search results matching tag: coast

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (630)     Sift Talk (19)     Blogs (42)     Comments (859)   

Honest Government Ad | Climate Change Policy

newtboy says...

Oh Bob...
2017 extremist related murder numbers are out....
71% were by right wing extremists-many neo Nazis
26% were by Islamic extremists
And those numbers should only include the murders, not the myriad of failed right wing terrorist acts like the multiple failed right wing mail bombers and caught in the nick of time right wing Coast guard terrorists.
Not sure how you plan to make a case that egg wielding left wing extremists are the real pressing danger, but I'm all ears.

In 2018, every single terroristic attacker in the U.S. had ties to right wing extremist organizations, although one had converted to Islamic extremism before attacking that doesn't mean (and there's little evidence that) they abandoned their right wing politics or philosophy.

Try to absorb that information instead of just being defensive and ignoring it....please.

bobknight33 said:

neo-nazi right wing terrorism issue.... Non existent .0000000001 % of Conservatives are nuts jobs like you describe. You side is way worse.

Plane Ran Out of Fuel at 41,000 Feet. Here's What Happened.

ulysses1904 says...

While we're on the subject, does anyone remember the news reports from around 1989 I think, of a private plane flying along the east coast of the U.S. near Florida and it was assumed the pilot was incapacitated. He wasn't responding to the radio but the jet pilots saw that the sun visor position had changed while they were tracking him so obviously someone was flying the plane.

I think he eventually landed but it was never clear what the explanation was for the lack of communication. It was a big deal at the time but I can't find any reference to it with Google.

1976 Winnebago Chieftain Turbo LS: Regular Car Reviews

newtboy says...

I drove a 76 Brave (18 ft) from the West coast to Florida and back towing a CJ-5. I sure could have used this motor swap over the dodge 318 it had. We struggled up hills.

Why Everyone is Going to Iceland Lately

newtboy says...

We went 2016 because tickets were <$200 roundtrip from the West coast on wow air.....air bnb was everywhere and great, most attractions were free and amazing, zero crowds, we drove the entire island in a week without rushing, everyone speaks English well, and because Formula Offroad, which I finally saw in person after years of disbelief. I would suggest a summer trip there to anyone who loves nature, beauty, friendly people, and interesting mythology.

Edit: book your day at blue lagoon first, they can be booked solid for months.

BACON CAUSES CANCER!!!! MCDONALDS IS GIVING FREE CANCER!

newtboy says...

It's not time you lack, I got an A in statistics which I took after advanced placement B/C calculus, thank you.
Please stop hyper exaggerating the danger of all animal products and the benefits of veganism.

No, we're acting like +1% lifetime risk of one type of cancer, from 5%-6%, is a totally acceptable level of risk to trade for a lifetime of pleasure when taken knowingly, and is a far cry from +18% every time you eat bacon. It's probably far less than the additional risk of drinking municipal water, or breathing anywhere East of the West coast, certainly exponentially less than breathing air in any major metropolitan area, or living within 25 miles of a military base or airport.

I'm also acting like people who lie about or misrepresent the stats only prove their position is untenable and that they're untrustworthy. If 1% total increased lifetime risk is enough to make your point, why erroneously claim +18% per serving? It makes it so easy to dismiss and overlook any real point you might have had.

Nothing is unanimous, and that goes double for nutritional advice. Somewhere there's a doctor that insists you can't possibly get enough nitrates, most would say if you're healthy go ahead and have some bacon...in moderation. My doctor and numerous documentaries say the stress of worrying incessantly about every little risk factor is a much bigger risk factor than almost any other for innumerable disorders and diseases. I'll take his advice, thanks.

transmorpher said:

I don't have time to teach you statistics. Stop trying to downplay the danger.

And for the third time, even if it is 1%, that's still millions of people suffering from colon cancer in the USA alone, but y'all are pretending like 1% is 0%.

Regardless of the numbers THE RECOMMENDATION IS UNANIMOUSLY DO NOT EAT. Very clear language that leaves no room for dispute.

Ladder beats wall

newtboy says...

Perhaps you are ignorant of the fact that the vast majority cross where walls already exist. To answer your question, nearly all of them would still try. Do you really think a fence is deterrence when the alternative is go home and see your family raped to death before you're decapitated? Would you just say "oops, sorry, didn't mean to trigger you....let me just take my daughter back to the narcos for a life of sex slavery and just die then, so sorry."?

A better immigration policy that makes it easier to get a work visa or asylum at ports of entry instead of making illegal entry easier, simpler, cheaper, and faster would discourage people from taking the easier, but illegal path. We are moving the other direction, which is why illegal immigration is on the rise under Trump after falling steadily for decades.

This doesn't cost America except for fighting it, they make us money with cheap labor, taxation without representation or access to government assistance, and by lowering the per capita crime rates by being far less criminal on average than Americans. You want to deport a group that's well above average in criminality, that would be Republican politicians and or Trump associates...no one will miss a single one.

A $50 billion wall (Trump's never built anything that wasn't at least 100% over budget) that can be evaded with a ladder, shovel, car, truck, saw, torch, boat, plane, and in many many places, absolutely nothing (it's no longer a single solid wall from coast to gulf, it's now a fence in a few more places for your $50 billion.) is not just vastly more expensive, it's also uselessly wasting that money for almost zero return, the few places it might help will just see the migrant paths move a few miles over.

If we had a 40+ ft high, 20 ft deep, 4+ft thick reinforced concrete wall coast to coast that was somehow ladder proof, it still wouldn't stop most illegal immigration or drug trafficking, because the vast majority of both come through ports of entry. The wall is a useless solution to a non existent problem that's been solving itself for decades....side note: what do you think it was like in the good old days when America was "great"? Contrary to Chump's claims, operation wetback (that he wants to reimplement) was a failure....
https://www.cato.org/blog/enforcement-didnt-end-unlawful-immigration-1950s-more-visas-did

bobknight33 said:

Out of the 400,000 apprehensions last year along the southern boarder how many would have tried if there were a wall?

How many slipped passed and not accounted for?

from U.S. Customs and Border Protection link

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration/fy-2018

400,000 average apprehensions /year for last 6 years

With catch and release how much $ does this cost America?
A Wall would greatly discourage one from attempting.
Also a wall would be cheaper.

CNN Red Pills itself. The Economy is GREAT.

newtboy says...

So wrong, try research. Wikipedia has all this information easily available.
Obama turned it around 180 degrees from the Republican's path of doom we were on at -2.8% GDP up to 2.5% in only one year, and eventually hit a yearly 2.9% gdp, that took time and Herculean effort against obstructionist Republicans who's only job from before he was sworn in was making him a one term president by obstructing him, a job they failed.
Trump started with a strong economy of at least 2.3% growth and a complicit congress, and GDP growth is actually STILL much lower than under Obama. Trump has coasted fairly flatly which is better than expected, Obama deftly turned us around from the cliff Bush was driving off. Obama had a positive swing of 5.1%, expectations are a 3.1% GDP growth for 2018, a positive swing of .8%, and that's expected to drop .5% for the next two years.

5.1% upswing >.8% upswing. Trump is limping along, Obama stopped the Republican crash AND did better overall. I wish you wouldn't spout such nonsense.

bobknight33 said:

Obama slow walked the economy to his pre-election levels. Trump stomped on the gas peddle.

Ted Cruz loves White Castle

Mekanikal says...

White Castle was a real letdown. I've lived on the west coast my whole life and had only heard about them, then about 10 years ago I had a chance to go to Atlanta for my job. After picking up the rental, I was headed to the hotel when I saw a White Castle. "Hell yeah", I thought. I finally get to try a Harold and Kumar burger. So I get a slider combo and...... yeah, they wern't very good. Turns out I don't like steamed hamburger.

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

scheherazade says...

The Zero's Chinese performance was ignored by the U.S. command prior to pearl harbor, dismissed as exaggeration. That's actually the crux of my point.

Exceptional moments do not change the rule.
Yes on occasion a wildcat would get swiss cheesed and not go down, but 99% of the time when swiss cheesed they went down.
Yes, there were wildcat aces that did fairly well (and Zero aces that did even better), but 99% of wildcat pilots were just trying to not get mauled.

Hellcat didn't enter combat till mid 1943, and it is the correction to the mistake. The F6F should have been the front line fighter at the start of the war... and could have been made sooner had Japanese tech not been ignored/dismissed as exaggeration.


Russian quantity as quality? At the start they were shot down at a higher ratio than the manufacturing counter ratio (by a lot). It was a white wash in favor of the Germans.
It took improvements in Russian tech to turn the tide in the air. Lend-lease only constituted about 10% of their air force at the peak. Russia had to improve their own forces, so they did. By the end, planes like the yak3 were par with the best.


The Mig31 is a slower Mig25 with a digital radar. Their version of the F14, not really ahead of the times, par maybe.

F15 is faster than either mig29 or Su27 (roughly Mig31 speed).
F16/F18, at altitude, are moderately slower, but a wash at sea level.

Why would they shoot and run?
We have awacs, we would know they are coming, so the only chance to shoot would be at max range. Max range shots are throw-away shots, they basically won't hit unless the target is unaware, which it won't be unaware because of the RWR. Just a slight turn and the missile can't follow after tens of miles of coasting and losing energy.


Chinese railgun is in sea trials, right now. Not some lab test. It wouldn't be on a ship without first having the gun proven, the mount proven, the fire control proven, stationary testing completed, etc.
2025 is the estimate for fleet wide usage.
Try finding a picture of a U.S. railgun aboard a U.S. ship.


Why would a laser rifle not work, when you can buy crap like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7baI2Nyi5rI
There's ones made in China, too : https://www.sanwulasers.com/customurl.aspx?type=Product&key=7wblue&shop=
That will light paper on fire ~instantly, and it's just a pitiful hand held laser pointer.
An actual weapon would be orders of magnitude stronger than a handheld toy.
It's an excellent covert operations weapon, silently blinding and starting fires form kilometers away.


Russia does not need to sink a U.S. carrier for no reason.
And the U.S. has no interest in giving Russia proper a need to defend from a U.S. carrier. For the very reasons you mentioned.


What Russia can do is proliferate such a missile, and effectively deprecate the U.S. carrier group as a military unit.

We need carriers to get our air force to wherever we need it to be.
If everyone had these missiles, we would have no way to deliver our air force by naval means.

Russia has land access to Europe, Asia, Africa. They can send planes to anywhere they need to go, from land bases. Russia doesn't /need/ a navy.

Most of the planet does not have a navy worth sinking. It's just us. This is the kind of weapon that disproportionately affects us.

-scheherazade

Mordhaus said:

A big part of the Zero's reputation came from racking up kills in China against a lot of second-rate planes with poorly-trained pilots. After all, there was a reason that the Republic of China hired the American Volunteer Group to help out during the Second Sino-Japanese War – Chinese pilots had a hard time cutting it.

The Wildcat was deficient in many ways versus the Zero, but it still had superior firepower via ammo loadout. The Zero carried very few 20mm rounds, most of it's ammo was 7.7mm. There are records of Japanese pilots unloading all their 7.7mm ammo on a Wildcat and it was still flyable. On the flip side, the Wildcat had an ample supply of .50 cal.

Stanley "Swede" Vejtasa was able to score seven kills against Japanese planes in one day with a Wildcat.

Yes, the discovery of the Akutan Zero helped the United States beat this plane. But MilitaryFactory.com notes that the Hellcat's first flight was on June 26, 1942 – three weeks after the raid on Dutch Harbor that lead to the fateful crash-landing of the Mitsubishi A6M flown by Tadayoshi Koga.

Marine Captain Kenneth Walsh described how he knew to roll to the right at high speed to lose a Zero on his tail. Walsh would end World War II with 17 kills. The Zero also had trouble in dives, thanks to a bad carburetor.

We were behind in technology for many reasons, but once the Hellcat started replacing the Wildcat, the Japanese Air Superiority was over. Even if they had maintained a lead in technology, as Russia showed in WW2, quantity has a quality all of it's own. We were always going to be able to field more pilots and planes than Japan would be able to.

As far as Soviet rockets, once we were stunned by the launch of Sputnik, we kicked into high gear. You can say what you will of reliability, consistency, and dependability, but exactly how many manned Soviet missions landed on the moon and returned? Other than Buran, which was almost a copy of our Space Shuttle, how many shuttles did the USSR field?

The Soviets did build some things that were very sophisticated and were, for a while, better than what we could field. The Mig-31 is a great example. We briefly lagged behind but have a much superior air capability now. The only advantages the Mig and Sukhoi have is speed, they can fire all their missiles and flee. If they are engaged however, they will lose if pilots are equally skilled.

As @newtboy has said, I am sure that Russia and China are working on military advancements, but the technology simply doesn't exist to make a Hypersonic missile possible at this point.

China is fielding a man portable rifle that can inflict pain, not kill, and there is no hard evidence that it works.

There is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. We also have created successful railguns, the problem is POWERING them repeatedly, especially onboard a ship. If they figured out a power source that will pull it off, then it is possible, but there is no concrete proof other than a photo of a weapon attached to a ship. Our experts are guessing they might have it functional by 2025, might...

China has shown that long range QEEC is possible. It has been around but they created the first one capable of doing it from space. The problem is, they had to jury rig it. Photons, or light, can only go through about 100 kilometers of optic fiber before getting too dim to reliably carry data. As a result, the signal needs to be relayed by a node, which decrypts and re-encrypts the data before passing it on. This process makes the nodes susceptible to hacking. There are 32 of these nodes for the Beijing-Shanghai quantum link alone.

The main issue with warfare today is that it really doesn't matter unless the battle is between one of the big 3. Which means that ANY action could provoke Nuclear conflict. Is Russia going to hypersonic missile one of our carriers without Nukes become an option on the table as a retaliation? Is China going to railgun a ship and risk nuclear war?

Hell no, no more than we would expect to blow up some major Russian or Chinese piece of military hardware without severe escalation! Which means we can create all the technological terrors we like, because we WON'T use them unless they somehow provide us a defense against nuclear annihilation.

So just like China and Russia steal stuff from us to build military hardware to counter ours, if they create something that is significantly better, we will began trying to duplicate it. The only thing which would screw this system to hell is if one of us actually did begin developing a successful counter measure to nukes. If that happens, both of the other nations are quite likely to threaten IMMEDIATE thermonuclear war to prevent that country from developing enough of the counter measures to break the tie.

A Sand Dollar's Breakfast is Totally Metal | Deep Look

Shep Smith Shuts Down Sean Hannity's Lies And Propaganda

C-note says...

3 of the countries that I pay for cable tv service all carry fox news. MSNBC is no where to be found on the channel listing except for in america. Hell even in america in a number of hotels that I've stayed in through out the midwest you can't find MSNBC.

Conservative talk radio dominates the AM radio networks from coast to coast. The right wing propaganda machine is finely tuned and a force that the left hasn't scratched the surface on trying to counter.

I don't know what it all means, but fox is doing a great job of dragging this country around by the nose.

Nauti-Craft Marine Suspension Technology

Restored 1967 Footage Of Saturn V Space Rocket Launch

bareboards2 says...

@ChaosEngine @Buck

My dad was in the Air Force. He was chosen for a particular program -- to be a Range Safety Officer on launches.

Once he got his Masters in Engineering at MIT on the government's dime, he was stationed at Cape Canaveral.

His job was to have his hand on the key that would blow up a missile when it went off course. The course was set so that if it went bad, the pieces would fall safely into the ocean. If it started to veer off course, you had to blow it up quick.

He was stationed at Cape Canaveral from something like 1958 to 1966. About that time frame. Early days, when they didn't know quite how to do a successful launch -- and he blew up a lot.

More than any other person -- and no one will catch up with his record, because it is no longer early days.

He got a Saturn. He blew up a Titan. He blew up a lot of Missilemen missiles.

He mostly worked on the unmanned launches. Only one launch (that I know of) was manned -- and he almost had to blow it up. He was sweating that one -- because of the stakes of blowing early or blowing late and no good result if you make the wrong choice. There was a wobble ... and he waited ... and it corrected.

But yeah. A Saturn.

After Cape Canaveral, he was stationed at Vandenberg Air Force Base, NW of Santa Barbara. The west coast equivalent of the Cape.

PM me your email, and I'll send you a SERIOUSLY cool cartoon that was a gift when he left the Cape. Sitting astride a rocket that has obviously been launched from Florida, with silhouettes of all the missiles he blew up -- with HASHMARKS for how many of each.

It is seriously cool.

ZTE Axon M has 2 screens

Gordon Hayward's Scary Injury | Celtics vs Cavaliers (2017)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon