TROM Social | Community

UNRWA Employees in Gaza Forced to Eat Animal Feed to Survive, Agency Head Says

That staff for Gaza’s main humanitarian group can’t access real food is a show of the severity of Israel’s aid blockade.

^{Sharon Zhang (Truthout)}

Israel Destroyed North Gaza Hospital’s Water Tanks With Remote-Controlled Robots

“Tonight was one of the most difficult nights we have faced,” the facility’s head said amid Israel’s months-long siege.

^{Sharon Zhang (Truthout)}

like this

Study Finds 96% of Gaza Children Fear Imminent Death—And Half Want to Die | Common Dreams

Study Finds 96% of Gaza Children Fear Imminent Death—And Half Want to Die

"The world's failure to protect Gaza's children is a moral failing on a monumental scale," said one advocate.

^{brett-wilkins (Common Dreams)}

like this

in reply to Garibaldee

Maeve

in reply to Garibaldee • 1 year ago • •

The Gaza-based Community Training Center for Crisis Management, supported by War Child Alliance, surveyed more than 500 Palestinian children in Gaza last June and found that 96% of them fear imminent death, 92% are not accepting of reality, 79% suffer from nightmares, 77% avoid discussing traumatic events, 73% display signs of aggression, 49% wish to die because of the war, and many more "show signs of withdrawal and severe anxiety, alongside a pervasive sense of hopelessness."

Children aren't stupid. And any who survive will have a long road toward healing, both physical and mental.

And this is how "terrorists" (freedom fighters) are made.

in reply to Garibaldee

Zaktor

in reply to Garibaldee • 1 year ago • •

Tell me more, establishment power structures, how celebrating the vigilante killing of a mass murderer in a suit is demonstrating the deep moral rot in our society.

like this

Wine 10.0-rc2 Released

like this

in reply to John

Mactan

in reply to John • 1 year ago • •

good to see the hidraw fix made it in

in reply to Mactan

Heavybell

in reply to Mactan • 1 year ago • •

Yep. :P

PortsInfo, simple GUI for netstat/ss to view active network ports

PortsInfo is a simple desktop app that shows a list of active network ports on your linux systems.

In other words, it shows you which servers are running on your computer.

It's a graphical equivalent of running netstat -plunt in a terminal.

The app supports quick search with CTRL+F shortcut.

Hopefully this will be useful to newbies and system administrators.

GitHub - mfat/ports-info: Simple utility to show open ports on linux systems

Simple utility to show open ports on linux systems - mfat/ports-info

^GitHub

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

like this

in reply to mfat

Krafting

in reply to mfat • 1 year ago • •

Looks good ! Do you think you'll package the app as a Flatpak (if it is even possible, but probably) ?

in reply to Krafting

mfat

in reply to Krafting • 1 year ago • •

Yes there will be a flatpak too.

in reply to Krafting

mfat

in reply to Krafting • 1 year ago • •

You can now download an AppImage from the releases section.

Unknown parent

mfat

Unknown parent • 1 year ago • •

Haha yeah i really like it too :))

Europe's economic engine is stalling: The deindustrialization of Germany – POLITICO

Europe’s economic engine is stalling: Germany deindustrializes

The decline of the Continent’s largest economy will send shudders across the EU’s already polarized political landscape.

^{Matthew Karnitschnig (POLITICO)}

The quantum reason behind the solidity of matter

If atoms are mostly empty space, then why can't two objects made of atoms simply pass through each other? Quantum physics explains why.

^{Ethan Siegel (Big Think)}

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Zotora

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

The short version: It's the Pauli Exclusion Principle.

6 paragraphs from the end of the article they actually get to the point.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

like this

in reply to Zotora

slacktoid

in reply to Zotora • 1 year ago • •

Thank you!

in reply to Zotora

SurfinBird

in reply to Zotora • 1 year ago • •

Yeah they really make you work for this answer.

in reply to Zotora

davel

in reply to Zotora • 1 year ago • •

Electrostatic repulsion is also an indispensable component, so the answer obviously isn’t that short.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to davel

Zotora

in reply to davel • 1 year ago • •

To quote the article;

"The Pauli Exclusion Principle doesn’t only explain why matter is solid, but also why it occupies the amount of space that it does. Again: it isn’t just the uncertainty principle and electrostatic repulsion that’s responsible for volume; if matter were made of bosons, it wouldn’t occupy space in the same fashion that it does when it’s made of fermions"

in reply to Zotora

bitcrafter

in reply to Zotora • 1 year ago • •

Which, in turn, is a consequence of the spin-statistics theorem.

As for why the spin-statistics theorem is true, the answer is that, in a sense, we do not really know. This is because, although we have rigorous mathematical proofs that it is true, they rely on arguments that are very technical in nature, so they provide no real intuitive insight into why the theorem is true. (This theorem is actually really notorious for this; people have been trying for a long time to improve on the situation, but have yet to succeed in coming up with a satisfactory elementary proof of it.)

Dessalines via Electric Vehicles including hybrids and plug-ins

1 year ago • •

Dessalines
1 year ago • •

“Nothing like before” — China is out-competing the West on EVs

“Nothing like before” — China is out-competing the West on EVs - Friends of Socialist China

The following article, written by Paweł Wargan for Progressive International, examines the neverending accusations by Western media and politicians regarding China’s putative ‘overcapacity’ in electric vehicles (EVs).

^{Friends of Socialist China}

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via Security

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

Yearlong supply-chain attack targeting security pros steals 390K credentials

Multifaceted, high-precision campaign targets malicious and benevolent hackers alike.

^{Dan Goodin (Ars Technica)}

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via World News

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

U.S. occupation airman in Japan is sentenced to 5 years in prison for sexually assaulting a minor

U.S. airman in Japan is sentenced to 5 years in prison for sexually assaulting a minor

A U.S. airman stationed in Japan was sentenced to five years in prison Friday after being convicted of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor.

^{Arata Yamamoto (NBC News)}

in reply to muhyb

Sauerkraut

in reply to muhyb • 1 year ago • •

5 years in jail is protecting him?

in reply to Sauerkraut

muhyb

in reply to Sauerkraut • 1 year ago • •

Considering if they let Japan to trial him and he can get up to life-time prison, yes.

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via Technology

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

China’s hypersonic jet shatters Mach 6.5 speed in Gobi desert test

The scientists claim that the hypersonic aircraft prototype with a rather bulky body reached the speed of Mach 6.56 in flight test.

^{Abhishek Bhardwaj (Interesting Engineering)}

like this

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

cygnus

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

Uhh OK, they've matched something the X-15 was doing 65 years ago. What's the endgame here? Build a ludicrously inefficient passenger aircraft?

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to cygnus

catloaf

in reply to cygnus • 1 year ago • •

Seems like it. No mention of the fuel efficiency either, which leads me to assume it's significantly worse than existing flights.

in reply to catloaf

alcoholicorn

in reply to catloaf • 1 year ago • •

It probably is, the whole reason supersonic passenger flight looked feasible for a bit was that turbine technology hadn't caught up so slower jets weren't that much less efficient than supersonic jets.

But fuel concerns aside, it's kinda silly to compare a billion dollar fighter jet built with 60s technology to a 747-sized aircraft built for passenger flight with modern technology. Just wildly different environments, purposes, and resources.

like this

in reply to alcoholicorn

cygnus

in reply to alcoholicorn • 1 year ago • •

Based on the renderings (as there are no actual photos of this thing, other than the blurry-ass pic of what appears to be a rocket taking off vertically) it's nowhere near the size of a 747. It actually looks rather like an elongated SR-71, which makes me very skeptical that it can actually hit Mach 6.5 because ramjet engines have a hard limit due to something called "physics". That fact, plus the rocket-like takeoff, are why I think this is more like the X-15 and can't sustain its top speed for long.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

don't like this

in reply to cygnus

alcoholicorn

in reply to cygnus • 1 year ago • •

The rendering in interestingengineering article is a stock image. An older SCMP article gives a much weirder rendering which matches the whitepaper the lead researcher published on I-shaped hypersonic configurations.

So I have no idea what the blurry ass rocket pic is supposed to be, maybe it was a test vehicle for just the engine, maybe SCMP misattributed it, maybe the team dumped the whole "I-shaped configuration" thing.

Presumably any ram or scram-jet engine will require a rocket engine or other assist, assuming it's not a hybrid like the SR-71.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

like this

in reply to alcoholicorn

cygnus

in reply to alcoholicorn • 1 year ago • •

Nice, thanks for this extra background! My first thought was scramjet too, but it would be nice of them to mention how it takes off and lands.

The original rendering looks awesome, in a bonkers sci-fi kind of way.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

don't like this

in reply to cygnus

Eezyville

in reply to cygnus • 1 year ago • •

The X-15 was a rocket propelled aircraft. This is an air breathing aircraft.

in reply to Eezyville

cygnus

in reply to Eezyville • 1 year ago • •

scmp.com/news/china/science/ar…

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ Did it though?

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

It did

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ And I'm the queen of England.

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

Just a sad racist.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ No, just someone who can smell obvious bullshit. SCRAMjets basically don't work for any real world application, and can't. They inherently have utterly useless power to weight performance.

None of this shit works on anything that's not a scale model.

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

I guess we'll see won't we. Pretty much same thing was confidently said about lots of technology in modern use, like the high speed train network in China. Plenty of western geniuses derided it as not being cost effective.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ Oh, their rail network is impressive and I wish it was being copied elsewhere.

But this ... is not credible.

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

don't like this

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

Well since you obviously must be an aeronautics engineering expert, perhaps you can explain what aspects of the paper aren't credible for a dumdum like me

researchgate.net/publication/3…

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ plenty of published stuff on why scramjets aren’t practical and air breathing hypersonic transport is basically a white elephant even if you’re able to do it.

I’m not your butler

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

don't like this

in reply to Sarah Brown

Sarah Brown

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ the tl;dr is that you basically have super high energy air coming in at Mach 5. You then have to take all that energy away to get your fuel to burn in it, which barely gets you past break even. They create massive amounts of drag too and in order to function need to stay in the part of the atmosphere that’s thick enough to breathe, thus prolonging the drag and problematic heat generation.

Given the point of a scramjet is to get you into a suborbital trajectory for a rapid glide to your destination, the fact that they have inherently terrible thrust performance and only work when you’re in the bit of the atmosphere you desperately don’t want to be in, they’re uniquely terrible at it.

Turborockets solve these problems. Get up to Mach 5 on air, close the intakes, run on liquid oxygen, and CLIMB.

They’re lighter, more efficient, and faster t

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

like this

don't like this

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

Again, go ahead and explain what the paper about this specific jet gets wrong. Also, nobody is asking your to be anybody's butler. You made a claim, so now it's up to you to substantiate it.

I find it absolutely hilarious how arm chair aeronautics engineers such as yourself just assume that people building this stuff aren't aware of obvious arguments that even a layman such as yourself understands. Like it took your galaxy brain to figure this out, but the people actually making the jet aren't aware of this.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ I did.

Scramjets are fundamentally fighting Newton’s 3rd law. Slow air down by Mach 5 only to speed if back up to Mach 5 again. You’re burning tonnes of fuel to accomplish almost nothing.

If they have a practical scramjet vehicle (they don’t), then they should feel free to show the world, rather than posting vacuous bullshit on the Internet.

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

don't like this

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

Nowhere in the paper does it say that this is a scramjet. Meanwhile, obvious solution for a hypersonic vehicle would be to go to upper atmosphere at a lower speed, and then achieve speeds over Mach 5 where there is low atmospheric density. You really think that you're smarter than literally everybody working on this project, and it's absolutely hilarious.

Maybe take your own advice and stop posting vacuous bullshit on the internet pretending that you're an expert on things you have little understanding of.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Sarah Brown

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ “The paper”.

This isn’t a paper. It’s a blog post.

It’s no more a “paper” that is subject to any kind of scientific debate than some rando who said they made cold fusion in their microwave.

“Jumbo jet prototype”. Bless.

@☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

Nothing more adorable than internet randos acting like they're bonafied rocket scientists. Bless.

in reply to Sarah Brown

Eezyville

in reply to Sarah Brown • 1 year ago • •

The "paper" that OP is referring to is the one they posted a few levels up. It links to a researchgate paper that I believe is associated with the article. Just from a quick look at the paper, which is only 3 pages, they are talking about the design the aircraft uses to mitigate the negative effects that occur at hypersonic speeds. They refer to the Waverider design and modified it by including a High-Pressure Capturing Wing to improve lift. Waveriders are designed to conform to the shockwaves the vehicle produces at hypersonic speeds to reduce the drag from those shockwaves. When designing high speed aircraft you have to design around the shockwaves it will produce. This enhancement seems to improve the lift the vehicle creates at those speeds.

Also you aren't getting everything right in your arguments. Earlier you stated that scramjets are fighting Newton's 3rd law which states, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction". You do understand that all air-breathing

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

FleetingTit

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

Their high speed train network is impressive, but none of it was new technology when they built it. The first train sets they bought were Siemens Velaro D, a mature high speed train system that has been around in Europe for almost a decade prior.

It ISN'T cost effective, but in China that doesn't matter: what the state wants the state gets. No matter the cost. And I'm willing to bet that in 10 years time a lot of the stuff just doesn't work anymore, line speeds get reduced and stops cancelled due to infrastructure not being maintained.

We have seen chinese prestige projects fall into disrepair time and again, and their extensive transport network will see the same fate.

in reply to FleetingTit

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to FleetingTit • 1 year ago • •

China absolutely has done a lot of innovation in HSR tech. Building stuff is how we develop and improve technology. It's absolutely incredible that you think China hasn't innovated in this area.

It ISN’T cost effective, but in China that doesn’t matter: what the state wants the state gets. No matter the cost. And I’m willing to bet that in 10 years time a lot of the stuff just doesn’t work anymore, line speeds get reduced and stops cancelled due to infrastructure not being maintained.

That shows just how utterly clueless you are. The reason China wants to have the whole country connected by rail is because it stimulates the economy. It makes it easy to transport goods across the country, and for people to move around. To suggest that China would abandon its rail network is sheer idiocy.

We have seen chinese prestige projects fall into disrepair time and again, and their extensive transport network will see the same fate.

It's not a prestige project, it's critical infrastructure. You

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

geneva_convenience

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

High speed rail can be cost effective. High speed planes however cannot.

The amount of air resistance at higher speeds is insane. Instead of relying on wing lift for efficiency the entire aircraft has to remove all wings and it literally becomes a missile.

Efficient planes have long wings to create lift and cruise at lower speeds. This is the opposite where all lift is generated from the fuel.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to geneva_convenience

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to geneva_convenience • 1 year ago • •

Given that China has high speed rail all across the country, I suspect that there's going to be little market for short flights. I would expect this sort of a plane would go all the way to the edge of space where it doesn't need to worry about air density.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

geneva_convenience

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

That's going to cost a lot of fuel, maintenance and spare parts. Rebranding an ICBM as a passenger plane is not that big an invention.

The high spees rail is much more impressive as it can be used by the general population. Whereas these top speed planes will only be for the elites.

in reply to geneva_convenience

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to geneva_convenience • 1 year ago • •

It's not really an ICBM, it's likely a hypersonic glide vehicle. I imagine people building this stuff have thought of obvious things like cost of fuel and parts before trying to build it. Maybe it will work or maybe it won't, I think we'll learn something interesting one way or another.

I also don't think it'll just be for elites. All successful technology becomes cheaper over time, and it sounds like they're explicitly building a large capacity vehicle here. I imagine it's going to be a long haul vehicle that could go anywhere in the world in about an hour.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

I am willing to believe that this may have actually been developed...

But a better source sure would be neat.

Interesting/Wonderful Engineering both claim this was posted on 'Social Media' by the Chinese Academy of Sciences... with no link.

South China Morning Post also claims a video posted by CAS on social media... with no link, no video.

The english version of the CAS website is updated every couple of days, but this isn't on it.

Granted, they could be taking their time doing a proper translation.

Does anybody know where to see this video?

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

researchgate.net/publication/3…

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

I mean sure, thats a related research paper, but that isn't the same thing as an official press announcement or video saying 'Hey we actually built this thing, it works, take a look.'

I know that the CAS has specifically been researching/developing a hypersonic, passenger liner sized craft for around a decade... and the US has been doing the same with the SR 72, both attempting to develop ... something like turbo ramjet that transitions to scramjet at high speeds/altitudes.

But a link to a research paper from 6 years ago is not actually a primary source to what your original link claims, but does not actually source.

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

Sure, and if it works I'm sure we'll get videos and announcements at some point.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

Ok so 24+ hours later and I now see a few different websites I've never heard of before that basically have the same article as this:

scienceinfo.net/chinese-hypers…

Still no actual link to the apparently original source somewhere on some social media site.

Now whats being said is that this was a flight test that actually occured 3 years ago, and was classified until now.

And they do provide an image, and credit it to CAS (without an actual link, I still can't find this on CAS' english site, but again maybe they are still writing a proper English post?)

This is a test article, that doesn't appear to have any intakes for scramjet. I think I can make out two small rocket bells inside the thing, but the image quality is very low.

It's just a test article, launched by a rocket, that Inwould

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

Yeah, if they're reporting on the test from three years ago then it is basically similar tech to X15.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

So... then... you agree that this entire Interesting Engineering article you posted is wrong?

Are you going to apologize to Sarah Brown for calling her a 'sad racist' when she expressed doubt as to the veracity of the dubious article you posted?

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

That's assuming that the random article you found is correct, the veracity of which I can't verify any more than the interesting engineering article, and assuming they're talking about the same test. Sarah Brown didn't substantiate the doubts in any meaningful way, so no I'm not going to apologize for my assumption on what those doubts are based on.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

So, you just assumed a unsourced, unverified story is true because you have a bias in favor of China, and put the burden of proof onto the other person to disprove it, and are completely fine with calling the other person a 'sad racist', despite now admitting that the veracity of the claim they are skeptical of is in fact not well established.

This is the argument/personality style of a fanatic, a religious fundamentalist, a QAnon adherent, an Elon Musk simp.

This is how we got 'the Trump assasination attempt was staged!'

Please stop posting trash tier misinformation as 'technology news', please stop jumping to 'everyone who disagrees with me is rascist', this level of unjustified vitriol only makes you appear manic.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

So, to sum up, you found a completely unsourced article, and on that basis you're attacking the article I posted. The fact that you don't see the irony in that is really a cherry on top. However, you, unlike Sarah Brown, at least went to the trouble to attempt to substantiate your position.

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

sp3ctr4l

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

Neither of the two articles are well sourced.

But you acted like yours was credible, until I presented another one, whereupon you admitted they are both equally valid.

That's assuming that the random article you found is correct, the veracity of which I can't verify any more than the interesting engineering article...

That is to say, you cannot verify either of these articles at all, ie, they are both of dubious legitimacy.

You accused someone of being racist based of an article you admit you cannot verify, posted a bunch of related research papers that indicate, sure, they're trying to develop the thing your article claimed they did... but doesn't indicate that they actually developed it.

...

I can link you a patent for a triangular shaped aircraft, listed as filed by a US Navy Scientist that claims to outline how to create an electromagnetic, gravity negating field around the craft.

That would not be evidence that the US Navy officially announced that they basically built a UFO, that it works, and there

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to sp3ctr4l

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to sp3ctr4l • 1 year ago • •

But you acted like yours was credible, until I presented another one, whereupon you admitted they are both equally valid.

Every article I've seen aside from the one you found says the same thing. These articles come from fairly mainstream sources, so if somebody is arguing that this is impossible then they can at least provide some evidence for the claim.

You went through the effort of finding something that makes different claims, but it's in no way authoritative. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt saying that it's plausible.

You accused someone of being racist based of an article you admit you cannot verify, posted a bunch of related research papers that indicate, sure, they’re trying to develop the thing your article claimed they did… but doesn’t indicate that they actually developed it.

I accused someone of being a racist based on their vacuous comment that dismissed the claim without substantiating their position in any way. My reaction would've been quite different had Sara

But you acted like yours was credible, until I presented another one, whereupon you admitted they are both equally valid.

You went through the effort of finding something that makes different claims, but it's in no way authoritative. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt saying that it's plausible.

You accused someone of being racist based of an article you admit you cannot verify, posted a bunch of related research papers that indicate, sure, they’re trying to develop the thing your article claimed they did… but doesn’t indicate that they actually developed it.

I accused someone of being a racist based on their vacuous comment that dismissed the claim without substantiating their position in any way. My reaction would've been quite different had Sarah said something along the lines of I don't find the source convincing, here's another source claiming something different.

But to you, it would be, if China had done all those things.

No it wouldn't, but if a mainstream US publication came out and said that the US built an aircraft like that my first reaction wouldn't be to just dismiss it as impossible as Sarah did.

I am saying that you believe(d?) it credulously, without any skepticism, got very hostile with people who doubted its claim less tactfully than I did, and now you admit you got hostile based on a claim that you now admit is dubious, and shifted the burden of proof from the article making the claim to the skeptic questioning it.

Again, I had a hostile reaction to the style of argument. The same way you're having a hostile reaction to my style of argument.

Again, this is the logic of a fanatic.

Certainly would be, but that's not my actual position. My whole point from the start is that it is plausible that China may have developed what they say they developed. You're seemingly intentionally misrepresenting what I actually said to make me sound like a deranged lunatic.

If we just pick which dubiously sourced claims we believe based on vibes, truth stops existing.

And nobody is actually doing this.

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via World News

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

Swedish Mother Travels to China for Birth After Swedish Doctors Couldn’t Save Her Womb

Swedish mother flew to China for childbirth after doctors in Sweden can't handle her situation.

^{Li Jingyi (China Academy)}

like this

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

Jeena

in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • 1 year ago • •

You are literary posting about one woman.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

in reply to Jeena

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

in reply to Jeena • 1 year ago • •

No, I'm literally posting about a procedure that has high success rate in China while being questionable in Europe. The fact that this needs to be chewed up for you is phenomenal.

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via World News

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

Opposition lawmakers are alleging the full scope of President Yoon’s coup involved a months-long plot to trigger a “limited war” with North Korea

Was South Korea’s coup an attempt to restart the Korean War? : Peoples Dispatch

Opposition lawmakers are alleging the full scope of President Yoon’s coup involved a months-long plot to trigger a “limited war” with North Korea

^{Ju-Hyun Park (Peoples Dispatch)}

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via news

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

The FDA Hasn’t Inspected This Drug Factory After 7 Recalls for the Same Flaw, 1 Potentially Deadly

FDA Hasn’t Inspected This Drug Factory After 7 Recalls, 1 Potentially Deadly

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals issued seven recalls for pills that didn’t dissolve properly, records show. All were made at the same factory in India. But the FDA still hasn’t stopped the company from shipping other pills made there to the U.S.

^ProPublica

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ via United States | News & Politics

1 year ago • •

☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
1 year ago • •

The FDA Hasn’t Inspected This Drug Factory After 7 Recalls for the Same Flaw, 1 Potentially Deadly

FDA Hasn’t Inspected This Drug Factory After 7 Recalls, 1 Potentially Deadly

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals issued seven recalls for pills that didn’t dissolve properly, records show. All were made at the same factory in India. But the FDA still hasn’t stopped the company from shipping other pills made there to the U.S.

^ProPublica