|
Peztopiary posted:Basically, it's really impolite to call bullshit on entire countries. It's also hard for people to understand how one person can have enough power to do that. Thus, conspiracy theories. (Soros acted the way a Capitalist should, that the results were monstrous has everything to do with the nature of Capitalism. ) Don't hate the player hate the game~
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Right, the antimatter will all eventually get annihilated, but some non-negligible percentage of it might get annihilated in a less-than-ideal location, such as far away from your bomb site. For instance, if you're careless and just turn off the suspension vessel, the antimatter dropp will annihilate asymmetrically. This definitely creates a nice big explosion, but some fraction of the remaining antimatter droplet will be flung *somewhere else*, possibly with minimal matter contact along the way, since air is not particularly dense. This isn't terrible, but it's less than ideal. If you're careful and maximize antimatter-matter surface contact during annihilation, then you maximize your effective yield, which is the goal. The mean free path in air is on the order of tens of nanometers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
SN1987A posted:The mean free path in air is on the order of tens of nanometers. On average, yes. But explosions tend to create voids
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:On average, yes. But explosions tend to create voids Explosions aren't known for being low-pressure environments.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:Explosions aren't known for being low-pressure environments. Again, you're right if you're talking about the mean pressure. But they do tend to create regions of low pressure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Again, you're right if you're talking about the mean pressure. But they do tend to create regions of low pressure. Yes, they create rarefaction zones behind compression zones. But all of that happens much slower than the reaction timescale for antimatter. Even if it didn't, why would the antimatter be in the region behind the shock wave instead of being blasted out with it? Also, containment vessels tend to be made of pretty dense materials.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
SN1987A posted:Yes, they create rarefaction zones behind compression zones. But all of that happens much slower than the reaction timescale for antimatter. Even if it didn't, why would the antimatter be in the region behind the shock wave instead of being blasted out with it? Also, containment vessels tend to be made of pretty dense materials. It wouldn't, my point is that anyone who says that bombs are not known for creating low pressure zones probably doesn't know much about bombs. Really all that I'm saying is that bomb designers work very hard to optimize their explosive yields, and I imagine that a hypothetical antimatter bomb designer would be no different in that respect. It'd be like trying to make a bomb out of a chemical that violently reacts when exposed to air, but many many orders of magnitude more difficult to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
Well like all the antimatter ever made by man would be microscopic, and it'd take like thousands of years if every lab on earth were turned over to its creation to make enough to build even an antimatter hand grenade. Maybe we can find massive bodies of antimatter somewhere out in space or something, then we can worry about how to harvest and use it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Moose-Alini posted:Well like all the antimatter ever made by man would be microscopic, and it'd take like thousands of years if every lab on earth were turned over to its creation to make enough to build even an antimatter hand grenade. Right, we all already agree on that. We're just theorycrafting; talking about antimatter bomb design is like talking about whether Superman or Batman would win in a fight
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Right, we all already agree on that. We're just theorycrafting; talking about antimatter bomb design is like talking about whether Superman or Batman would win in a fight Has batman ever lost to superman? Is 9/11 a coverup of a batman v superman brawl in the twin towers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Has batman ever lost to superman? Yes, if you turn to pay 37 of my self-insert erotic fanfiction then you'll see that...
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Has batman ever lost to superman? Yes, in The Dark Knight Returns. Vvv that's still a loss! :V Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Nov 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Bruce deliberately threw that fight. It was Suicide By Kryptonian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
 This has been my go-to standard response to my hippy friends posting conspiracy theories on facebook for a while now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
duck monster posted:
Good idea; I"m going to starting doing this now. I legit had a friend post one of those "reporter shooting was fake" posts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
OMG I was making a "Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel Beams" joke with a co-worker when another co-worker turned it into a serious discussion.... And he brought up WTC7. GDI I hate even knowing a lot of the 9/11 conspiracy theroy stuff I do, and I really hate talking about it now. I do like how I keep cutting him off on his train of thought, though. "Yeah, you know WTC7 that fell, that wasn't hit by a plane?" "Yeah, the one that was hit by massive amounts of debris from the towers' collapse?" and he would pause for a moment and couldn't really pick it back up. And yes, I had to do the "You're right, you don't have to melt steel in order to have it start to fail!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:OMG I really loving hate that they act like most of us sheeple somehow don't know Building 7 fell and they're so loving smug about it. "You probably didn't know Building 7 also collapsed, but it wasn't hit by a plane" 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm3Ii9BXai4 Jews did
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Yarbald posted:I really loving hate that they act like most of us sheeple somehow don't know Building 7 fell and they're so loving smug about it. I know; I used to be one of those  idiots.  That's what just makes it that much more infuriating, since I woke up out of that poo poo. I guess it helps me argue against it when I already know the playbook.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Has batman ever lost to superman? He will in about 4 months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
computer parts posted:He will in about 4 months. With Zack Snyder movies, we all lose.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
duck monster posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm3Ii9BXai4 God drat it, is there any attack they don't believe was a false flag?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
King Dopplepopolos posted:God drat it, is there any attack they don't believe was a false flag? D-Day?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:I know; I used to be one of those What helped snap you out of it, if I can ask?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Yeah, what is the playbook, exactly? Just find a way to feel smarter than the person contradicting you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What helped snap you out of it, if I can ask? It's been a while so I don't recall that well. It started with me realizing some things he was saying I wasn't able to fully quantify because I wasn't reading all the articles he was sourcing and to an extent what he said that had mad sense during the broadcast didn't make as much sense later. I then decided to take a break for it all for a bit because I was getting overwhelmed and classes were more important. Amonth later I decided to start listening to Alex Jones again and I started to see him take things in ways that no longer made sense. As in the more likely answer didn't make sense. I only really recall well some article about a possible future where humans split off into 2 different species - one being the smarter and one not so much - and him taking it as "this is what they want for us!". I was embarrassed for being bought in for so long that I through all of my Alex Jones stuff in the trash. At least for a while I've gotten to the point of laughing at it because I realized I got bought into it. Also my skeptical and critical thinking has actually been significantly improved after moving on from it. Not so much the "I've stopped turning off my critical thinking" but more so "I got scammed and now I"m more vigilant". I guess that's also the reason I'm more liberal now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
It's a little discouraging that it takes something like a Morlocks/Eloi theory to make someone go "uhhh wait a sec"
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
I had something of a conspiracy theorist thing going on for a while as I was voracious reader and watching stuff like the X-files and all those screwed up History channel style documentaries got me into books on similar stuff. I never listened to any of the radio shows at the time, but I read and took in a lot of the more grounded stuff, you know the JFK assassination, 9/11Truth, Holy Blood/ Holy Grail, Area 51, The Gulf of Tonkin false flag, religion as recycled opiate of the masses, stuff like that. But I was still a voracious reader, and though I got to the debunking books late, I did get to them, and it read smarter and more consistently than all the conspiracy stuff. So, I changed my mind. Still feel embarrassed about some of the conversations I had when I was still into that stuff. It fulfills that curiosity, that want to learn more about the world, and if all you have on these subjects is the story told in high school mixed with a heavy reader's understanding that it isn't the whole story, you can easily get sucked into this stuff, especially given the right books and confident sounding narrators in documentaries. When I read "Holy Blood Holy Grail", I was still really into this stuff, by the time I read it's sequel, "The Messianic Legacy", I was just doing it for the sake of completeness and entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:It's been a while so I don't recall that well. It started with me realizing some things he was saying I wasn't able to fully quantify because I wasn't reading all the articles he was sourcing and to an extent what he said that had mad sense during the broadcast didn't make as much sense later. That you took a break from the constant stream of paranoid media and had other pursuits to occupy you explains a lot, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
e_angst posted:D-Day? Hitler did D-Day. Jews did Stalingrad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 19:03
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
chitoryu12 posted:In the full video he spends nearly a full minute aiming the gun at her on camera, and they've got such tunnel vision from reporting that they don't notice the gun until he starts firing. I'm 99% sure he hit and there's just no way to see the impacts because there's no Hollywood squibs exploding blood packs under her jacket. I was on a jury for an attempted murder trial, and the defendant was accused of* firing all 6 shots in his revolver at the victim (we had a surveillance video from multiple angles showing every shot). The victim was hit by one, but it would have been nearly impossible to tel which one if it hadn't been explained to us in the trial. The victim was hit in the leg and instantly bolted off into the store, so unless the little bits of blood were pointed out in the video it would have been really hard to tell that the first shot was the one that hit him and that he wasn't just running because this dude fired a gun at him. *He almost certainly did it, but I was chosen as an alternate immediately before deliberations so I don't know how things turned out. Based on what I heard during the trial, I would have gone with attempted second degree murder (the prosecution was aiming for first degree, but there was zero evidence for premeditation of any sort).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I was on a jury for an attempted murder trial, and the defendant was accused of* firing all 6 shots in his revolver at the victim (we had a surveillance video from multiple angles showing every shot). The victim was hit by one, but it would have been nearly impossible to tel which one if it hadn't been explained to us in the trial. The victim was hit in the leg and instantly bolted off into the store, so unless the little bits of blood were pointed out in the video it would have been really hard to tell that the first shot was the one that hit him and that he wasn't just running because this dude fired a gun at him. The key part to take away from real violence is that it looks nothing like Hollywood violence, but the majority of people don't know anything beyond the Hollywood depiction. You expect gunshots to have a physical impact to them, throwing people backwards or spinning them around, and with blood exploding out from the wound. People falling from gunfire in movies and TV always looks like someone intentionally throwing themselves or collapsing, rather than spontaneously falling over. When someone really gets shot in the head and killed instantly, they don't fall back with their arms flying out and one arm out behind their back to brace the fall. Their legs just crumple under them like someone flipped a switch and they take the shortest vertical path to the ground. And unfortunately, this lack of understanding makes conspiracy theories so much easier to believe. If violence and destruction don't look like the only violence and destruction you've seen clearly depicted in front of you, you start to wonder if it's real.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:OMG You could show your friend this picture of WTC7 completely snowed under by debris; like it's not even visible, maybe that would hammer the point home?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
I wish I could find a picture of the side of Building 7 that faced the towers, I've seen examples before and it was a flaming ruin, but there's still this from the non-wrecked flank before the building came down:
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
zeal posted:I wish I could find a picture of the side of Building 7 that faced the towers, I've seen examples before and it was a flaming ruin, but there's still this from the non-wrecked flank before the building came down: IIRC, when the planes hit there was a lot of executive wooden furniture that got shredded and ignited in the jet fuel explosion, blowing countless shards of quality burning hardwood through the windows of WTC 7.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
jet fuel can't melt expensive furniture
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 09:06
|
|
|
no see those are just doctored photos, the fact that the government would go this far means that this is just further proof that tower 7 was destroyed by controlled demolition! *resumes huffing paint*
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 09:12
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:no see those are just doctored photos, the fact that the government would go this far means that this is just further proof that tower 7 was destroyed by controlled demolition! There is no reason people wouldn't be able to enter the most crowded commercial buildings in the world, wait till no one was looking, and then plant thermite explosives inside the walls, and then be sworn to complete secrecy (outside of horribly crude youtube vidyas) for ever! *can is labeled: own farts*
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
Tias posted:There is no reason people wouldn't be able to enter the most crowded commercial buildings in the world, wait till no one was looking, and then plant thermite explosives inside the walls, and then be sworn to complete secrecy (outside of horribly crude youtube vidyas) for ever! They where built wired to explode, duh
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:That you took a break from the constant stream of paranoid media and had other pursuits to occupy you explains a lot, thanks. Yeah, pretty much. The main thing that convinced mein the first place was one of Alex Jones' "documentaries". It involved footage of local anchors during the OKC bombing talking about a second and third bomb being found at the - that I never heard of before - being carted off. Unfortunately part of the issue was that it wasn't disclosed/realized until 2007 (a few years after I saw the video) that they were ATF training devices, Which makes sense since ATF HQ was in the building... Data Graham posted:It's a little discouraging that it takes something like a Morlocks/Eloi theory to make someone go "uhhh wait a sec" No, that was just the first thing that he was talking about after I came back; in general it was me no longer following the twisted logic (especially because he left out a paragraph from the article that implicitly contradicted what he was claiming it was)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 18:43
|
|