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

881–890 of 943 posts

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

#881

Post by Izkata »

yencabulator wrote: post #852
narrator wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who want to know the most consistent UFOlogy angle that wasn't invented last week: Over on 4chan there was an alleged leaker and follow ups back in 2023 who says that there's an underwater ET mothership off the east coast that produces 3-d printed made to order small anti-gravity drones that launch and do various tasks to monitor us. Anything that approaches the underwater mothership is destroyed before the…

Ah, E115 aka Moscovium. Highly radioactive, with a half-life of under a second, claimed to be a stable building material. Straight to Bob Lazar levels of kookiness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materials_science_in_science_f... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscovium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lazar

> claimed to be a stable building material.

Element 115 wasn't a building material, it was supposed to exhibit antigravity properties under the right circumstances and was part how UFOs flew in such abnormal patterns.

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

#882

Post by Izkata »

zelon88 wrote: post #708
Loughla wrote: post #702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like - does the castle doctrine apply to defending yourself against someone not actually trying to enter your castle. It would be like shooting someone for taking pictures of your house from the street. I'm relatively certain law enforcement would have opinions about that.

I don't think you understand. It sounds like you think I'm talking about defending youself against a human. I am not. If a drone is trying to gain access to your home, do you have the right to defend against it using deadly force? Meaning; Force that would be deadly to a human attacker.

> Force that would be deadly to a human attacker.

There's plenty of states where you don't even have that.

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

#883

Post by eitland »

diggan wrote: post #557
jahnu wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even taking a picture of the moon with a typical phone results in a white mushy blob.

I like that parent said "200 meters" and then you give a "even" example with the distance of ~400,000 kilometers :)

Then again the moon is a few times bigger than a typical drone and much brighter.

The point is: the moon is easier to spot, moves less and emits more light.

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

#884

Post by someonehere »

For those thinking they’re off the shelf drones or some other type of consumer drone, they’ve been reported to be the size of an SUV.

Also I learned from the a recent JRE with Marc Andressen that the US really doesn’t make consumer drones domestically because of regulations but China is allowed to import them here. But still not to say someone isn’t making them at home on their own.

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

#885

Post by chatmasta »

narrator wrote: post #805
jandrese wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anything that approaches the underwater mothership is destroyed before they even know they're under attack. Let me guess, it is parked in the "Bermuda Triangle". It's easy to make theories when you are unburdened by evidence.

There used to be no evidence at all, but now you have David Grusch who was given explicit authorization to talk to people in unacknowledged special access programs about UAPs and he said under oath before congress that yes, there are crashed ET craft with biologics in them that have been recovered going back to the 1930s. https://x.com/cspan/status/1684217673716989958

Nothing about this guy is trustworthy, but it’s the “biologics” that sets me off. Who says this? It’s a nonsense word that sounds smart.

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

#886

Post by sleigh-bells »

jwarden wrote: post #320
trimethylpurine wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there was such a news source we'd all be reading it and agreeing with one another.

But there is such a reliable source, it is right in GP’s post — the AP article with the cosst guard interview. I don’t understand these comments. https://apnews.com/article/fbi-drones-new-jersey-a978470fa3b...

The actual quote from the Coast Guard says they saw some drones but they weren't a threat. The Congressman is that one that says the Coast Guard says they were followed by drones.

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

#887

Post by yencabulator »

Izkata wrote: post #881
yencabulator wrote: post #852

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, E115 aka Moscovium. Highly radioactive, with a half-life of under a second, claimed to be a stable building material. Straight to Bob Lazar levels of kookiness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materials_science_in_science_f... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscovium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lazar

> claimed to be a stable building material. Element 115 wasn't a building material, it was supposed to exhibit antigravity properties under the right circumstances and was part how UFOs flew in such abnormal patterns.

Can't search the images but one of the quotes is

> We enter the first order of business is checking for E115 then leaving the ship together to send it away.

Once again, E115 decays fully (multiple half-lifes, very little left) in mere seconds and is very radioactive.

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

#888

Post by zelphirkalt »

drjasonharrison wrote: post #688
xattt wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll stop you there and say there are videos. They just happen to be of naturally-occurring phenomena and captured by inept operators who don’t subscribe to Occam’s Razor.

had to look it up, the opposite of Occam's Razor, it is Hickham's Dictum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hickam%27s_dictum

Finally! A new word we can use to throw, when we get tired of saying "Occam's Razor"! Exciting times ahead!

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

#889

Post by solaire_oa »

For perhaps the first time in history, the world knew before being told: if you'd seen the sky, you had the scoop. The usual arbiters of newsworthiness, stripped of their accustomed role in filtering reality, had to be content with merely labeling it. It took them ninety minutes to agree on Fireflies. A half hour after that, the first Fourier transforms appeared in the noosphere; to no one's great surprise, the Fireflies had not wasted their dying breaths on static. There was pattern embedded in that terminal chorus, some cryptic intelligence that resisted all earthly analysis. The experts, rigorously empirical, refused to speculate: they only admitted that the Fireflies had said something. They didn't know what.

Everyone else did. How else would you explain 65,536 probes evenly dispersed along a lat-long grid that barely left any square meter of planetary surface unexposed? Obviously the Flies had taken our picture. The whole world had been caught with its pants down in panoramic composite freeze-frame. We'd been surveyed—whether as a prelude to formal introductions or outright invasion was anyone's guess.

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

#890

Post by hshshshshsh »

Vegenoid wrote: post #439
hshshshshsh wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you already have decided that this is safe and then are using "boring" explanations to back that narrative. This is easy cause nothing bad has happened in a while so it's less cognitive dissonance to go with that narrative. Have you even tried coming up with boring explanations on how this could be not safe? Also why specifically boring explanations? Plenty of incidents have dramatic explanations. How do…

> Also why specifically boring explanations? Without referring to anything specific about this case, things usually have boring explanations because what makes an explanation boring is that it is expected and empirically likely. “The most likely explanation is the most boring one” is practically a tautology, because “boring” practically means “likely” in regards to explanations of events.

Makes sense. Maybe we can use explanations that are hard to vary instead?
Post reply on HN