Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 943 posts

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#931

Post by obmelvin »

ANewFormation wrote: post #929
obmelvin wrote: post #928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't made any claims about the recent sightings. Some have clearly been planes and people are just looking up more. My original point was and is that there are many laws restricting what the military is able to do domestically.

I do challenge you to show me the law stating that the military cannot engage unidentified and non-responsive potentially hostile vessels breaching controlled airspace, let alone with full authority from the CIC. That's just about the dumbest talking point ever. Though even if such law exists, which it doesn't, then like any law in modern times, or even increasingly the Constitution, if the political establishment de…

You're arguing with me about points I haven't made.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#932

Post by gregw2 »

j_timberlake wrote: post #731
gregw2 wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"How can anyone know these aren't a threat without knowing whose they are?" Easy. They didn't say they don't know whose they are. They could belong to a private contractor who is paid by the military but the military doesn't own the drones nor company (plausible deniability /outsourcing.) Or they could be a friendly country (e.g. UK) red-teaming the US with our consent. I've never heard anyone apply the Five Eyes hor…

"They didn't say they don't know whose they are." The FBI explicitly said they didn't 2 days ago. There's a possibility the FBI is being purposefully left in the dark by other feds, or lying under oath at risk of prison time for perjury, but without any evidence that's just one more of MANY conspiracy theories here.

Fair point. Another option is that the FBI knows more about the nature of the drones (size, lights, other identifiers, etc) either via visual identification or other sensors (classified, at related military installations nearby) sufficiently that they can be confident that there are no, say, explosives or guns attached and thus the drones are "safe". But they still don't know whose they are.

Another option is a variation of the above, where they might have a "person or company of interest" that is too soon to talk about, but they suspect the game being played is that they are owned by some tech startup who is trying to fly their/others drones around to drum up business by scaring people to in turn secure huge military contracts for drone-sensing and drone-countermeasures which they can sell as a solution to the problem/risk they've created. Am I too cynical?

Or as the original poster implied and some statements I've seen are clearer about than others, the wording is just sloppy in distinguishing between: "There is no evidence these drones are a threat/harmful" (ie they have been non-violent, so far) vs "There is not a threat here" (of any kind now or future... "keep calm and carry on"/"Don't panic... because we told you so; we don't see any particular reason".)

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#934

Post by LinuxBender »

LinuxBender wrote: post #906
LinuxBender wrote: post #5

Seems like an opportunity for a training exercise. Have the FAA put a TFR in place and let the national guard interdict, ECW and such. Take control, land it in the x-ray scanner, check for explosives then take it apart and get telemetry data. The US taught Ukraine how to do this with great success. If no joy on ECW, disassemble them in the sky. If the drones were legit they would be broadcasting their ID as would the…

Most plausible theory I have heard yet. [1] disclaimer: prepper channel, some here may perceive it as nutty. Nuke sensors would explain why the guard is not touching them. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaEPvrq5VFM [video][21 mins]

Another update and Trump may have spoken too openly about this. [1] Ignore the nutty aspects of this or comment in his YT channel. CP's name is Nate.

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c2tMH4Qn1w [video][35 mins]

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#935

Post by llamaimperative »

ANewFormation wrote: post #927
AlexeyBelov wrote: post #919

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you link a map?

A web search will turn up a bunch. Here's one - https://www.gmcmap.com

Looking at the history of the one counter currently showing elevated levels (northjerseymike), it looks like the current value is well within variance of historical levels. I jumped back 10, 50, and 100 pages and without plotting, it didn't seem anything is notable about more recent data.

Also... why wouldn't the feds just say they're inspecting infrastructure and avoid the entire question...?

IMO this is almost certainly a commercial LIDAR mapping effort plus right wing conspiratorial hysteria.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#936

Post by LinuxBender »

LinuxBender wrote: post #934
LinuxBender wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most plausible theory I have heard yet. [1] disclaimer: prepper channel, some here may perceive it as nutty. Nuke sensors would explain why the guard is not touching them. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaEPvrq5VFM [video][21 mins]

Another update and Trump may have spoken too openly about this. [1] Ignore the nutty aspects of this or comment in his YT channel. CP's name is Nate. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c2tMH4Qn1w [video][35 mins]

As a follow up, it's being communicated that we knew about these drones for 6 years. Not sure I buy it. They have been showing up in multiple states, not just the army post that had the TFR. Or it's mass hysteria.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#937

Post by ANewFormation »

llamaimperative wrote: post #935
ANewFormation wrote: post #927

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A web search will turn up a bunch. Here's one - https://www.gmcmap.com

Looking at the history of the one counter currently showing elevated levels (northjerseymike), it looks like the current value is well within variance of historical levels. I jumped back 10, 50, and 100 pages and without plotting, it didn't seem anything is notable about more recent data. Also... why wouldn't the feds just say they're inspecting infrastructure and avoid the entire question...? IMO this is almost cert…

You need to go by date, not whatever pages are. When I made that post, levels were around 400 which is dangerously high.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#938

Post by llamaimperative »

ANewFormation wrote: post #937
llamaimperative wrote: post #935

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the history of the one counter currently showing elevated levels (northjerseymike), it looks like the current value is well within variance of historical levels. I jumped back 10, 50, and 100 pages and without plotting, it didn't seem anything is notable about more recent data. Also... why wouldn't the feds just say they're inspecting infrastructure and avoid the entire question...? IMO this is almost cert…

You need to go by date, not whatever pages are. When I made that post, levels were around 400 which is dangerously high.

The pages are sorted by date... I ended up going back roughly 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months.

A single value at a moment in time doesn't mean anything at all. You need to see the variance over time. And you need to trust the source data. The only "dangerously high" readings I saw were from counters that had no name, no history, no identifier, no additional values.

This theory makes no sense from the get-go and this "evidence" is extremely low quality.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#939

Post by ANewFormation »

llamaimperative wrote: post #938
ANewFormation wrote: post #937

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to go by date, not whatever pages are. When I made that post, levels were around 400 which is dangerously high.

The pages are sorted by date... I ended up going back roughly 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. A single value at a moment in time doesn't mean anything at all. You need to see the variance over time. And you need to trust the source data. The only "dangerously high" readings I saw were from counters that had no name, no history, no identifier, no additional values. This theory makes no sense from the get-g…

Ok so you went back a day, saw the ongoing sky high readings from multiple sources which you were apparently trying to claim didn't exist, now acknowledge they exist, and now you want to claim they don't mean anything. Ok.

You sort of people are so weird.

Re: Mysterious New Jersey drone sightings prompt call for 'state of emergency'

#940

Post by jazzyjackson »

stevenhuang wrote: post #869
IAmGraydon wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And another event from the 1800s of craft that is era-appropriate, mimicking airships of the time: You do realize that's because those too were cases of mass hysteria, and the delusions matched what they knew to be airborne at the time - airships. Now all you see on the news is drones and suddenly everyone is having drone-flavored mass hysteria. > I've studied the phenomenon from all angles. Give me your most convin…

Here's a report re light orb phenomenon buzzing a FedEx cargo plane. https://www.narcap.org/blog/narcaptr20 News article of event: https://nypost.com/2021/10/27/video-captures-pulsating-ufo-d... Interview with the pilots: https://youtu.be/HXLFC-hwQ6M?si=TEcOt3yTrSi1_VIh There are countless such documented sightings throughout history.

"The pilots have not come forward with their identities, according to the Daily Mail, due to stigma surrounding such controversial events."

Come on

Post reply on HN