3
scare_event_me_now 3 points ago +3 / -0

Japan, China and India have also mapped the moon at high res.

If that wuz real, it would be a simple matter to get 4 images from 4 separate data sources (those 3 plus US) and examine the area. The person who found it would be a minor celeb in astronomy circles. Please, someone go ahead and make yourself famous.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

NTSB must have over 500 Tesla autopilot incidents by now. Many fatalities -- two motorcyclists recently. Funny, all those engineers in the autopilot team must have forgotten their code of ethics...

He needs to suck up to people left and right and CCP or his empire's a bust.

In the end, all that matters is #1 -- Elon himself.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can't be done without billions down the drain. Glazers won't sell except for a highly inflated price -- just like the highly inflated prices they bought rubbish players for. Others have asked.

2
scare_event_me_now 2 points ago +2 / -0

Joe can still ride a bike? Hmmm...

I'm really, really suspicious about such physical capabilities of Joe lately. 🤔

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Still trusting the computer. The computer can do anything. IT people who are competent will point you back to paper ballots.

To trust blockchain votes, you'd need to check the data and total it up and see that it matches the official totals. Audit, check. No trust. Trust is a really big thing in IT security, and it's too easily abused to be used in voting.

Physical ballots, each piece counted and observed by reps all parties. Better don't transport them boxes, too easy to play games. Maybe video the counting. If any power cuts at night or suspicious acts, invalidate the whole thing. If it keep being invalidated, then the election is being scammed. Simples.

3
scare_event_me_now 3 points ago +3 / -0

Heh. Doesn't even look like Joe. Not even pretending to be an old man with dementia. 😜

Bad director, or deliberate. I'd say deliberate.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Look at this part in the article: [[ Once the hydrogen plasma "ignites", the fusion reaction becomes self-sustaining... ]]

Hmmm... "self-sustaining" haha. 😕 Whoever wrote that is retarded and delusional, has no idea about fusion reactions in the core of a star. Perhaps this is why scientists have been promising that a breakthrough will come soon enough, and they have been babbling the hype for the last 50 years or so.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

About right. 😎👍

I think Anne Heche just wanted to beat everybody else to Suicide Weekend.

2
scare_event_me_now 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hilarious seeing folks get their panties in a bunch over ZH. 😎👍

ZH was much better years ago, before the revamp, monetizing, etc. They kinda moved to become more mainstream-friendly in recent years. I like the ZH glory days better.

3
scare_event_me_now 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep. 😎👍 While I would have liked to see a GoFundMe to help the Russians with testing her, ultimately it's another card for Lavrov to play.

Won't be played just yet.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Okay, have fun. I think I have gone on this topic for far too long.

I don't think any interaction between him and me will be productive. He has his earnings to defend. Look at what Lance Armstrong did.

Anyway, everything I said can be verified if you read enough of imaging chip tech, astronomy, astrophotography, optics, video and image processing, stuff like that. If you have not studied such things, I don't expect you to believe me. But all of it can be checked out if you study enough in these areas.

So bye 👋😎

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

See the inverse frame for the triangle. Positive video frames do not look anything like the negative video frames. A few splotches in positive video but got a nice triangle in negative video? Not possible.

Technically: The partially eclipsed sun is very bright and saturates almost everything. So you won't see any useful surface detail in such CCD/CMOS astro vids, except for basic shapes -- the moon shadow. The imaging CCD/CMOS chip has to compensate for the bright sun, and by reducing the brightness of the sun, all the less bright detail is lost. Signal-to-noise is low and the image or video would be very noisy. There is no way anyone can find a triangle feature or a triangular craft in such an image. Hmmm... 🤔

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

I searched his channel name "Bruce Sees all" on YT and it was one of the video that popped up. Title looked interesting to me, so I browsed through it -- my usual method is to use right arrow to skip quickly through it with sound muted.

Link is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OR9Ty4MaT4

It does look like it was posted by Bruce Sees all in July 2019.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Many CCDs these days are USB output. Super easy to get frame by frame. Meteor watchers will also have frame-by-frame analyzers to locate hits. Beyond those frames, you can't get more slowed-down data. For example, if recording at PAL 25 FPS, it will always be 40 msec between frames. Between two frames, no new data can be found. I am very well-versed with CCDs, CMOS imagers, telescopes, video data, image processing. His triangle craft is not credible.

We can agree to disagree. Happy to do so. 😎👍

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

The triangular craft going that fast MUST smear in the moon video. You can't go that fast and be seen clearly in a video frame. The triangle was added in post-processing -- it is too pristine, like a triangle with Photoshop blur. Given the poor exposure and atmospheric seeing of the sun and moon, it can't have been captured perfectly like that.

Some actual amateurs have countless hours monitoring the moon and Jupiter for meteor hits. Those are far more credible and I haven't heard of them reporting anomalies. They record video too, so that meteor hits can be analyzed. So much material and no talk of anomalies, ever.

So when I see fake tech bullshit in a YT video, I run very very far away. No need for me to spend any time on it.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

The triangular craft moves exactly vertical with respect to his telescope. What a coincidence! Funny as hell.

Hey no offense, but I've seen to much dodgy stuff on YT to spend any time on Bruce.

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Here are some back-of-napkin numbers (all very approximate):

Moon's apparent disk = 0.5 degrees = 1800 arcseconds

Astronomical seeing (FWHM, above average site) = 1 arcsecond

Useful pixels = 1800/1 = 1800 pixels

You won't get more detail if you zoom and the moon's disk is more than 1800 pixels across, due to atmospheric effects. If you use 10,000 pixels, you will still end up with the same amount of detail as the 1800 pixel image. If you've looked through telescope eyepieces at high mag, there is a lot of shimmer when looking at the moon.

Moon's radius = 1740 km

Size of pixel on moon (center of disk) = about 1 km across

Therefore, if the moon disk in your picture is about 1800 pixels across, then the one pixel in the center of the moon disk will be about 1 km x 1 km. Increasing magnification won't get you more detail, due to atmospheric turbulence. So your picture may look detailed, but the detail is only about 1 km2 per pixel. To do better, you'd need other techniques like lucky imaging or active optics.

2
scare_event_me_now 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's gonna take a lot of land to run biodiesel widely.

There is a fundamental flaw with biodiesel. You will often hear so-called experts talk about the amazing efficiency of photosynthesis. Now, while some of the steps inside chloroplasts may be pretty efficient, chloroplasts and leaves as a whole evolved to take up only a small portion of the incident solar energy. Why? Well:

Leaves are actually good at dumping energy, otherwise they will overheat and be damaged. The plant as a system does not want to overheat, thus it is good at wasting energy. Overall photosynthesis efficiency, light energy to plant matter of 1% is already high. Vegetable oil yield would be rather less than 1%.

To get efficiencies above that, the photosynthesis system need to be reworked and somehow the collected energy must not be allowed to damage the plant's systems. Easier said than done -- 1 kW per m2 of solar energy on a good day, no way any normal plant today can collect all of that.

So this is really a much more difficult proposition. It's easier said than done. You need to look into the details -- energy books plus botany books.

3
scare_event_me_now 3 points ago +3 / -0

Shhhhh.....! Don't give Dwayne Johnson ideas. He's already been in far too many movies he's become a cliche. 😜

1
scare_event_me_now 1 point ago +1 / -0

Look! CYA. They are covering their asses, shifting their positions.

Lancet set up that commission, got Sachs, an economics professor to head it, who in turn hired Daszak to head the investigation team. Got basically the chief perpetrator and money man on the US side to investigate the thing. The fox got to investigate the incident at the hen house.

Of course, Sachs is now also going around talking like he was on our side all along, CYA, covering his ass.

Many of these people should be up for Nuremberg 2.

2
scare_event_me_now 2 points ago +2 / -0

Dang. It's been a long time since we had one of these. Was great fun during the early days of these boards 😎👍

view more: Next ›