More on the Chinese balloon US overflight

[Citysnaps]

How does one make their own hydrogen?

Drain cleaner (sodium hydroxide) in water with aluminum will generate hydrogen gas.

 

[Citysnaps]

My older brother has one stuck in his chest right next to his heart from when he was a kid goofing off with friends as a kid, doctors said it was not safe enough to remove it so they just left it.

Whoa!

A couple friends and I would do that with inexpensive Daisy hand guns. If hit, it would sting pretty bad. I know there were more expensive (Feinwerkbau, for example) pellet handguns and rifles used in match competitions that could do serious damage.

 

[Citysnaps]

Here's an interesting story:

China’s Top Airship Scientist Promoted Program to Watch the World From Above

Corporate records and media reports reveal an airship scientist at the center of China’s high-altitude balloon program. Companies he has founded were among those targeted by Washington.

www.nytimes.com

 

[lizkat]

Did a lot of fun stuff when I was a kid.

I stuck to tree climbing contests. Stupidly enough, we climbed tall poplars in the backyard, all in a row for a windbreak. Enough for every kid to grab a different tree and start up, egging each other on as the branches got more spindly. Of course I fell out a few times, we all did and somehow didn't end up w broken necks since we usually got up far enough so that in falling we turned around and were hands down hoping to break the fall, meanwhile getting scratched all to hell as the fuller shape of the tree towards the bottom began to ensnare us.

It's clearly just as well we didn't move on from those endeavors to rocket science.

On topic: I see that as "balloon science" goes, the planet has advanced further through the checklist:

US sees balloon the size of a really big raptor and finally shoots it down. Check.​

​

US says this thing belonged to China. Check.​

​

China says yeah but we didn't mean anything by it, it got away from us. Check.​

​

US says yeah, not: you could be reading my grandma's texts, so just stop. Check.​

​

More "objects" show up over North America. Check.​

​

US shoots them down too after saying not entirely sure what they are. Check.​

​

Media and a bunch of us gawkers call them all "Chinese balloons" because it's simpler. Check.​

​

China says the US has flown balloons into Chinese airspace. Check.​

​

Of course the USA denies that. Check.​

​

This is gonna take awhile, isn't it.

 

[Eric]

 

[NT1440]

For those paying attention, now that the hysteria has been dying down the media is now slowly softening the story by burying admissions paragraphs into stories:

“Meanwhile, the White House on Tuesday said that three other objects shot down over North America in the last week may have posed no national security threat, striking perhaps the clearest distinction yet between those flying anomalies and the suspected spy balloon. John Kirby, the National Security Council’s coordinator for strategic communications, told reporters that the U.S. intelligence community “will not dismiss as a possibility” that the three craft instead belonged to a commercial organization or research entity and were therefore “benign.”

“
By the time a Chinese spy balloon crossed into American airspace late last month, U.S. military and intelligence agencies had been tracking it for nearly a week, watching as it lifted off from its home base on Hainan Island near China’s south coast.
...
The balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands thousands of miles away from Guam, then drifted over Canada, where it encountered strong winds that appear to have pushed the balloon south into the continental United States, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive intelligence. A U.S. fighter jet shot the balloon down off the coast of South Carolina on Feb. 4, a week after it crossed over Alaska."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/02/14/china-spy-balloon-path-tracking-weather/

So we watched it from day one, watched as the broken jet stream swept it off course, and then shot down a bunch of other weather balloons in the media hysteria that followed that only helps the China hawks.


I expect more walking back of the narrative in coming weeks as it becomes safer to do so once the next sensationalized story of the week takes over.

I stated my thoughts on all of this originally that this seemed like an opportunity to whip up public sentiment against China because we’re planning to go to war. This is what manufacturing consent looks like in the 21st century.

LizKat provided a nice summary of how narrative quickly becomes “truth” in post #84. I suggest we all learn something from this as the drumbeats for WWIII continue to march on…

 

[Cmaier]

For those paying attention, now that the hysteria has been dying down the media is now slowly softening the story by burying admissions paragraphs into stories:

“Meanwhile, the White House on Tuesday said that three other objects shot down over North America in the last week may have posed no national security threat, striking perhaps the clearest distinction yet between those flying anomalies and the suspected spy balloon. John Kirby, the National Security Council’s coordinator for strategic communications, told reporters that the U.S. intelligence community “will not dismiss as a possibility” that the three craft instead belonged to a commercial organization or research entity and were therefore “benign.”

“
By the time a Chinese spy balloon crossed into American airspace late last month, U.S. military and intelligence agencies had been tracking it for nearly a week, watching as it lifted off from its home base on Hainan Island near China’s south coast.
...
The balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands thousands of miles away from Guam, then drifted over Canada, where it encountered strong winds that appear to have pushed the balloon south into the continental United States, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive intelligence. A U.S. fighter jet shot the balloon down off the coast of South Carolina on Feb. 4, a week after it crossed over Alaska."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/02/14/china-spy-balloon-path-tracking-weather/

So we watched it from day one, watched as the broken jet stream swept it off course, and then shot down a bunch of other weather balloons in the media hysteria that followed that only helps the China hawks.


I expect more walking back of the narrative in coming weeks as it becomes safer to do so once the next sensationalized story of the week takes over.

I stated my thoughts on all of this originally that this seemed like an opportunity to whip up public sentiment against China because we’re planning to go to war. This is what manufacturing consent looks like in the 21st century.

LizKat provided a nice summary of how narrative quickly becomes “truth” in post #84. I suggest we all learn something from this as the drumbeats for WWIII continue to march on…

I’m not sure I understand your conclusion. Nobody ever said the other 3 had anything to do with China, and from the start it was clear from the reporting that each of the 3 varied in various ways from the one that was from china (including reporting that there was no apparent communication equipment on one, different shapes, etc.). The gov’t said from the start that they had no idea what these things were and they‘d let us know when they have a chance to recover and analyze.

If this were some conspiracy to walk us into war, they didn’t do a very good job of it.

Sometimes a duck is a duck and a spy balloon is a spy balloon.

 

[NT1440]

I’m not sure I understand your conclusion. Nobody ever said the other 3 had anything to do with China, and from the start it was clear from the reporting that each of the 3 varied in various ways from the one that was from china (including reporting that there was no apparent communication equipment on one, different shapes, etc.). The gov’t said from the start that they had no idea what these things were and they‘d let us know when they have a chance to recover and analyze.

If this were some conspiracy to walk us into war, they didn’t do a very good job of it.

Sometimes a duck is a duck and a spy balloon is a spy balloon.

And sometimes the *narrative* is the goal. Any casual news viewer now understands that China is using surveillance balloons on the US. Because there was one…then suddenly 2 more were scary enough to commit millions of dollars to shooting down. The idea that the public wouldn’t link these together given the coverage is a bit rich given the nebulous details in wall to wall coverage.

But regarding the ONE suspect balloon, as noted in bold above, it was pushed *off course* to go over the US. Meaning, that wasn’t the point of the balloon in the first place.

A single news story doesn’t make consent for war. Years of half truths and omissions, however, can solidify in the public mind who the Official Enemy is.

 

[Cmaier]

And sometimes the *narrative* is the goal. Any casual news viewer now understands that China is using surveillance balloons on the US. Because there was one…then suddenly 2 more were scary enough to commit millions of dollars to shooting down. The idea that the public wouldn’t link these together given the coverage is a bit rich given the nebulous details in wall to wall coverage.

But regarding the ONE suspect balloon, as noted in bold above, it was pushed *off course* to go over the US. Meaning, that wasn’t the point of the balloon in the first place.

A single news story doesn’t make consent for war. Years of half truths and omissions, however, can solidify in the public mind who the Official Enemy is.

Who says it was “pushed off course” other than China?

 

[NT1440]

Who says it was “pushed off course” other than China?

I literally included the quote with that part bolded, it’s an excerpt from the Washington Post.

“The balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands thousands of miles away from Guam, then drifted over Canada, where it encountered strong winds that appear to have pushed the balloon south into the continental United States, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive intelligence.”

That’s not quoting a Chinese official.

 

[Citysnaps]

I literally included the quote with that part bolded, it’s an excerpt from the Washington Post.

“The balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands thousands of miles away from Guam, then drifted over Canada, where it encountered strong winds that appear to have pushed the balloon south into the continental United States, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive intelligence.”

That’s not quoting a Chinese official.

Cmaier may have been referring to this from a week and a half ago, directly from China:

"The airship is from China and is civilian in nature, used for meteorological and other scientific research. Due to the influence of westerly winds and its limited control capability, the airship deviated from its intended course," it said.

"China regrets that the airship strayed into the United States by mistake due to force majeure. China will continue to maintain communication with the U.S. side to properly handle this accident," it said.

China says balloon over U.S. is civilian vessel blown off course

China said on Friday an "airship" that is flying over the United States is for civilian meteorological and other scientific purposes and voiced regret that it strayed into U.S. airspace.

www.reuters.com

Are you suggesting the large balloon with antennas, equipment, and at least a kilowatt of solar electricity generation attached to a 100+' boom, traversing across the US, was not engaged in signals collection?

 

[NT1440]

Cmaier may have been referring to this from a week and a half ago, directly from China:

"The airship is from China and is civilian in nature, used for meteorological and other scientific research. Due to the influence of westerly winds and its limited control capability, the airship deviated from its intended course," it said.

"China regrets that the airship strayed into the United States by mistake due to force majeure. China will continue to maintain communication with the U.S. side to properly handle this accident," it said.

China says balloon over U.S. is civilian vessel blown off course

China said on Friday an "airship" that is flying over the United States is for civilian meteorological and other scientific purposes and voiced regret that it strayed into U.S. airspace.

www.reuters.com

Are you suggesting the large balloon with antennas and equipment attached on a 100' boom traversing across the US was not engaged in signals collection?

If it was for signals collection, wouldn’t the admission from both the Chinese and now the US that it went off course mean that it wasn’t intended to do such collection over the continental US?

In other words, let’s just say it was indeed a spy balloon, but both the US and China are now saying it wasn’t meant to be over the US for said collection….what’s the problem here?

As an aside, from July of this year:

U.S. military’s newest weapon against China and Russia: Hot air

The Pentagon is quietly transitioning high-altitude balloon projects to the military services.

www.politico.com

 

[Citysnaps]

If it was for signals collection, wouldn’t the admission from both the Chinese and now the US that it went off course mean that it wasn’t intended to do such collection over the continental US?

In other words, let’s just say it was indeed a spy balloon, but both the US and China are now saying it wasn’t meant to be over the US for said collection….what’s the problem here?

As an aside, from July of this year:

U.S. military’s newest weapon against China and Russia: Hot air

The Pentagon is quietly transitioning high-altitude balloon projects to the military services.

www.politico.com

Specifically, who (ie, a name) in the US is making that admission/claim?

 

[NT1440]

Specifically, who (ie, a name) in the US is making that admission/claim?

Un named sources, which are good enough to tell us us what to fear, but apparently not good enough to counter prevailing narratives now that they set in.

Weird how that works.

I will quote yet again from the Washington Post:

“The balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands thousands of miles away from Guam, then drifted over Canada, where it encountered strong winds that appear to have pushed the balloon south into the continental United States, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive intelligence.”

So the same paper that furthered the balloon story, but now that it might be backing off initial claims the same journalistic standards are not acceptable? I’m trying to find where it’s acceptable, only when pointing to a boogeyman? Not acceptable when claiming that boogeyman is really just a creaky floorboard? Maybe this un-named source that the WaPo is citing is secretly a Russian op?

 

[Citysnaps]

So the same paper that furthered the balloon story, but now that it might be backing off initial claims the same journalistic standards are not acceptable?

No, WaPo is simply quoting an unnamed source who is making that claim. I'm basing my opinion from reading multiple accounts including from high ranking military personnel, looking closely at the photographs, knowing that collecting important low-power signals of interest is difficult from space, reading that the balloon/craft traversed over sensitive military bases, etc.

Also...I know that going back many hudreds of years, major world powers have spied on their adversaries, using a wide variety of methods. That’s certainly true today, and includes the US and other powerful countries.

Except, in your view, China. Who apparently has no interest in understanding and sussing out US (and other country's) strategic military offensive/defensive systems, technology, capabilities, etc.

No doubt you believe that large balloon with attached equipment/antennas/solar power generation/etc that traversed over the US was really for weather research because that’s what China said and would never be deceptive.

That's OK. Believe what you want.

 

[NT1440]

No, WaPo is simply quoting an unnamed source who is making that claim. I'm basing my opinion from reading multiple accounts including from high ranking military personnel, looking closely at the photographs, knowing that collecting important low-power signals of interest is difficult from space, reading that the balloon/craft traversed over sensitive military bases, etc.

Also...I know that going back many hudreds of years, major world powers have spied on their adversaries, using a wide variety of methods. That’s certainly true today, and includes the US and other powerful countries.

Except, in your view, China. Who apparently has no interest in understanding and sussing out US (and other country's) strategic military offensive/defensive systems, technology, capabilities, etc.

No doubt you believe that large balloon with attached equipment/antennas/solar power generation/etc that traversed over the US was really for weather research because that’s what China said and would never be deceptive.

That's OK. Believe what you want.

So…CNN repeating the same walk back any good for you? Expect more of these in the coming days. They’re all projecting that the balloon was never intended to be over the US in the first place.

Loading…

www.cnn.com

Now, I think we discussed earlier in the thread that if the balloon stayed on course it would have been over the arctic. I can see benefits for a surveillance program there as the US, Russia, and others are exploring newly opening up shipping lanes (thanks global warming!).

So let’s split the difference, let’s say it was a spy balloon. Now that the US is slowly accepting that the balloon was never intended to go over the US but was blown off course by the jet stream fluctuations (polar vortex), can we be friends?

I’m honestly a bit tired of the animosity this story has whipped up here. I come here to discuss world politics with people that actually have the wherewithal to be a little more attentive to these topics than most. I know many of you disagree with my worldview, but I’m not here to fight (being human, obviously I can get a bit testy). I’m just looking to have conversations that would bore the hell out of most “regular” people.

 

[Citysnaps]

I can see benefits for a surveillance program there as the US, Russia, and others are exploring newly opening up shipping lanes (thanks global warming!).

The thing is, China already has Radar/Optical/Signals reconnaissance space assets in polar orbits (multiple passes per day, as Earth rotates underneath) capable of monitoring any and all ship traffic in that area. Ships are huge and easy to spot, communications are not low-power. Thus shipping activity is relatively easy to intercept and surveil from space.

I’m just looking to have conversations that would bore the hell out of most “regular” people.

Same here. We're good.
.

 

[Herdfan]

Now, I think we discussed earlier in the thread that if the balloon stayed on course it would have been over the arctic. I can see benefits for a surveillance program there as the US, Russia, and others are exploring newly opening up shipping lanes (thanks global warming!).

I can as well. But if this really was the case, why wasn't this public info to begin with? Would there have been any reason for China not to have picked up the phone and said, "Hey, we have a rogue weather balloon going off course"?

And there could have been multiple applications for the same balloon.

And, I hope you survive this , but I agree with you about the narrative. Get the people ready for a war with China. Way back in 2003, Ithought going to war with Iraq was a horrible idea. WMD's or not. But the majority of the people supported it, so we did it and how did that turn out for us as a whole?

 

[Citysnaps]

Way back in 2003, Ithought going to war with Iraq was a horrible idea. WMD's or not. But the majority of the people supported it, so we did it and how did that turn out for us as a whole?

Same here.

We'd have been just as likely to discover WMD in Mexico.

 

[NT1440]

Same here.

We'd have been just as likely to discover WMD in Mexico.

To be fair, we knew where there formerly were WMD in Iraq when we and the UK had no problem selling it to Saddam

Britain's dirty secret | Politics | The Guardian

This is Falluja 2, identified by Colin Powell as an Iraqi chemical weapons plant. Confidential documents show we were warned but we helped build it. And we covered it up.

amp.theguardian.com

It was the purposeful crafting and leaking of partial information over the course of the year that made invasion *politically* viable (despite the largest protests from citizens of the nations of the world in history, but who cares what The People want?).