MachineFab812
joined 2 years ago
IIRC, it was regarging Air to Air engagement, and you got me on Geneva Conventions: It would be International Law, but I'm not having any luck finding anything the US has agreed to at the moment.
I will say, I made zero mention of Stealth. Nothing about Stealth prevents positive target identification once you have visual confirmation. The main reasons not to lob missiles at Stealth aircraft you can't physically see revolve around not wasting those missiles on birds, kites, or small civilian aircraft.
There's still the fact that Beyond The Horizon engagement is going to require either pilots firing blind or magically getting some sort of confirmation from a third party(gets dicey with weather or with all the ECM static that would need to be dealt with in a real war involving air to air combat much at all). Meanwhile, legitimate targets move fast enough to enter visual range before that can happen as often as not.
If dog-fighting were over, the F35 wouldn't even have a gun, or it would be angled downward for ground support, a role which the standard F35 doesn't/can't fly slow enough for anyways. This is something that literally led to the design of the F14 in the first place, as they had thought dog-fighting was dead when they fielded the F4 Phantom.
Just wait until someone posts an archive.org link? Nevermind that I didn't even see any pop-ups or pop-over ads when I read the article, but here: https://web.archive.org/web/20240128113926/https://www.sciencealert.com/world-first-partial-heart-transplant-is-growing-with-a-baby
There should also be a Lemmy feature request for user blocking of domains floating around, but for me its buried in other search results.
The carbon footprint of the average person in Sub-Saharan Africa is nothing close to yours or mine. The idea that that article recommends eliminating wood-burning entirely is ... not born-out in its text.
What do you think the biomass in "Efficient Biomass Cooking" is? Its wood. The carbon footprint of the transportation of any other fuel to these people alone would more than offset any criteria by which wood-burning falls short, until we can electrify the entire world, and/or get everyone using solar ovens for cooking.
"Stranger Danger" and "Bad Touch" aren't discussed in Indiana Classrooms until the 2nd grade, and even then, its super-vague.
I can't even find the quote you've "replied" to in this thread, and it deffinitely was not myself who said it ...
No point. Its the diversified old-growth forests we need to protect. Planting more trees without achieving that is pointless. There is not enough wood-burning for heat and/or fuel happening to make a difference vs what we do grow though, as the vast majority of what we do grow goes into construction.
You want to stop indigenous peoples burning wood for heat and cooking? How about we stop paying them to burn down rainforests for farms and ranches first. If we can accomplish that, cracking down on campfires becomes a pointless endeavor.
You know we farm trees, right?
A Chinese man who chain-smoked his way through a marathon was disqualified for smoking on the course
Like I said. The weakest form of enforcement possible. Their policy accomplished nothing here, and somehow they were proud enough of that nothing to try to get papers to crow about it.
Girl on the left and trashcan on the right are literally following the same standard though? She gets the moral high ground for being unable to afford a Baneblade?
I mean, fair I guess, but say THAT next time.
RUDE