Estimating Flight Characteristics of Anomalous Unidentified Aerial Vehicles in the 2004 Nimitz Encounter

Published: 16 December 2019
Abstract: A number of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) encountered by military, commercial, and civilian aircraft have been reported to be structured craft that exhibit ‘impossible’ flight characteristics. We consider the 2004 UAP encounters with the Nimitz Carrier Group off the coast of California, and estimate lower bounds on the accelerations exhibited by the craft during the observed maneuvers. Estimated accelerations range from 75 g to more than 5000 g with no observed air disturbance, no sonic booms, and no evidence of excessive heat commensurate with even the minimal estimated energies. In accordance with observations, the estimated parameters describing the behavior of these craft are both anomalous and surprising. The extreme estimated flight characteristics reveal that these observations are either fabricated or seriously in error, or that these craft exhibit technology far more advanced than any known craft on Earth. In the case of the Nimitz encounters the number and quality of witnesses, the variety of roles they played in the encounters, and the equipment used to track and record the craft favor the latter hypothesis that these are technologically advanced craft.

Also see:

DRAFT June 1947 Relationships with Inhabitants of Celestial Bodies

LOGr-App.com

LOGr-Research.com – Search Your Way – Category Engine (Targeted Selection: News/Financial/Shop/Style), Saved Searches, Fast Updates, Take Notes, Export with Citation, In the App Store https://apps.apple.com/us/app/logr-research-app/id1456324753

Political Junkie Sunday Clinics

The Sunday Morning Shows

Find your story! Explore, Discover and Share with http://LOGr-App.com

LOGr-Icon-0a.png

Facebook F.A.I.L.

Facebook Research

https://research.fb.com/blog/2020/02/new-privacy-protected-facebook-data-for-independent-research-on-social-medias-impact-on-democracy/

The following came from Robinhood Snacks, get yours.

“Facebook adds Reuters to its fact-checking army against quasi-impossible odds

What’s a Deepfake, again?… Facebook, with its 2.5B users sharing billions of posts, just made a new addition to its fact-checking army: a whopping 4 journalists. The 4 Reuters journalists will join a US fact-checking team that includes the Associated Press, PolitiFact, Factcheck.org, and thousands of FB-employed contractors. Oh, and don’t forget machine-taught AI bots that spot potentially false news and flag ALL-CAPS!!! posts.

• ‘Tis the Season: Political ads season. Presidential primary elections are happening — and the outflow of political ads and posts is just gonna increase. FB’s been in hot water for misinformation on its platform — and the jacuzzi is getting hotter.

• Cue the Fact Squad: We’re calling it: Factual Accuracy Investigation League (or F.A.I.L., for short). This crew of moderators, journalists, and bots has a lot on its plate (billions of posts per day, including generous servings of misleading, false, and manipulative information).

• Blog About It: Reuters’ 4 journalists will review user-generated vids, pics, and headlines that were flagged or submitted for review. Then, they’ll blog about whether something is true, false, or partially true. FB will use those conclusions to label bad info and limit its spread in the News Feed algorithm (by up to 80%).

THE TAKEAWAY

It would really take an army… to actually fact-check and verify every single Facebook post for misinformation, since most is user-generated content. Even with its F.A.I.L. army, Facebook has become nearly too big to moderate. And Zuck still insists that it’s a social network — not an editorial operation like The Wall Street Journal. Since Facebook is failing to keep up, you’ll need to stay vigilent.”

… What’s your story? http://LOGr-App.com

When dating data isn’t enough

All the usual answers about online dating https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/06/10-facts-about-americans-and-online-dating/

How Pew collected the data https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/06/online-dating-methodology-2/

Pew Research Center has long studied the changing nature of romantic relationships and the role of digital technology in how people meet potential partners and navigate web-based dating platforms. This particular report focuses on the patterns, experiences and attitudes related to online dating in America. These findings are based on a survey (ADD hyperlink) conducted Oct. 16 to 28, 2019, among 4,860 U.S. adults. This includes those who took part as members of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses, as well as respondents from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel who indicated that they identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB). The margin of sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

Recruiting ATP panelists by phone or mail ensures that nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. This gives us confidence that any sample can represent the whole U.S. adult population (see our Methods 101 explainer on random sampling).To further ensure that each ATP survey reflects a balanced cross-section of the nation, the data are weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories.

For more, see the report’s methodology about the project. You can also find the questions asked, and the answers the public provided, in this topline.

=> Get content for your story! Use LOGr https://apple.co/2GIX32u