Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by TheDuke »

anonymous91 wrote: February 5th, 2023, 12:29 am
TheDuke wrote: February 4th, 2023, 10:10 am Just read it is only 60,000' high. That isn't much above what a modern fighter will get to. Should have been easy to shoot down with a smaller missile, likely not guns. I think F15 will get close to 55,000, maybe higher lightly loaded. but the USAF will not allow it due to stupid FAA regulations about pressure suits and such. In the old days, when I was flying, rumor was the F15 guys would fly with one of two above 50,000 and the other below, the upper w/o transponder, half way they'd swap. This allowed for longer range flights when carrying your golf clubs to a summer resort (sounds funny but fighter pilots do like to play golf).

I cannot figure out some folks here like FoxMama, Sush and peasant that want to deny what 1000's of people can see with their own eyes or at least quality binocs or cheap telescope. I guess there is no requirement for common sense on Internet. You may wish to call the DoD liars, Prez a liar (why he would announce this and lie is really silly), but lets not get so carried away with FAA, and civilian folks that are here to protect the air space. I know quite a few of them and they take their jobs seriously, they are not the heart of a conspiracy and they are the ones tracking this for civilian airplane safety.

Back in the day, I had an acquaintance that was an aircraft mechanic in the Air Force. The one jet he was absolutely fascinated with was the SR-71 Blackbird. From what I understand the ceiling for this plane is still classified. I also find this plane absolutely fascinating. It was sad to hear that they've now retired these planes. :(

This is what a Google search shows "The estimated maximum altitude is 85,000 feet but some sources say that the SR-71 can fly up to 100,000 feet and can probably go even higher."

A few interesting facts about the SR-71 Blackbird:

1- It could outmaneuver missiles, and was never taken out by any either.
2- Cruise speed was Mach 3.2
3- Could easily maintain a height of 80-85K+ feet.
4- The body of the plane would expand during flight, then as it cools down it morphs back to its original shape. I've been told it's very fascinating to see in real life.

Here's a video about the SR-71 Blackbird for anyone wanting to learn a bit more.

your data is out of context. The SR-71 could fly, nearly 100,000' but could not maneuver at all, my friend flew one for a time and said that they could turn over most of the NW but on occasion almost turn over Montana (180 degree turn). It doesn't carry missiles and the missiles they tried didn't work (too much heat from that altitude and speed)

BTW Apollo 11 flew to the moon........................... definitely high enough, but also not pertinent to the balloon story. Just FYI

anonymous91
captain of 100
Posts: 649

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by anonymous91 »

OldGlory wrote: February 5th, 2023, 8:22 am It’s all theater and the world leaders are ALL actors.

I am curious where people on this forum stand when it comes to space, nasa, moon landing, our “plane”t, map of the un, the who, etc?
Personally, I have opinions on many of these to varying degrees. I try to not take a hard stance on anything that is almost impossible to be completely certain of myself. The nice thing about an opinion on these types of things is just that, it is an opinion.

When getting to the real root of the question for myself I've made some personal observations. Absolute truth comes from one source and that is God. What many of us consider truth in our lives is what we are able to observe through experience in our reality.

A definition of truth defined by the dictionary is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality." True is defined as "accurate or exact." and reality being defined as "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them."

I find this Biblical answer more satisfying:

Here’s a simple definition drawn from what the Bible teaches: Truth is that which is consistent with the mind, will, character, glory, and being of God. Even more to the point: Truth is the self-expression of God. That is the biblical meaning of truth. Because the definition of truth flows from God, truth is theological.

Truth is also ontological—which is a fancy way of saying it is the way things really are. Reality is what it is because God declared it so and made it so. Therefore God is the author, source, determiner, governor, arbiter, ultimate standard, and final judge of all truth.


Here's some questions I consider:

First, is it important for me to find the truth about these issues? If so, why is it important to me?

Second, am I willing to spend the time and effort, to learn the skills necessary to study these issues?

From time to time I will spend some spare time looking into some of these things more out of curiosity and as a hobby, not so much because it has eternal ramifications for my soul & well-being necessarily.

So, as an example, the moon landing did it really happen? Well, I've never been to the moon and personally don't trust anyone that claims that they were there. So, I choose to not put my faith in the few people that claim that they were. I personally doubt that it happens for a variety of reasons, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong too.

For me, there are a lot of problems with the moon landing that I question. Such as higher atmospheric temperatures that would melt right through the "supposed" space crafts that were said to land on the moon, the van allen belt, having a near-unlimited propulsion system in a vacuum (we can't get a plane enough fuel to travel around the world, yet we have a rocket that can travel to the moon and back without having to refuel?), how did they lose the plans to get back to the moon? and plenty more questions without any satisfactory answers. Add to that multiple theories, documentaries, explanations on both sides, and so forth.

Another issue that irritates me is the approach some people choose to take (**cough**Neil deGrasse Tyson**cough**) when answering questions. Rather than be professional and explain things in layman's terms, they would rather ridicule and be derisive of others' opinions. Saying things like "it's too hard for you to understand" is a lazy way of saying I'm too stupid to explain it to you. Here's another one "I'm the expert and I say it's true, so sit down and shut up" (**cough**Fauci**cough**). We are expected to have faith in these so-called experts, that don't even bother explaining it to anyone.

I choose to put my faith in God, not in Science, and definitely not in the arm of flesh.

I've realized a few things about these theories. First, even experts argue over who is right and who is wrong and these are people that have spent most of their lives developing the skills needed so that this ought to be easier to derive at the truth. Secondly, I've learned to not be absolute in my opinions and be open to other possibilities, when it comes to these types of issues. Finally, unless I feel impressed that God really wants me to know this now (so far this hasn't been the case) I can set this aside as a curiosity of the mind.

And to answer your question about the who, they are an awesome underrated band. :) Here's one of their songs to enjoy.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by Thinker »

anonymous91 wrote: February 5th, 2023, 12:56 pmPersonally, I have opinions on many of these to varying degrees. I try to not take a hard stance on anything that is almost impossible to be completely certain of myself. The nice thing about an opinion on these types of things is just that, it is an opinion.

When getting to the real root of the question for myself I've made some personal observations. Absolute truth comes from one source and that is God. What many of us consider truth in our lives is what we are able to observe through experience in our reality.

A definition of truth defined by the dictionary is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality." True is defined as "accurate or exact." and reality being defined as "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them."

I find this Biblical answer more satisfying:

Here’s a simple definition drawn from what the Bible teaches: Truth is that which is consistent with the mind, will, character, glory, and being of God. Even more to the point: Truth is the self-expression of God. That is the biblical meaning of truth. Because the definition of truth flows from God, truth is theological.

Truth is also ontological—which is a fancy way of saying it is the way things really are. Reality is what it is because God declared it so and made it so. Therefore God is the author, source, determiner, governor, arbiter, ultimate standard, and final judge of all truth.


Here's some questions I consider:

First, is it important for me to find the truth about these issues? If so, why is it important to me?

Second, am I willing to spend the time and effort, to learn the skills necessary to study these issues?…

And to answer your question about the who, they are an awesome underrated band. :) Here's one of their songs to enjoy…
😁😉😎 That’s my 1st thought about the who, especially lower cased.

I like your points about different ways of defining truth & not being too decided that you can’t learn more. Bringing up the who reminds me of the need for humor to lighten things up. At the end of the day, or life, what needs our attention? A lot! So selectivity is a must.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by Thinker »

Niemand wrote: February 5th, 2023, 3:33 am
Thinker wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:09 pm I didn’t know this happened last year in Hawaii & Guam…

“U.S. officials confirmed that previous balloon incidents involving China occurred near Hawaii and Guam last year…
In February 2022, a balloon appeared to be stationary in international waters northwest of Kauai, Hawaii, the officials said. The Hawaii incident came shortly after a similar incident…”



Were they checking out Panama Canal?…

“A second suspected Chinese surveillance balloon was spotted Friday night over Colombia and Venezuela, the Pentagon confirmed, without providing further details on the balloon, after outlets in Costa Rica reported seeing what appeared to be a hot air balloon over the Central American country on Thursday…”

They like to do these experiments or whatever in pairs… why?
Where did this 2nd balloon start & where/how will it end?

I guess it takes more balls to do this…
“On Feb. 4, officials told reporters that a third Chinese surveillance balloon was operating somewhere else in the world, and that the balloons are part of a Chinese military surveillance program.”

Might these be researching Nuclear &/or EMP attack? 60,000 feet is about 11 miles. At least 18.6 miles high is said to be needed for an EMP. So maybe surveillance was/is being done above and below.
Guam and Hawaii might be forgivable, but right over the continental USA?

I think you're right about Panama, although they must have ships going through there all the time.

What gets me is that this thing was spotted on Wednesday over US territory and they waited until Saturday to shoot it down. If it was over the Alaskan bush there is a low population there, and they could have taken it down round there.
Yeah it’s strange.
Maybe there are 3 purposes:

1) Some surveillance /data collecting - hacking, EMP/nuclear
2) More fear-mongering Psychological Operations, including distractions
3) Setting the stage for future plans (more surveillance normalizing, or increasing hostilities between US & China - especially since this canceled potential peaceful meeting between the 2 …)

Someone suggested maybe viruses could’ve been in the balloons - but don’t you think that’s doubtful?

User avatar
Niemand
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13997

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by Niemand »

Thinker wrote: February 5th, 2023, 1:30 pm
Niemand wrote: February 5th, 2023, 3:33 am
Thinker wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:09 pm I didn’t know this happened last year in Hawaii & Guam…

“U.S. officials confirmed that previous balloon incidents involving China occurred near Hawaii and Guam last year…
In February 2022, a balloon appeared to be stationary in international waters northwest of Kauai, Hawaii, the officials said. The Hawaii incident came shortly after a similar incident…”



Were they checking out Panama Canal?…

“A second suspected Chinese surveillance balloon was spotted Friday night over Colombia and Venezuela, the Pentagon confirmed, without providing further details on the balloon, after outlets in Costa Rica reported seeing what appeared to be a hot air balloon over the Central American country on Thursday…”

They like to do these experiments or whatever in pairs… why?
Where did this 2nd balloon start & where/how will it end?

I guess it takes more balls to do this…
“On Feb. 4, officials told reporters that a third Chinese surveillance balloon was operating somewhere else in the world, and that the balloons are part of a Chinese military surveillance program.”

Might these be researching Nuclear &/or EMP attack? 60,000 feet is about 11 miles. At least 18.6 miles high is said to be needed for an EMP. So maybe surveillance was/is being done above and below.
Guam and Hawaii might be forgivable, but right over the continental USA?

I think you're right about Panama, although they must have ships going through there all the time.

What gets me is that this thing was spotted on Wednesday over US territory and they waited until Saturday to shoot it down. If it was over the Alaskan bush there is a low population there, and they could have taken it down round there.
Yeah it’s strange.
Maybe there are 3 purposes:

1) Some surveillance /data collecting - hacking, EMP/nuclear
2) More fear-mongering Psychological Operations, including distractions
3) Setting the stage for future plans (more surveillance normalizing, or increasing hostilities between US & China - especially since this canceled potential peaceful meeting between the 2 …)

Someone suggested maybe viruses could’ve been in the balloons - but don’t you think that’s doubtful?
You would have to have a large payload of viruses to infect humans or animals. However I do wonder if it could be used against plants or crops in some way.

As Bro. Kearney rightly says above, China has satellites. This is obviously a stunt (no. 2) Apparently they're making great capital of it on Chinese TV since it makes the US look ridiculous and weak after all the sabre rattling over Taiwan. Canada says that it was being used to intercept RCAF transmissions (no. 1) which is concerning.

I agree with the comments about these countries working together, Medusa heads etc above, but the world's leaders are mostly allies not friends. Xi would quite happily stab Biden and Trudeau in the back. He thinks Trudeau is a joke (you can see that in some video footage.)

OldGlory
captain of 50
Posts: 61

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by OldGlory »

anonymous91 wrote: February 5th, 2023, 12:56 pm
OldGlory wrote: February 5th, 2023, 8:22 am It’s all theater and the world leaders are ALL actors.

I am curious where people on this forum stand when it comes to space, nasa, moon landing, our “plane”t, map of the un, the who, etc?
Personally, I have opinions on many of these to varying degrees. I try to not take a hard stance on anything that is almost impossible to be completely certain of myself. The nice thing about an opinion on these types of things is just that, it is an opinion.

When getting to the real root of the question for myself I've made some personal observations. Absolute truth comes from one source and that is God. What many of us consider truth in our lives is what we are able to observe through experience in our reality.

A definition of truth defined by the dictionary is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality." True is defined as "accurate or exact." and reality being defined as "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them."

I find this Biblical answer more satisfying:

Here’s a simple definition drawn from what the Bible teaches: Truth is that which is consistent with the mind, will, character, glory, and being of God. Even more to the point: Truth is the self-expression of God. That is the biblical meaning of truth. Because the definition of truth flows from God, truth is theological.

Truth is also ontological—which is a fancy way of saying it is the way things really are. Reality is what it is because God declared it so and made it so. Therefore God is the author, source, determiner, governor, arbiter, ultimate standard, and final judge of all truth.


Here's some questions I consider:

First, is it important for me to find the truth about these issues? If so, why is it important to me?

Second, am I willing to spend the time and effort, to learn the skills necessary to study these issues?

From time to time I will spend some spare time looking into some of these things more out of curiosity and as a hobby, not so much because it has eternal ramifications for my soul & well-being necessarily.

So, as an example, the moon landing did it really happen? Well, I've never been to the moon and personally don't trust anyone that claims that they were there. So, I choose to not put my faith in the few people that claim that they were. I personally doubt that it happens for a variety of reasons, but I acknowledge that I could be wrong too.

For me, there are a lot of problems with the moon landing that I question. Such as higher atmospheric temperatures that would melt right through the "supposed" space crafts that were said to land on the moon, the van allen belt, having a near-unlimited propulsion system in a vacuum (we can't get a plane enough fuel to travel around the world, yet we have a rocket that can travel to the moon and back without having to refuel?), how did they lose the plans to get back to the moon? and plenty more questions without any satisfactory answers. Add to that multiple theories, documentaries, explanations on both sides, and so forth.

Another issue that irritates me is the approach some people choose to take (**cough**Neil deGrasse Tyson**cough**) when answering questions. Rather than be professional and explain things in layman's terms, they would rather ridicule and be derisive of others' opinions. Saying things like "it's too hard for you to understand" is a lazy way of saying I'm too stupid to explain it to you. Here's another one "I'm the expert and I say it's true, so sit down and shut up" (**cough**Fauci**cough**). We are expected to have faith in these so-called experts, that don't even bother explaining it to anyone.

I choose to put my faith in God, not in Science, and definitely not in the arm of flesh.

I've realized a few things about these theories. First, even experts argue over who is right and who is wrong and these are people that have spent most of their lives developing the skills needed so that this ought to be easier to derive at the truth. Secondly, I've learned to not be absolute in my opinions and be open to other possibilities, when it comes to these types of issues. Finally, unless I feel impressed that God really wants me to know this now (so far this hasn't been the case) I can set this aside as a curiosity of the mind.

And to answer your question about the who, they are an awesome underrated band. :) Here's one of their songs to enjoy.
Thanks! That was a great explanation. It’s funny how we have define what truth is since most of what we’ve been has all been lies. And the who video was a nice touch. I really try to keep these corrupt entities and people in lower case letters. They don’t deserve upper case let and it makes my husband mad that I do that. 😂😂😂

User avatar
SmilingPatriot
captain of 50
Posts: 63

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by SmilingPatriot »

FoxMammaWisdom wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 1:27 pm Maybe they are trying to show people who don't get it yet. China spies on us a billion other ways, they don't need a balloon. The coverage on this is BS and inflaming the situation having WH press conferences... if it were a real threat they would have just taken care of it and none of us would ever know about that OP.

US at Defcon 2 today over this... ya they want us scared.

https://www.defconlevel.com/northern-command-news.php
This is the way I see it as well! It was way to obvious and publicized to be what they said. Most likely a diversion tactic. Everyone look at the spy balloon don’t look at the chicken farms burning down or something else really disturbing

User avatar
SmilingPatriot
captain of 50
Posts: 63

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by SmilingPatriot »

BeNotDeceived wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:07 pm
TheDuke wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:06 pm
larsenb wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 4:59 pm
TheDuke wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 2:34 pm My question is why we don't drop it. It will not hit anything if careful. Is is too high? or are we too scared? Do we want China to do this? Like above, I don't think a balloon is too useful for surveillance, but is great publicity.

remember Ice Station Zebra? Didn't know Rock was gay back then. One of Jim Brown's major acting successes (haha), but always liked Patrick McGoohan from his Danger Man days (reruns of course).
What happened to the requirement that we protect our air space, regardless of what violates it, especially if it come from Red China. Heck, why not send something up to capture it so we can determine what the heck it's doing? Or would that be using too much common sense?
I suppose that was my question, perhaps we don't have the technology to do it right now, or it would require a very large missile that would pop right through a balloon. I don't know but it must be much higher than any plane can fly.
Mine me says

Poke pin holes in it with a laser. :lol:
:lol:

moving2zion
captain of 100
Posts: 550

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by moving2zion »

gkearney wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 2:13 pm This seems like an inefficient way for a country with space launching capabilities to conduct intelligence gathering. Why not just use satellites like everyone else does? They don't need a balloon to know how upper atmosphere winds are blowing the University of Wyoming will give you that information on the internet. http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/uamap.shtml
Most satellites have a limited number of high power cameras of varying capabilities.

It was put out that the balloon that was shot down had a payload the size of 3 busses, that's why the balloon was so big. If 1/3 was the fuel, mobility, guidance system, 1/3 aluminum frame, batteries, some solar panels, the last 1/3 would be a very large sensor array. Shooting it down over the ocean was stupid. Completely eliminated the ability on our part to collect any intelligence on their capabilities. One more example of our government being filled with sellouts.

User avatar
truefreedom
captain of 100
Posts: 653

Re: Any thoughts on this surveillance balloon?

Post by truefreedom »


Post Reply