This must have maimed thousands of marine mammals.
and those mammals will become a food source for tens of thousands of crustaceans and other creatures. Circle of life
An explosion that is nourishing to marine life, that is one way to see it.
M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
41–50 of 54 posts
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
The structure is engineered to survive a multitude of conventional threats intact. It is testing properties of the design rather than specific weapons per se. Also, these tests are intended to be non-destructive which impacts their design. Exercises where the US military uses decommissioned aircraft carriers and other large ships as targets are illustrative. They are basically unsinkable. You can hit them with torped…
> People chronically underestimate how difficult it is to get enough conventional explosive on target to sink a major naval vessel, even ignoring the extensive active defenses. American ships, certainly. Russian ships? Oh boy. The Ukrainians, a country with no navy to speak of, sunk the Russian flagship Moskva to widespread memefied acclaim, a bunch of other Black Sea assets and are now taking potshots at the shadow…
Well, there was that small incident that nearly sunk that ship: https://www.fbi.gov/history/cases-and-criminals/uss-cole-bom...
I'm guessing with a few more tries to get the right positioning and amount of explosives, those terrorists could blow up US ships as well as the Ukrainians do Russian ones.
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#43Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is almost certainly what it was. Wiki even has a photo of the USS Gerald Ford undergoing blast tests off of Ponce Inlet, and mentions that it registered as a M3.9 quake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford#Operational... If I had to guess, this is probably the USS John F. Kennedy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_John_F._Kennedy_(CVN-79)
I dont understand the purpose of using 40,000 lbs of TNT (0.2 kilotons) that registers as M3.9 quake - what kind of explosive payload is it simulating? the only thing that comes to mind, is the smallest yield settings of a modern tactical nuke B61-12
[deleted]
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
in civilized countries, industrially farmed animals live short, uneventful lives devoid of hunger and pain, injury and disease, heat and cold, then die instant, painless deaths. in the wild, the kind of animals we farm rarely get to die of old age - most end up being mauled and eaten alive by predators. their lives are only bad if you assume they possess adult human level of conscience, which they obviously don't.
I don't know how narrow your definition of "civilized country" is, but a majority of industrially farmed animals do not live the kind of lives you describe. I will link the EU regulation for laying hens for exemple, and maybe it will change your mind as to how farmed animals are treated? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... A few numbers I personally find telling: - 550 cm² caged area per h…
again, you're ascribing human level of consciousness to much simpler creatures driven primarily by instinct.
and you are aware that even humans, with our much longer lifespan and much higher cognition, can endure living in captivity for years just fine, right? hell, even outside of captivity, a double digit percentage of us doesn't have a single room of living space, and the only outside most of us see is covered with asphalt and concrete.
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait until you hear about industrialised farming, even mass production of crops are killing plenty of animals…
Is your point that that makes this better?
No, I’m saying we live in a horrible world but complaining about the marine life killed here is like worrying about plastic shopping bags.. I’d really rather we didn’t kill animals tbh, but when it comes to growing our food we have little choice right now.
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#47Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is your point that that makes this better?
No, I’m saying we live in a horrible world but complaining about the marine life killed here is like worrying about plastic shopping bags.. I’d really rather we didn’t kill animals tbh, but when it comes to growing our food we have little choice right now.
> I’d really rather we didn’t kill animals tbh, but when it comes to growing our food we have little choice right now
Several hundred million Indians would disagree
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is your point that that makes this better?
No, I’m saying we live in a horrible world but complaining about the marine life killed here is like worrying about plastic shopping bags.. I’d really rather we didn’t kill animals tbh, but when it comes to growing our food we have little choice right now.
Pesticide-less farming would disagree.
It works by introducing natural predators of the harmful pests into the plantation or by setting up traps for them (and many of these traps doesn't need any kind of chemicals, except water).
So, you can grow crops, fruits and veggies without playing Destroyer of Worlds. They came out more delicious and nutrient-rich, too!
Re: M 3.9 Experimental Explosion – 147 Km ENE of Ponce Inlet, Florida
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it's kinda whataboutism, but I made a similar comment on a video about an environmental crime (a copper mine had dumped an entire lake's worth of toxic sludge into a valley). The author of the mini documentary said something about how deeply disturbed he was and how he really thought humans were better than this. I thought that was kind of funny since, yeah the sludge lake is nasty as hell (and if the dam holdin…
You got it right: around ~70 billion land animals in 2013, 1-2.7 trillion fishes [0] and 25 trillion shrimps [1] But can you compare: - a fish that lived 1 year wild then died by pressure or asphyxia in a net during 15 minutes - a chicken that lived 40 days in a cage Instead of raw count, the Welfare Footprint Institute [2] propose a framework: > quantify animal welfare by systematically measuring animals’ affective…
>The Welfare Footprint Framework (WFF) is a method developed to quantify animal welfare by systematically measuring animals’ affective experiences—specifically, the intensity and duration of their negative (painful) and positive (pleasurable) states.
We got utilitarianism for chickens before GTA 6! But yeah that's roughly matches my own intuitions. A literal lifetime of suffering doesn't seem like the right approach here.
>25 trillion shrimps
Holy crap. That's not even a comprehensible number!
So I'm not against animal products (not even meat) per se, just against keeping them locked inside in cages.
(And also, it should go without saying, but I've seen the footage, I'm against paying psychopathic factory farm employees to treat them horribly...)
A return to traditional farming methods would obviously require a significant worldwide reduction in meat consumption though (and the prices would go up a lot I think), due to the increased land requirements.
I haven't given the fishing situation much thought (I don't eat fish), but that ties in with "stop devastating natural ecosystems" which seems pretty straightforward to me (just for basic self-preservation reasons).
There might be attention between "traditional farming" and that though, because having them on land instead of compacted in a giant industrial cube obviously requires way more space :/
I don't know, it doesn't seem like there's any good solutions here. (More vegan propaganda? That doesn't seem to be working very well...)