- Status
Buck
5,000+ posts
little alien on campus
SKYNET:
'"The simulation results suggest that a 10-megaton warhead – modestly powerful by today’s standards – could create a serious threat to satellites if it detonates at an altitude of 80 km (50 miles)," according to SCMP's report. "The blast could turn air molecules into radioactive particles and produce a cloud with a shape similar to an upside-down pear."'
'The U.S. military, as a whole, already has multiple programs in the works now to develop these kinds of distributed space-based capabilities, to support early warning and missile-defense-related missions, more general intelligence-gathering and surveillance, communications and data-sharing, and more. Various branches of the U.S. armed forces have been exploring how commercial options, including SpaceX's Starlink distributed satellite internet constellation, will be able to help support future military operations.'
'Just today, Derek Tournear, head of the U.S. military's Space Development Agency (SDA), noted that Russia has not shot down any Starlink satellites, despite past threats and having the means to do so.
It's perhaps not surprising that Chinese authorities and government-linked researchers have talked about Starlink as a potential national security issue or have otherwise been critical of the system, too. Earlier this year, researchers at the Beijing Institute of Tracking and Telecommunications, which is linked to the PLA's Strategic Support Force (PLASSF), published a paper that called for, among other things, "a combination of soft and hard kill methods should be adopted to make some Starlink satellites lose their functions and destroy the constellation’s operating system," according to a separate report from SCMP.'
www.thedrive.com
'"The simulation results suggest that a 10-megaton warhead – modestly powerful by today’s standards – could create a serious threat to satellites if it detonates at an altitude of 80 km (50 miles)," according to SCMP's report. "The blast could turn air molecules into radioactive particles and produce a cloud with a shape similar to an upside-down pear."'
'The U.S. military, as a whole, already has multiple programs in the works now to develop these kinds of distributed space-based capabilities, to support early warning and missile-defense-related missions, more general intelligence-gathering and surveillance, communications and data-sharing, and more. Various branches of the U.S. armed forces have been exploring how commercial options, including SpaceX's Starlink distributed satellite internet constellation, will be able to help support future military operations.'
'Just today, Derek Tournear, head of the U.S. military's Space Development Agency (SDA), noted that Russia has not shot down any Starlink satellites, despite past threats and having the means to do so.
It's perhaps not surprising that Chinese authorities and government-linked researchers have talked about Starlink as a potential national security issue or have otherwise been critical of the system, too. Earlier this year, researchers at the Beijing Institute of Tracking and Telecommunications, which is linked to the PLA's Strategic Support Force (PLASSF), published a paper that called for, among other things, "a combination of soft and hard kill methods should be adopted to make some Starlink satellites lose their functions and destroy the constellation’s operating system," according to a separate report from SCMP.'
Chinese Nuclear Anti-Satellite Study Highlights Problem Of Countering Starlink-Like Constellations
Constellations like Starlink for comms and missile tracking will dominate space, presenting foes with the problem of how to counter them.
www.thedrive.com
If you can find all the information about how gas prices are established, about the historical cost of gas vs present cost, real pricing versus nominal pricing, average use, etc, then why in the world would you come in here and just post how you feel, and argue that your feelings are correct?
You could actually align your feelings with reality, and not look like a completely clueless rube who just spouts catchphrases you heard Trump or one of his sycophants say.
You could do the research and you wouldn't ridiculous make claims like "averages are not exact numbers" or "bones do not have nerves in them" (based on the medical knowledge at the time you went to university), or "Just because a permit (for oil extraction) is approved doesn't mean the lease will be approved. Tell us Rob in all of your infinite wisdom... How many approved leases match those approved permits."
You actually COULD be part of a conversation b/c you would be speaking with knowledge and not just spouting nonsense. I'm sorry if it offends, but if you are in here and spouting nonsense, you WILL get called on it. It's the nature of the beast.
It's not for everyone. Some people have a really hard time being called out. That's OK. But if it's not for you, it may not be the place you want to be(?)
ThxOne
Premium Member
Staff Member
Let it go man let it go.
Is that like the Republican who claimed election fraud when another Republican won?
Or is it more like the candidate who said the system was rigged, but then won?
Logic is really tough for stupid people, isn't it JRS?
Back to your playbook.
You left yourself with no out, and now we should just "let it go".
'Surprised you didn't declare "conversation over", or tell me to "eat a diick" or something equally juvenile.
ThxOne
Premium Member
Staff Member
Is this from YOUR playbook? You couldn't post what you accused me of so now you want to keep pestering me? Do you want to fuck me or something? If you aren't trying to screw me then get off my jock. I am not interested in you trying to teach me anything from your one sided liberal mind.
You are very strange. Your regular outbursts suggest something about your psychological state. And it's not good.
Can you clarify what I "couldn't post" that I "accused you of"? Since you started crying about it, I've made it a point to answer specific questions you pose of me, even though you continue to refuse to answer my questions.
I'll try again:
If you can find all the information about how gas prices are established, about the historical cost of gas vs present cost, real pricing versus nominal pricing, average use, etc, then why in the world would you come in here and just post how you feel, and argue that your feelings are correct?
Why would you read information that is provided and can be easily checked by you for accuracy, and then declare that information wrong becasue it is "liberal" and "one sided" and "biased"?
Do you really think there are two sets of gas price histories out there, one that is "liberal" and one that is "conservative", and that no one has noticed this and made a news story out of it?
- Status
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
About this thread
- Start date
- Participants
- Who Replied
- Replies
- 33,976
- Views
- 1,119,121
- Last reply date
- Last reply from
- Buck
