There is no way anybody could have predicted this, is there?
No possibility exists that the smartest person on earth could have expected anything like this would ever happen, right?
Only some kind of radical, ESPer could have seen this coming, right?
Nobody would have EVER, EVER thought this possible, right?
NEW YORK (Reuters) - An American Airlines Group Inc aircraft almost collided with a drone above Florida earlier this year...
Jim Williams, manager of the Federal Aviation Administrations's Unmanned Aircraft System Integration Office, said, The airplane pilot said that the UAS was so close to his jet that he was sure he had collided with it..."
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
Jetliners "almost collide" with each other and birds all the time. How is this any different and how is it Obama's fault???
XO: It's like volcanoes spew tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, so let's not add the minuscule amount spewed by man.
We should just add some more air traffic to make things worse.
Actually, the post just had to do with whether or not we should be surprised that a drone and an air liner almost engaged in a personal relationship with each other.
This is why the FAA has been told to come up with a plan to integrate drones into the commercial air space. They will almost certainly have to have transponders on them so that we know where they are at all times. And I personally would like to see a sort of open source "caller ID" requirement where if I see a drone and think it is invading my privacy, I can use an app on my smartphone to identify what type of drone it is, who it is registered to, and the contact information for that person or entity. No anonymous drones!
XO: "...source "caller ID" requirement where if I see a drone and think it is invading my privacy..."
For some strange reason, every once in a while you get smart and I agree with you.
I would go one step further. Our smart phones would have an app on them that would let us interrupt the drone's signal, override it and send the drone back from whence it came (most likely Amazon or the NSA).
Joe, do you think drones should be regulated? If so, by whom? The feds or states? If you say the states, do you think it's wise to have 57 different sets of regulations? I think you know my answer.
P.s. Since you brought it up and in the interest of you not looking so foolish in the future, human activity is responsible for dumping 135 times more CO2 into the atmosphere than all volcanic activity on earth each year.
1 of many sources.
Craig: "...human activity is responsible for dumping 135 times more CO2 into the atmosphere than all volcanic activity on earth each year."
Patently false.
I think FAA should regulate drones. Does that surprise you? That's one of the few federal agencies I fully support (although I do wish they would bring their technology into the 21st century).
That does not mean I support the waste that they establish in the agency.
Imagine that! Points of agreement! The world must be coming to an end.
Look at this article, especially the first comment about an RC aircraft.
Since the "drone" was described as a "small" F-4, I'm betting the commenter was correct. Not a drone, but a model.
I forgot the link;
http://defensetech.org/2014/05/12/faa-operator-of-wayward-drone-unknown/?comp=1198882887570&rank=3
Patently false
Peer reviewed research published the American Geophysical Union's Eos
The projected 2010 anthropogenic CO2
emission rate of 35 gigatons per year is 135
times greater than the 0.26-
gigaton-per-year
preferred estimate for volcanoes. This ratio
of anthropogenic to volcanic CO2
emissions defines the anthropogenic CO2 multiplier (ACM), an index of anthropogenic
CO2’s dominance over volcanic CO2 emissions.
You got one right, regulating drones. 50%, your score is improving. I stuck a little joke in my last comment. Did you catch it?
Craig: What joke? The president has decreed that there are 57 states so there are 57 states. He signed an Executive Order. What joke?
:: sigh ::
I deal with this volcano/human nonsense all the time.
Let me try and make this simple for you.
Put a big dutch oven full of water on the stove, turn the gas burner on the highest possible sitting and leave it like that for an hour.
Eventually, the flames will engulf the bottom of the pot, the water will come to a furious boil releasing much steam and noise.
Very dramatic! Very impressive.
But after the burner is turned off and the water cools down, you have almost the same amount of water you had before.
That's your volcano. Impressive, but insignificant.
Take the same dutch oven full of the same amount of water, turn the gas burner on the lowest possible setting and leave it there for a month.
The water will be boiled away, the dutch oven will be red hot and starting to deform and warp.
That is the human impact on the environment. That is the overall global warming that causes climate change all across the planet.
Colder winters, hotter summers, longer and dryer droughts, wetter monsoons, more powerful and destructive hurricanes and tornadoes, larger hail, stronger winds, rapid pole-to-pole melting of glacier ice in the Arctic, Greenland and Antarctica.
More extreme weather everywhere on the planet and we are the cause.
People who refuse to act on the overwhelming evidence are condemning their children and grandchildren to an uninhabitable planet.
X.O.
There is NO evidence for man-caused global warming or cooling, etc.
The earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling forever.
If it wasn't for Algore and his lies, there would have been no political involvement. All political involvement became excuses for taxing us more and instituting programs and projects of virtually no value except to those who are collecting the tax dollars paid to them for their useless programs.
XO: "Let me try and make this simple for you."
Why didn't you actually do that?
Your example does not hold water.
"More extreme weather everywhere on the planet and we are the cause."
Maybe you are, I am not. Care to leave us?
GEC: "The earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling forever."
You mean even before man? Who knew?
G.E.C. - "There is NO evidence for man-caused global warming or cooling, etc."
You are wrong. You don't just have a different opinion. You are flat out wrong!
97% of the scientific community agrees with this concensus.
But you think you know more than they do? Based on what? The Bible?
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/human-caused
http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/29/climate-talks-science-idUSL5E8MT35Z20121129
http://ciesin.columbia.edu/docs/iucc1/fs1.html
http://planetsave.com/2010/08/18/humans-cause-global-warming-10-indicators/
http://news.msn.com/science-technology/un-evidence-for-man-made-climate-change-stronger
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/
http://www.nature.com/news/at-least-three-quarters-of-climate-change-is-man-made-1.9538
I could do this all night long because the evidence is overwhelming and indisputable.
X.O. The evidence is MUCH disputable:
http://petitionproject.org/
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/human-caused-global-warming-global-climate-change-still-a-hoax-by-any-name/
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2013/03/18/obama-halts-global-warming-by-executive-order-n1536914/page/full/
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2013/03/16/report-no-statistical-global-warming-in-17-years/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/12/climate-change-not-2012-drought
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2013/04/12/lawrence-solomon-media-consensus-on-global-warming-cracking/
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2013/04/16/carbon-not-culprit-in-global-warming-science-is-say-scientists-n1568608/page/full/
http://siftingreality.com/2013/04/17/oops-climate-scientists-wrong-again/
http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2013/06/05/is-the-global-warming-climate-change-hoax-coming-to-an-end/
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/07/swedish-scientist-replicates-dr-murry.html
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/signs-that-warming-scare-is-all-hot-air/story-e6frfhqf-1226640600205
http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/07/26/global-warming-fear-mongering/
http://siftingreality.com/2013/08/19/global-warming-doomsday-predictions-not-panning-out/
http://onenewsnow.com//media/2013/07/01/media-still-ignoring-facts-re-climate-change#.Uie_uBY0tkF
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2425775/Climate-scientists-told-cover-fact-Earths-temperature-risen-15-years.html
http://siftingreality.com/2013/09/26/polar-ice-at-record-highs-but-but-global-warming/
http://siftingreality.com/2013/09/30/study-released-in-the-journal-nature-climate-change-confirms-hiatus-in-global-warming/
http://siftingreality.com/2013/11/04/new-peer-reviewed-study-predicts-pause-in-global-warming-could-last-two-decades/
http://www.climatedepot.com
http://nypost.com/2013/12/05/global-warming-proof-is-evaporating/
http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/un-makes-us-pay-for-the-weather.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-myth-of-settled-science/2014/02/20/c1f8d994-9a75-11e3-b931-0204122c514b_story.html
http://siftingreality.com/2014/03/03/founder-of-greenpeace-admits-no-evidence-climate-change-is-caused-by-man/
XO: "97% of the scientific community agrees with this concensus."
97% of statistics are made up, just like that one.
As a matter of fact, the percentage of consensus is NOT 97%...not even close.
Check out the TRUE percent who agree:
http://barbwire.com/2014/05/16/where-did-97-percent-global-warming-consensus-figure-come-from/
The X.O.'s of the world are lemmings, accepting everything the liberal media tells them.
97% of the scientific community agrees with this concensus
Sorry XO, that is not an accurate statement. It should be 97% of published climate scientists.
Glenn, The Cook study wasn't the only one to reach the 97% conclusion. Here is Cook's rebuttal to the deniers.
Nevertheless, the existence of the expert consensus on human-caused global warming is a reality, as is clear from an examination of the full body of evidence. For example, Naomi Oreskes found no rejections of the consensus in a survey of 928 abstracts performed in 2004. Doran & Zimmerman (2009) found a 97% consensus among scientists actively publishing climate research. Anderegg et al. (2010) reviewed publicly signed declarations supporting or rejecting human-caused global warming, and again found over 97% consensus among climate experts. Cook et al. (2013) found the same 97% result through a survey of over 12,000 climate abstracts from peer-reviewed journals, as well as from over 2,000 scientist author self-ratings, among abstracts and papers taking a position on the causes of global warming.
There is NO evidence for man-caused global warming or cooling, etc
That ranks as one of the dumbest things you've ever said and you have set the bar really high. It reveals your complete ignorance on the subject. Because you haven't bothered to look doesn't mean the mountain of evidence doesn't exist. If ignorance is bliss, you must be the happiest person on earth.
Craig,
No, it isn't one of the dumbest things said, nor does it show ignorance. What is dumb and showing ignorance is the accepting of the nonsense that man can cause climate change.
People ignore the evidence that for thousands of years the climate of the earth has gone though heating and cooling cycles. Most people know about the "little ice age" with the "global cooling,"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
Man had nothing to do with it. A few decades the cry from the leftist enviro-wackos was "global cooling" and then more recently "global warming," and when all that was proven to be nonsense they changed their cry to "climate change." And the media propagated it while dissent was muzzled.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/16/climategate-ii-scientific-community-accused-muzzling-dissent-on-global-warming/
Here ya go, Glenn. Bengtsson's paper was rejected because it is bad science.
I read your link. Mark Moreno quotes? Ignorance on parade. I hope you'll read mine. If you are at all interested, look up the rest of your tired denial claims to see how easily they're debunked. I haven't time to do your homework.
Craig,
I read the article. Just more of the left saying the "deniers' are lying while they propagate their own lies about "climate change"
Like I said before, no one has yet provided incontrovertible evidence than man has caused any climate change. The proof is the thousands of years of climate change long before the industrialization of mankind.
It's all about more government control of businesses and personal lives.
Global Warming?
http://barbwire.com/2014/05/17/someone-tell-record-polar-ice-cap-melting/
Post a Comment