• FlowVoid@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    And The Guardian referred to it as a spy balloon right in this very article.

    Incidentally, the Pentagon said it did not collect information over the US. Perhaps it was intended to collect information elsewhere.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or the most logical explanation that it’s a weather balloon that blew off course and that US regime has been cynically lying about.

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There have been multiple incidents of Chinese balloons that “flew off course” and ended up over sovereign airspace.

        If China doesn’t want its balloons destroyed, it will have to do a better job controlling its “research instruments”.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Balloons that follow air currents have blown of course more than once, wow that’s sinister. The fact that US reacted in an absolutely deranged fashion to a weather balloon being blown off course is the real story here. It shows the whole world that US is run by a dangerous and unstable regime. The fact that such unhinged lunatics have the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world should worry everyone.

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            But real weather balloons do not follow air currents. They ascend and descend over the same point, so that they can be easily recovered by real scientists. Real weather balloons are also far smaller. Various scientists, not just Americans, said that the Chinese balloons did not resemble the instruments they use.

              • FlowVoid@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m afraid you are the one making things up. The article doesn’t say anything about balloons following air currents, quite the opposite:

                That’s because balloons still offer unique advantages: They don’t disturb their surrounding environment, they’re very gentle on scientific instruments, they can hover in one place for extended periods of time

                Normal weather balloons are far smaller and incapable of crossing an ocean. The Chinese balloon was not a normal weather balloon.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This is going to blow your mind, but there are different kinds of balloons for different purposes. Also, the word can has a different meaning from the world must. Perhaps work on your reading comprehension?

                  • FlowVoid@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Sure, it’s possible that China deployed a completely novel type of weather balloon. But if so, it should not be surprised by the interception of its unusual balloon when it entered US airspace.

                    For that matter, if you designed a brand new weather instrument that was carried in the back of a Cessna, and then you flew that Cessna into Chinese airspace to carry out your measurements, then you should expect to be intercepted and probably arrested. After all, Mathias Rust was sentenced to four years for violating Soviet airspace.