US military drones”, and that they have no evidence that they are from a foreign entity or adversary, which is very different from what I interpreted you as saying.
You interpreted me as saying?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can see these things with satellites
Or airplanes. Like the ones flying overhead all the time in N.J.
https://felt.com/explore/us-electric-power-transmission-line...
(Account signup required.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are assessed by the Pentagon yesterday to not originate in the US or any other nation To be clear, they stated that “these are not US military drones”, and that they have no evidence that they are from a foreign entity or adversary, which is very different from what I interpreted you as saying.
You interpreted me as saying?
This statement logically means that:
* The Pentagon assessed (determined) that X is true
* Where X is defined as "The drones do not originate in the US or any other nation"
That is different than the statement:
* The Pentagon has stated that (a) X is false, and (b) they have no evidence that Y is true.
* Where X is defined as "The drones are US military assets"
* Where Y is defined as "The drones originate from and/or are assets of a foreign nation or adversary."