[HN Gopher] Windshield pitting incidents in Washington reach fev...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Windshield pitting incidents in Washington reach fever pitch on
       April 15, 1954 (2003)
        
       Author : psc
       Score  : 181 points
       Date   : 2024-12-18 20:01 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.historylink.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.historylink.org)
        
       | ggm wrote:
       | Timely, given the "lights in the sky" fever.
        
         | AlexandrB wrote:
         | I don't get why someone would see lights in the sky and jump to
         | anything other than "domestic/commercial aircraft". Why would
         | aliens or foreign powers light their vehicles up for easy
         | spotting?
         | 
         |  _I_ would really start to worry if I spotted an aircraft at
         | dusk /night with no lights on it.
        
           | jerlam wrote:
           | They were primed by social media and other sources to believe
           | it.
        
             | evan_ wrote:
             | Not to mention, videos of "drones" are hot right now and
             | get a lot of traffic, so if you can convince yourself that
             | the lights you see in the sky above the airport are drones,
             | you too can get some of those eyeballs
        
           | dfxm12 wrote:
           | Most people don't know what airplanes _really_ look like or
           | what lights they have on them. To most people, _any_ flying
           | object is unidentified and _any_ aerial phenomenon is
           | unexplained. We use pennies more regularly than we see
           | airplanes, but how many can pick the right penny from this
           | lineup? https://human-
           | factors.arc.nasa.gov/groups/cognition/tutorial...
           | 
           | It gets easier to believe when supposed trustworthy sources:
           | news outlets, the government as a whole and even specific
           | senators/ex governors, fan the flames of conspiracy instead
           | of common sense.
        
             | whimsicalism wrote:
             | i have not used a penny in at least 5 years, i see planes
             | on the daily - but get your point.
             | 
             | pennies are useless junk, straight to the recycling bin for
             | me. really epitomizes our dysfunction that we are unable to
             | stop making them
        
               | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
               | I have to keep making pennies to replace the ones you're
               | throwing away! Don't destroy currency!
               | 
               | I put mine in baggies and use them as weights
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | dealing with them in any other way is literally not
               | economical to me if it takes more than like a quarter of
               | a second of time.
        
           | outworlder wrote:
           | Aliens are just good neighbors and figured out FAA
           | regulations before visiting.
        
           | refulgentis wrote:
           | To me, people are A) out of touch with how degenerate our
           | information environment has gotten B) generally, how little
           | people look into things outside their wheelhouse.
           | 
           | It's not any one individual thing. You can even reframe some
           | (one?) of the factors as Great Democracy Saving.
           | 
           | But they add up to: it is rational to not really trust
           | anything, and people don't mind if you were wrong if you just
           | didn't trust The Man/They, so there's more incentive to not
           | trust, than trust.
           | 
           | Hyperbole from people who should know better doesn't help.
           | Ex. a quite intelligent AI commentator tweeted yesterday,
           | asking why there hasn't been a reckoning for anyone who
           | publicly worried about effects of AI imagery on truth.
        
           | wat10000 wrote:
           | The Governor of Maryland posted a video of lights in the sky
           | that were very clearly not any kind of aircraft.
           | 
           | Because they were stars. Naturally, this dimwit took the
           | opportunity to blame the feds for failing to act.
           | 
           | Apparently there are a lot of people out there who ordinarily
           | just never look up in their daily lives. And instead of
           | thinking "I'm not familiar with this stuff so I don't know
           | what I'm seeing," they manage to conclude "I'm seeing
           | something strange and nobody knows what it is."
        
             | ekidd wrote:
             | Even 30 years ago, if you had a clear sky in countryside,
             | you could see the occasional satellite. Very tiny, much
             | tinier than airplane lights, and surprisingly fast. Today,
             | there are a lot more.
             | 
             | And of course there have always been plenty of airplane
             | lights.
             | 
             | Not to mention Venus, which more than one fighter pilot has
             | tried to shoot down.
        
               | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
               | I got to see an ISS flare once, that was fun
        
           | willy_k wrote:
           | There are without a doubt large drones with nav lights flying
           | around multiple states at night now. There are a lot of
           | people seeing drones where they aren't, too, and it would be
           | odd if that weren't happening. But to take that and say
           | "nothing to see here" is ignoring the mass of solid video and
           | official non-statement evidence to the contrary.
           | 
           | I myself saw a drone, and tried to paint it as a plane or
           | helicopter at first, but it was too close to the ground
           | (seemed a few hundred feet up at most), had the mismatched
           | light pattern characteristic of trans-wing drones, and moved
           | too slowly for other types of aircraft. And most damningly it
           | didn't make any noise audible from the ground, something not
           | even stealth bombers can accomplish. Honestly, it kind of
           | freaked me out having some previously abstract news-cycle
           | object just floating ominously down the road across from me.
           | 
           | EDIT: I thought that HN of all places would be able to pick
           | what's actually happening from what's not; Mass hysteria
           | occurring and drones being everywhere are not mutually
           | exclusive, and a critical analysis of the info available
           | makes it very clear that there are mysterious drones out at
           | night. Seeing one article about people misidentifying things
           | only tells you that people are misidentifying things, it says
           | nothing about the countless videos showing positively
           | identified drones, and certainly not about the fact that the
           | government has repeatedly stated that there are drones doing
           | this. And given all of that, downvoting someone giving their
           | personal account with reasonable criticality is at best
           | ignorant.
        
             | engcoach wrote:
             | You can't gauge the airspeed of an airplane from the
             | ground. What you are observing is the _ground speed_ ,
             | which is affected by winds. So a small Cessna flying into a
             | heavy headwind can appear to move very, very slowly
             | relative to the ground.
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | I'm aware of that, and I tried to think that was what was
               | happening. But the motion apart from speed was nothing
               | like a typical plane, and the other factors led me to
               | conclude it was a drone. When I say the FAA light
               | patterns were off, what I mean is that it had two red
               | lights on the outside, and two green lights on the
               | inside. AFAIK, the only type of aircraft that might have
               | that configuration is a trans-wing drone.
        
               | echoangle wrote:
               | > When I say the FAA light patterns were off, what I mean
               | is that it had two red lights on the outside, and two
               | green lights on the inside. AFAIK, the only type of
               | aircraft that might have that configuration is a trans-
               | wing drone.
               | 
               | What? How do you get from a specific kind of lighting to
               | ,,trans-wing drone"? What prevents me from lighting a
               | regular-wing RC plane with the same lighting
               | configuration?
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | > What prevents me from lighting a regular-wing RC plane
               | with the same lighting configuration?
               | 
               | If I'm not mistaken, the FAA does (unless RC planes
               | aren't covered?). Are you really positing that I saw an
               | intentionally misconfigured RC plane flying in the middle
               | of nowhere at 2 AM?
               | 
               | You're right that I'm making a leap with the trans-wing
               | part. I said that because it's my understanding that some
               | of the sightings have included airfoil and transforming
               | drones, that a trans-wing drone would exhibit the light
               | pattern I saw, and that the military (Navy I believe)
               | does own trans-wing drones that match other the
               | descriptions of other sightings. So to me the lights were
               | the final nail that this wasn't a plane, but I held on to
               | it being a plane for a while.
        
             | lm28469 wrote:
             | > ignoring the mass of solid video
             | 
             | 100% of the ones I looked into have been debunked,
             | helicopters, planes, out of focus stars, fireworks, &c.
             | 
             | > (seemed a few hundred feet up at most)
             | 
             | At night you have absolutely no way to tell
             | 
             | > And most damningly it didn't make any noise audible from
             | the ground, something not even stealth bombers can
             | accomplish.
             | 
             | My $300 dji can accomplish that, it's not a chinese super
             | weapon nor an alien craft
             | 
             | > Honestly, it kind of freaked me out having some
             | previously abstract news-cycle object just floating
             | ominously down the road across from me.
             | 
             | That's the definition of media induced mass hysteria, you
             | notice a lot of weird things when you look at things you
             | usually don't bother looking at. People in Los Angeles
             | freaked the fuck out when they saw the milky way during an
             | electricity outage in 1994
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | > 100% of the ones I looked into have been debunked,
               | helicopters, planes, out of focus stars, fireworks
               | 
               | A lot of videos are bunk, I have seen at least one video
               | that is certainly drones.
               | 
               | > At night you have absolutely no way to tell
               | 
               | I agree, but I've seen plenty of other aircraft at night
               | and it appeared to be much closer than any of those. And
               | you can get a rough guess based on apparent size of the
               | lights, though of course that's extremely rough unless
               | you know the size of the aircraft.
               | 
               | > My $300 dji can accomplish that, it's not a chinese
               | super weapon nor an alien craft
               | 
               | I know, I never claimed it was aliens or a Chinese super
               | weapon, I claimed they were drones. It's almost certain
               | that they are military drones, and if I had to guess
               | they're searching for something that would cause real
               | mass hysteria if told to the public.
               | 
               | > That's the definition of media induced mass hysteria,
               | you notice a lot of weird things when you look at things
               | you usually don't bother looking at. People in Los
               | Angeles freaked the fuck out when they saw the milky way
               | during an electricity outage in 1994
               | 
               | That certainly occurs, what I meant is more that I felt
               | an odd sensation having the news cycle and what I
               | observed collide, in the sense that it didn't feel quite
               | real. I would normally notice at an aircraft that
               | appeared to be as close as it was, and I would definitely
               | pay more attention to it when I noticed the lights and
               | movement pattern, regardless of the news cycle. It
               | actually took me a second to connect the two.
               | 
               | People in LA freaking out because they saw the Milky Way
               | is normal, people noticed something new and reacted to
               | it. I would wager that more people responded with awe
               | than with freaking out, but they weren't as interesting
               | to the media. Regardless of whether they were freaked out
               | or not (and I wasn't freaked out so much as it was
               | freaky), they still saw something real.
        
               | echoangle wrote:
               | > It's almost certain that they are military drones, and
               | if I had to guess they're searching for something that
               | would cause real mass hysteria if told to the public.
               | 
               | Why is that almost certain?
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | Well almost is doing a lot of heavy lifting, the case is
               | all circumstantial. But I say that both because of a
               | Reddit post that makes a strong case that at least some
               | portion of sightings are a specific model of navy drone,
               | and more so because their being military is the only
               | situation where the government response makes sense to
               | me.
               | 
               | If they were an enemy's, one would expect them to be shot
               | down. If they were an ally's, they would need a damn good
               | reason to be here and an even better reason why people
               | can't know. Maybe they're a private citizen's, but I
               | struggle to imagine why a private entity would have a
               | fleet of large drones that they covertly deploy along the
               | coasts, and why our government would abide that. So as I
               | see it, the two options that make sense are that they're
               | an enemy's that we can't shoot down for some terrifying
               | reason, or they're ours.
        
             | echoangle wrote:
             | > I myself saw a drone, and tried to paint it as a plane or
             | helicopter at first, but it was too close to the ground
             | (seemed a few hundred feet up at most), had the mismatched
             | light pattern characteristic of trans-wing drones, and
             | moved too slowly for other types of aircraft. And most
             | damningly it didn't make any noise audible from the ground,
             | something not even stealth bombers can accomplish.
             | 
             | That's exactly what you would expect from a regular
             | airplane though. You can't accurately differentiate ,,low
             | and slow" vs ,,high and fast" at night. And quiet operation
             | is what high flying planes seem to do regularly.
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | You can gauge rough distance/height pretty well by the
               | angles and relative distances between the nav lights. If
               | it is was high enough to be silent, it was at least 10x
               | the size of a 747.
        
           | mrandish wrote:
           | It's also clear that some more recent reports are trolls
           | flying their Costco drones around. Amazingly, as documented
           | on the news and YouTube, there are now people flying their
           | personal drones at night in an effort to find and follow the
           | 'original' drones (!) I assume they are now all following
           | each other around, creating new reports of "Mysterious Drone
           | Swarm Sighted". :-)
           | 
           | Of course, not all "Lights in the Sky" are airplanes,
           | helicopters, drones, stars, satellites or reflections of
           | ground-based lights. There was an interesting sighting in
           | Arizona two weeks ago analyzed and explained by the
           | indefatigable Mick West (2 min video)
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V00KT4PCd-0.
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | Same reason people hearing moose or coyotes think they're
           | about to get attacked by a skin walker: ignorance and being
           | primed by social medias
        
           | Lerc wrote:
           | The problem is that too many people don't know what 'normal'
           | is and nobody can pay attention to everything all of the
           | time. When attention is drawn to something, and without the
           | ability to judge if something is unusual, the inclination is
           | to believe that noticing for the first time is the same as
           | occurring for the first time.
           | 
           | The additives added to tap water to make them generate
           | rainbows is a good example
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIYZvr3ueGw
           | 
           | There is a BBC Radio program called More or Less, which
           | covers analysis of statistics in the media. They have a motto
           | "Is that a big number?" which is a great starting point for
           | any investigation, essentially asking if the observation is
           | what you would expect if nothing newsworthy were occurring.
           | It's worth keeping that idea floating in your head.
        
           | shreddit wrote:
           | Even then my first thought would be "military" or "idiot with
           | a plane license" before worrying about "attack of the flying
           | saucers".
           | 
           | I worry more about things I can't see...
        
         | 1970-01-01 wrote:
         | The scientific term is collective hysteria or mass-hysteria.
         | 
         | https://dictionary.apa.org/collective-hysteria
        
         | icameron wrote:
         | People noticing lights in the night sky is timely, with the
         | darkest weeks of the year.
        
       | 1attice wrote:
       | I take it, sotto voce, that this is about the New Jersey drone
       | sightings?
        
       | fshafique wrote:
       | What if we are living in a simulation and the new pitted glass
       | texture was rolled out, but our collective memories weren't
       | updated?
        
         | dave4420 wrote:
         | What if they switch the simulation off an hour after we notice?
        
         | seattle_spring wrote:
         | Patch V1954.1: New normal map support for car windshields.
         | Requires DirectX9 or later.
        
       | chiffre01 wrote:
       | The TLDR cause was:
       | 
       | The windshield pitting epidemic was a case of collective
       | delusion, where heightened awareness, media influence, and
       | misattributed environmental factors led people to notice and
       | misinterpret existing, ordinary damage as a mysterious
       | phenomenon.
        
         | glial wrote:
         | Yes, probably --
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion
        
           | outworlder wrote:
           | Nice. That probably explains why, say, we start seeing a
           | model car everywhere the moment we decide to buy one.
        
             | nom wrote:
             | This article was likely posted because of the drone
             | sightings. People started looking more.
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | It might be better to say that it was a case of a collective
         | shattered delusion, where the delusion was "my windshield
         | normally is not pitted". In modern parlance, it was a
         | collective "can't unsee" moment.
         | 
         | A delusion would imply that people were claiming their
         | windshields were pitted and they weren't... but I'm sure they
         | were.
        
       | thmsths wrote:
       | The conclusion is terrifying in my opinion. A not yet explained
       | phenomenon or even something as far fetched as "aliens" would
       | have been a more comforting answer than "essentially we can all
       | start losing our mind at once, and it takes very little to
       | trigger it".
        
         | InsideOutSanta wrote:
         | This happens all the time. See: drone sightings right now.
         | Previously: Havana syndrome.
        
           | idontwantthis wrote:
           | Best example: A whole town thinking Bigfoot AND aliens were
           | invading at the same time https://medium.com/@weirdones/the-
           | pa-ufo-bigfoot-invasion-of...
        
           | oldgradstudent wrote:
           | Havana syndrome can have a far less charitable explanation.
           | 
           | There is no objective test for Havana syndrome, but being
           | diagnosed with it grants significant financial and non-
           | financial benefits.
        
             | gopher_space wrote:
             | The veterinary world has a specific term for a condition
             | they can't diagnose, and I appreciate the intellectual
             | honesty behind that.
        
               | itronitron wrote:
               | do you know the specific term, or does your intellectual
               | honesty prevent you from saying that you do?
        
               | pdntspa wrote:
               | "Idiopathic"?
        
           | ghurtado wrote:
           | Also: killer clowns every few years. That one is a cultural
           | icon by now.
        
           | zitsarethecure wrote:
           | Another good one is the "Mad Gasser Of Mattoon" incident.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_Gasser_of_Mattoon
        
             | BLKNSLVR wrote:
             | But the "Illinois Enema Bandit" was real:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_H._Kenyon
             | 
             | (coincidentally, the "Mad Gasser" was also in Illinois).
             | 
             | I only know about this because of Frank Zappa:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=352dVmsn7y4
        
           | metabagel wrote:
           | Don't be so quick to characterize Havana Syndrome as
           | hysteria.
           | 
           | https://www.cbsnews.com/news/havana-syndrome-intelligence-
           | re...
        
         | schmidtleonard wrote:
         | It's all just memes?
         | 
         | Always has been.
        
         | AceJohnny2 wrote:
         | I dunno, "collective delusion" sounds worse than a simpler "we
         | weren't paying attention to the Thing, then media/memes sprung
         | up and made us pay attention and we freaked out".
         | 
         | This happens all the time in our current media landscape. "Yeah
         | health insurance denies claims sometimes, that's normal" to
         | "wait actually health insurance denies claims routinely to
         | increase its profits!?"
         | 
         | There are tons of things that we decide to ignore to go on with
         | our lives. It's exhausting to freak out about all the things
         | that deserve to be freaked out about.
        
           | mrandish wrote:
           | We already have a more neutral term than "collective
           | delusion"
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_bias
        
             | metabagel wrote:
             | What's the term for when people's attention and outrage is
             | directed by an unreliable third party (let's say a partisan
             | news channel) towards certain issues/threats, and away from
             | other equally (or more) significant issues/threats?
             | 
             | I'm not talking about editorial bias. I'm talking about
             | deliberately manipulating audience attention in order to
             | control the perception of reality. Another way of putting
             | it is to create a framework for rejecting or distracting
             | from 'disagreeable' ideas.
             | 
             | For example, a partisan news organization might highlight
             | the purported cultural and economic threat posed by
             | immigration. Since people have a limited budget for their
             | attention, having their attention and outrage focused on
             | immigration might distract from other issues such as rising
             | inequality.
        
           | psc wrote:
           | > There are tons of things that we decide to ignore to go on
           | with our lives
           | 
           | Absolutely, we all need to filter the overwhelming amount of
           | information we're faced with. The part that seems terrifying
           | is that occasionally our filters can line up in such a way as
           | to pick up what's just pure noise and escalate it into an
           | enormous positive feedback loop.
           | 
           | And of course there's a whole discussion about how those
           | filters are shaped (by the media we consume, authorities we
           | decide to trust, direct experience) and how that's changed
           | over time.
        
         | csours wrote:
         | > The conclusion is terrifying in my opinion.
         | 
         | And this is why "conspiracy" theories exist. I prefer to call
         | them Low Information High Satisfaction theories, as I fee that
         | is a more accurate name.
         | 
         | I am do not intend to pass judgement on this commentor or on
         | people who believe in these theories; in fact, I think that if
         | you tell yourself "I am too smart to believe in conspiracy
         | theories", you are making yourself MORE likely to fall into
         | one.
         | 
         | We are truly living in an age of narrative; it's not the first
         | and it won't be the last.
         | 
         | Book recommendation: High Conflict by Amanda Ripley
        
           | piotrkaminski wrote:
           | > I prefer to call them Low Information High Satisfaction
           | theories
           | 
           | If you called them Low Information Excessive Satisfaction
           | theories instead you'd end up with a much more satisfying
           | acronym! :)
        
             | s2l wrote:
             | Stories Pushing Imaginary Nonsence
        
             | rvbissell wrote:
             | I was about to recommend "Satisfaction High, Information
             | Tenuous"
        
             | schmidtleonard wrote:
             | Ooh, I like that.
             | 
             | However, I think the original thinking behind the term
             | "meme" is probably still the definitive discourse on the
             | subject: in analogy to genes, ideas undergo natural
             | selection for survival/reproduction and the attributes that
             | promote this specific kind of fitness (ease of spread,
             | satisfaction, advantage obtained by spreading) will be
             | selected for in the course of social interaction. Qualities
             | we might like to encourage (accuracy, completeness) will
             | not be selected for except insofar as we can connect them
             | back to the actual selection mechanism.
             | 
             | That said, "meme" really doesn't quite put as sharp of a
             | point on the problem as "LIES."
        
             | csours wrote:
             | I like it.
             | 
             | Another tweak: Low Information Extra Satisfying
        
           | hindsightbias wrote:
           | I was always down with Edgar Allan: "Believe nothing you
           | hear, and only one half that you see"
           | 
           | But now I think he was vastly over-optimistic.
        
           | monadINtop wrote:
           | Apart from the fact that conspiracies also do exist. Before
           | serious reporting was done, people would've called you a
           | crackpot for talking about half the things that the CIA got
           | up to under Allen Dulles, such as with Operation Gladio,
           | MKUltra, PBSuccess, Propaganda Due, etc., or mass
           | surveillance under the NSA and GCHQ.
        
             | cwillu wrote:
             | It's the same reflex: the desire to apply a simple theory
             | with apparent explanatory power.
        
               | monadINtop wrote:
               | Yeah I do agree with that.
        
         | cute_boi wrote:
         | just like fear for seed oils.
        
           | colechristensen wrote:
           | Every ten years or so there's a new batch of evidence that
           | eating a lot of something has some health effects for some
           | folks. Then a minority turns it into a morality cult against
           | the thing and the media picks it up as "you woudn't guess
           | what common food could be killing you"
           | 
           | And then ten years later new evidence for that thing comes
           | out that's like "maybe not so bad after all!" and a new set
           | of backlash morality. These things are politically affiliated
           | now too if they can be depending on who picks up which
           | evidence first.
           | 
           | Each decade people get bored and find something new to be
           | upset about.
           | 
           | "gluten" is definitely way down these days and "seed oils"
           | haven't yet hit their peak.
        
           | sfjailbird wrote:
           | The consumption of which itself is driven by an unscientific
           | scare about animal fat.
        
             | karlgkk wrote:
             | It's not unscientific, there is a _very_ direct link.
             | 
             | The real issue, as I see it, is that there was a huge
             | change in pattern in availability and consumption of those
             | fats in the last 50 years.
        
             | BobaFloutist wrote:
             | Or by cost of production or ethical considerations or
             | perishability or smoke point or water content
        
           | karlgkk wrote:
           | the seed oil thing is so funny to me because, _like, yeah.
           | also, no._
           | 
           | it's actually true. they cause serious inflammation which
           | aggravates serious downstream health problems. like, you
           | shouldn't be eating seed oils in any large quantity that you
           | would get from regularly eating deep fried foods
           | 
           | oh but wait, eating foods with beef tallow and other
           | saturated fats also causes health problems. except, those
           | problems only show up when you eat large quantities of them,
           | such as if you were regularly eating deep fried foods
           | 
           | so what if it wasn't the seed oils that were the problem for
           | many people, but rather, consuming lots of seed oil - as you
           | might find if you ate a lot of deep fried food?
           | 
           | what if it's not the seed oils that are causing you to get
           | fat and feel like shit all the time? what if it's the
           | quantity of fats that you're consuming? and, what if not
           | eating seed oils is actually an easy an effective way to
           | avoid eating deep fried foods as a second order effect?
           | 
           | that'd be crazy. better just jump on the new fad diet.
        
             | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
             | I remember last year when fats were "good" and carbs were
             | "bad", good times.
             | 
             | I mean, it could all be a psy-op by the animal agriculture
             | lobby to get people to eat even more meat and less veggies.
             | 
             | brb frying broccoli and noodles
        
               | karlgkk wrote:
               | I eat a pretty low carb (but not very low/keto!), high
               | protein diet. Lots of vegetables, tofu, and chicken. I
               | eat a head of cauliflower and two heads of cabbage a
               | week. My broccoli bill is off the charts. But I'm also
               | 210 lbs at 17% body fat so maybe my goals are different
               | from most people's.
               | 
               | I usually use seed oils, in very small amounts (to get a
               | pan going). I consume red meats infrequently (just not my
               | favorite thing, idk im weird), but when I do, I totally
               | use the fats from them to cook the rest of the meal.
               | 
               | Anyways, having been eating "clean" for a year, I always
               | feel like shit after eating fried foods. Or maybe, I just
               | notice that I feel it more.
        
               | Eisenstein wrote:
               | > high protein diet...I eat a head of cauliflower and two
               | heads of cabbage a week. My broccoli bill is off the
               | charts.
               | 
               | Your farts are probably legendary.
        
               | XorNot wrote:
               | I mean my conclusion is people just plain don't want to
               | eat in moderation, and _really_ don 't want to weigh
               | things since it might hold their own habits accountable
               | to them.
               | 
               | If fats are good and carbs are bad, it's the message
               | people want to hear: do not moderate or change your
               | habits, just eat as much as you want of the "good" thing
               | because it's good!
        
               | 98codes wrote:
               | Anyone know if eggs are officially good or bad for us
               | this year? I lost track.
        
         | kryogen1c wrote:
         | I think that people, on the whole, vastly underestimate the
         | degree to which humans are animals.
        
           | vehemenz wrote:
           | Maybe I'm more optimistic. Is it our animal nature? Or is it
           | that science is hard, and most people don't have enough
           | formal education in the relevant subjects to know they're out
           | of their depth, let alone to understand these things.
        
             | binoct wrote:
             | I don't take issue with the point of your last sentence,
             | but rather the framing that "animal" is somehow a negative
             | thing. Humans are animals, there's no separate animal
             | nature. We are animals, full stop. The scientific method is
             | a skill we have developed to be more objective about
             | complicated phenomena. Depth of knowledge and education
             | certainly help an individual reason more carefully about
             | cause and effect in various domains, but scientists and
             | other highly educated people share the same set of
             | biological behaviors as everyone else.
        
           | huijzer wrote:
           | Although there is one part of my brain which tells me I and
           | other people are rational beings, my own behavior tells me
           | otherwise. Why else would I eat a candy when I rationally
           | know I don't need it?
           | 
           | For people interested, I can highly recommend Our Inner Ape
           | by Frans de Waal. It tells many interesting stories about
           | social interactions between apes that look surprisingly
           | human. By the way, did you know that apes pick their nose,
           | just like humans?
        
           | Vegenoid wrote:
           | I don't understand how people underestimate it so badly when
           | we have so much history we are taught that demonstrates it.
           | History makes it abundantly clear that it is a regular
           | occurrence for large groups of people to collectively believe
           | things for which there is little evidence, and furthermore,
           | to take extreme actions based on such beliefs.
           | 
           | This applies to you too, reader. Many would read the above
           | and fully agree with it, but fail to apply it to themselves
           | and the groups they identify with. It is even more important
           | to critically consider your own beliefs than the beliefs of
           | others.
        
             | Eisenstein wrote:
             | > I don't understand how people underestimate it so badly
             | when we have so much history we are taught that
             | demonstrates it.
             | 
             | It is the tendency to think that people in the past were
             | dumb, and we aren't. Like, there always has to be some
             | explanation involved when we learn that people did
             | something unintuitive in the past -- people learned how to
             | make beer by accidentally leaving leftover bread in liquid
             | and then drank it when they were starving. Maybe? Or maybe
             | they figured out that things ferment and played with it
             | until it worked, like we would have done it? Why does it
             | always have to be an accident?
             | 
             | People may have had less access to information and
             | technology, but that didn't make them any dumber than we
             | are now.
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | > People may have had less access to information and
               | technology, but that didn't make them any dumber than we
               | are now.
               | 
               | There's probably an aspect to people confusing
               | "knowledge" with "brainpower". People in the past were
               | just as good at figuring stuff out as we are today.
               | 
               | We have the advantage of Millenia of stuff figured out
               | and documented. So we know on average more about how the
               | universe works than people in the distant past.
        
               | abakker wrote:
               | I'd say it: we know that some people currently know more,
               | but, the average person mostly knows something about what
               | is known, rather than knowing it directly.
        
         | krunck wrote:
         | Witch!!!
        
           | dessimus wrote:
           | Build a bridge out of her!
        
         | hobs wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_plague_of_1518 there's a
         | lot of conflicting stories, but mass hallucinations and
         | insanity are not an abnormal thing in history (unfortunately)
        
         | mikepurvis wrote:
         | I think the vast majority of people are just astonishingly
         | suggestible. That combined with a dash of main character
         | syndrome and horrid sleep patterns and you've got millions
         | driving home from work in the dark, ready to immediately assume
         | that whatever is out their windshield is what they heard about
         | on the radio that morning.
        
         | lxgr wrote:
         | It's always been like that, but now you and many more people
         | have this information available to you and can take it into
         | consideration - arguably you're better off than before :)
        
         | jidar wrote:
         | It's not terrifying. It's how people are, and it's destressing
         | to me that so few people seem to be aware of it. No amount of
         | explaining what confirmation bias is will convince people that
         | drones in the sky aren't aliens.
         | 
         | The people who have looked behind the curtain and come to this
         | realization about people and their behavior tend to be the ones
         | who make the skeptic community, so we have that going for us at
         | least.
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | The fundamental issue with skeptical truth and science is
           | that it is boring in terms of mass market marketing.
           | 
           | Combined with the inherent anti intellectual bias of most of
           | America inherited from the nerd hatred of us high schools,
           | reality has no chance against fantasy.
           | 
           | Look at how newspapers treat science. Findings are held up
           | like a freak zoo of "look at what the weirdo science nerds
           | are saying now" as they sensationalize and warp things in the
           | desperate need for clickbait.
           | 
           | So combine pseudoreality rules of media with pseudoreality of
           | finance and economics, and the pseudoreality of politics, and
           | reality simple doesn't have a chance.
        
       | mikestew wrote:
       | In the context of the fact that, according to TFA, the pits were
       | there all along: you'll really notice how pitted your current
       | windshield is when you go get a new, crystal-clear one. The folks
       | in TFA just skipped the "go get a new one" step, and for the
       | first time took a really hard look at their windshield.
        
       | delichon wrote:
       | The story completely misses that this period coincides with a
       | temporary expansion of the habitat of the Pacific Northwest Tree
       | Octopus.
       | 
       | https://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
       | 
       | The devil of the trees and terror of all loggers, forest rangers
       | and apparently windshields.
        
       | TheGRS wrote:
       | I'm assuming you posted this because of the drone sightings
       | right?
        
       | djeastm wrote:
       | Good post. It's important to understand that there's really not
       | that much new under the sun and we've never been that great at
       | understanding large social phenomena.
        
       | whimsicalism wrote:
       | must be the drones
        
       | itsanaccount wrote:
       | Since we all know what this is actually commenting on, I'll
       | answer that directly. The noise on the UFO topic has reached a
       | massed hysteria pitch. When that happens, the overall signal to
       | noise ratio of internet sourced sightings goes from "very poor"
       | to "nearly invisible." I blame a lot of that on the recent
       | congressional hearings bringing stories to the public's front of
       | mind.
       | 
       | But. And I think its a very very important but, these sightings
       | of phenomena go back decades, and just because the public at
       | large is not a reliable reporter, does mean there are not many,
       | many kernels of truth of an unexplained, repeated phenomena.
       | 
       | And otherwise you can always, always be skeptical, but at what
       | point does skepticism stretch into denial?
       | 
       | IR cameras recording rocket impacts aren't mass hysteria. 2011
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1gsdwl6/full_10_minut...
       | 
       | ^ maybe those are targeting drones and the rocket missed. but
       | then why are they dripping?
       | 
       | 2 days ago:
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/InterdimensionalNHI/comments/1hfkcg...
       | 
       | ^ maybe those are targeting flares, and thats why they're
       | dripping, but if they're flares why does the second one seem to
       | fly away when the first is struck?
       | 
       | meanwhile 7 days ago
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1hcfaqw/glowing_orb_f...
       | 
       | ^ maybe thats just a commercial drone modified to be super
       | bright. But why fly it there, as a hoax? (so, so many orb videos
       | to repeat this logic with, you get the idea.)
       | 
       | If you're interested in finding more, you need to get very used
       | to seeing lots of balloons, planes, commercial drones, planets,
       | stars, satellites, flares, skydivers, lens flare, insects and
       | birds and there's common examples of all of them. The ones we
       | should be interested in are usually uniformly luminous, follow
       | non linear flight paths, exhibit extraordinary acceleration (for
       | which you need size to estimate distance which is tough with only
       | one camera), and/or exhibit extraordinary altitude. Whether
       | they're controlled by a non-human intelligence or some
       | government, they do exist and are super interesting to watch.
       | You're just gonna have to wade through an absolute mountain of
       | bullshit.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | > maybe those are targeting drones and the rocket missed. but
         | then why are they dripping?
         | 
         | They're balloons carrying flares for target practice. You can
         | see lots of falling embers in
         | https://youtu.be/XHDXk9THJZM?si=CKSBB3AuslBizXxh&t=179 from a
         | military flare.
         | 
         | > if they're flares why does the second one seem to fly away
         | when the first is struck?
         | 
         | Because that's the maneuvering target drone (something like a
         | QF-16, probably; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics
         | _F-16_Fighting...) that's dropping the flares.
         | 
         | > maybe thats just a commercial drone modified to be super
         | bright. But why fly it there, as a hoax?
         | 
         | Asked and answered. We live in a world where "flashlight
         | enthusiast" is a real niche thing; "bright drone" is not an
         | implausible thing. https://www.reddit.com/r/flashlight/
        
           | itsanaccount wrote:
           | And what I'm saying is I understand that perspective. I think
           | you can do that song and dance going back 80 years. You can
           | watch all these people, all these witnesses, all these videos
           | and pictures (and a complete and stunning absence of military
           | radar data) and you can explain to them, each and every
           | single one of them how they're wrong, how its swamp gas
           | reflected off Venus, and in each individual case you might be
           | right. When the video gets too good you can blame it on
           | computer generated graphics.
           | 
           | But that doesn't match my experience, of pilots, of lifetime
           | military officers, of people as a whole, that they're all
           | incompetent or crazy or hoaxers. At some point I think that
           | level of myopic-skepticism moves towards the absurd and
           | cannot be maintained any longer.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Being competent in one thing doesn't make you competent in
             | everything.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_disease
             | 
             | Each of the videos you linked to have _extremely_
             | plausible, fairly mundane explanations other than
             | "aliens". That fits the pattern. That you find them
             | compelling as evidence of extraterrestrials is not a great
             | sign.
             | 
             | > When the video gets too good you can blame it on computer
             | generated graphics.
             | 
             | The corollary here is the unfortunate fact that as soon as
             | everyone got a camera in their pocket, aliens stopped
             | landing in random cornfields to say hi to lonely farmers.
        
               | itsanaccount wrote:
               | > That you find them compelling as evidence of
               | extraterrestrials is not a great sign.
               | 
               | That I post here a few easily accessible videos of
               | interest on what is an enormous history that I have spent
               | the past few years reading about tells me more about the
               | lack of respect you immediately have for anyone on the
               | topic.
               | 
               | > to lonely farmers.
               | 
               | That the public's UFO hysteria of the 1940s and 50s was
               | originated entirely within the US military is similarly a
               | fact of history I wouldn't expect you to know.
               | 
               | I think the thing watching the UFO topic has taught more
               | more than any other is how aggressively and reflexively
               | people of all levels of intelligence will hug their
               | worldview.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Respect is earned. If I claim to be able to fly, and send
               | you several links to me flying that are easily
               | explicable, conclusions can be drawn.
               | 
               | > That the public's UFO hysteria of the 1940s and 50s was
               | originated entirely within the US military is similarly a
               | fact of history I wouldn't expect you to know.
               | 
               | The 1940s military had a hell of a lot of former farmers
               | in it. The days of fighter pilots needing college degrees
               | came in the 70s/80s; Chuck Yeager was a farm (!) kid who
               | became a mechanic with the war.
               | 
               | That the UFO hysteria coincides with the rise of
               | commercial air travel is both known to me and entirely
               | unsurprising, and no more compelling to me than witch
               | hysteria in the 1600s, which often came with similarly
               | compelling witness testimony.
        
             | Aloisius wrote:
             | _> pilots, of lifetime military officers, of people as a
             | whole, that they 're all incompetent or crazy or hoaxers._
             | 
             | You don't have to be incompetent, crazy or a hoaxer to be
             | confused, fooled or mistaken.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Or "haven't slept in 24 hours taking amphetamines to stay
               | awake in combat".
               | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7661838/
        
       | mvkel wrote:
       | The difference these days seems to be that the frequency of the
       | hysterical events has gone up. One every other month, rather than
       | every other year.
       | 
       | What happens to a society that has been desensitized to mass-
       | hysteria, where no single event can evoke a reaction? Is it a
       | horseshoe, where we're so vigilant that nothing fazes us anymore?
       | Do we lose our humanity in the process?
        
         | Aloisius wrote:
         | Some just learn to ignore news gossip.
        
           | mvkel wrote:
           | Slippery slope. I posit that there are news items that
           | deserve real cause for concern, but because we're so
           | overwhelmed with information, we throw it into the same
           | "gossip" bucket with the rest of the slop.
        
       | carabiner wrote:
       | The subreddit /r/njdrones is sooo off the rails right now. It
       | started out as "I think this is a drone, maybe military?" to
       | classifying different drones as energy "orbs" and "mimics" that
       | only _look_ like airplanes when photographed.
        
       | dools wrote:
       | Oh look! This is how conservatives win elections.
        
       | itronitron wrote:
       | This feels like it was written as a satire based on the
       | screenplay of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"
        
       | j_timberlake wrote:
       | This was literally my first thought for the anomalous drones like
       | 2 weeks ago, and it was immediately obvious that the entire NJ
       | police department should not be incompetent enough to fall for
       | something so obvious. The mayors and governor should not be dumb
       | enough to stake their reputations on this when the null
       | hypothesis of "mass hysteria" is easier and safer. Even back
       | then, we knew the sightings do not appear on flight radar apps
       | that show every commercial flight and which any civilian can
       | access.
       | 
       | But since then we've also had airport shutdowns, incursions over
       | airforce bases, drones in no-fly zones. These are easy to Google:
       | 
       | https://www.recordonline.com/story/news/2024/12/16/stewart-a...
       | 
       | https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/16/us/us-air-force-base-closes-a...
       | 
       | https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article297295919.ht...
       | 
       | Also NJ police report the anomalous drones give off no heat
       | signature like normal drones:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K98A4CLMwf4&t=209s
       | 
       | There's a lot more I could post about, but most importantly Chuck
       | Schumer is trying to get Robin drone radar detectors deployed,
       | and I'm predicting that he's the smart guy in the room who will
       | get us answers.
        
         | vasco wrote:
         | You can buy satellite pictures of almost anywhere on earth with
         | pretty good definition and so I deduce that the US government
         | with almost 100 StarShield satellites plus who knows how many
         | ones with huge cameras probably can almost livestream any place
         | on earth GTA top view style. So shouldn't be hard to see what
         | it is and where it came from unless cloud cover is bad.
        
         | lxgr wrote:
         | > The mayors and governor should not be dumb enough to stake
         | their reputations on this when the null hypothesis of "mass
         | hysteria" is easier and safer.
         | 
         | I think they played this exactly right: Most people will never
         | accept a null result (or something close to it, like "there
         | were a couple of weird drones, but mostly it was people newly
         | looking up at the night sky") or even follow this news story
         | long enough for the actual resolution to matter. The only thing
         | they'll remember was their mayor or governor staying silent
         | when they were scared/angry vs. shouting at the feds to let
         | them shoot down some drones.
         | 
         | > Also NJ police report the anomalous drones give off no heat
         | signature like normal drones:
         | 
         | The only thing we can conclude from this is that the NJ police
         | wasn't able to detect a heat signature, but not whether there
         | really wasn't one.
        
           | whimsicalism wrote:
           | i think the government giving credence to this is what made
           | it spiral out of control
        
         | flutas wrote:
         | There was also a call in to a 911 department on the 13th of a
         | drone crashing in someones backyard and then being swarmed by
         | 10 others.
         | 
         | https://www.newsweek.com/drone-new-jersey-911-sighting-20002...
         | 
         | But I haven't seen a follow up from anyone on it yet.
        
         | Eisenstein wrote:
         | It is happening almost exactly the same way, but this time it
         | has to be different...
        
         | crystalmeph wrote:
         | Chuck Schumer is trying to mollify his constituents. The one
         | thing a politician can never tell his constituents is that they
         | are being morons, even when it's true.
         | 
         | Your last link has the officer claiming it doesn't give off
         | heat like regular drones, but just like the OP story where a
         | police officer claimed the "mystery residue" reacted
         | "violently" to a lead pencil, what does that even mean? Can we
         | get an A/B test of what this officer calls a "regular" drone on
         | heat vision versus one of these mystery drones?
         | 
         | And oh yeah, at about 4:30 into that link, the reporter puts up
         | his own "authentic drone footage" that I am absolutely certain
         | is a perfectly normal airplane.
         | 
         | The airport shutdown was real, sure, but that was dumb wannabe
         | sleuths who were going to "solve the problem" using their own
         | drones, thereby becoming the problem, or smart trolls who knew
         | exactly how best to get a laugh out of the gullible public.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | > Also NJ police report the anomalous drones give off no heat
         | signature like normal drones...
         | 
         | These are the same people who have panic attacks when they
         | think they've been exposed to fentanyl (which usually involves
         | them describing symptoms not consistent with opiate exposure,
         | and mysteriously the officers never seem to test positive for
         | it in the hospital).
         | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8810663/
         | 
         | In reality, someone exposed to a large volume of pure, liquid,
         | lab-grade fentanyl... just washes their hands.
         | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35722948/
         | 
         | (See also: "poisoned" milkshakes:
         | https://ny.eater.com/2020/6/23/21299721/nypd-officers-
         | report...)
        
         | jklinger410 wrote:
         | Lots of smart guys in this comment thread who already know what
         | this stuff is. No need to panic folks, the armchair critics say
         | everything is ok.
        
       | nicholasjon wrote:
       | The Omnibus Project (Ken Jennings and John Roderick) did a
       | podcast on this back in June:
       | https://www.omnibusproject.com/episodes/the-western-washingt...
        
       | GreenAlien wrote:
       | In 70 years, articles will talk about the strange drone invasion
       | only for it to be discovered that planes and drones were always
       | in the air, but people just never bothered to look up until
       | everyone started talking about it.
        
       | yalogin wrote:
       | People just don't want to accept simple, no drama and
       | explanations, even more so if it means they have to accept they
       | are wrong. This is a trait we as a species had all along
       | apparently but manifested much more during covid. I am just
       | amazed we made this much progress cumulatively in which a short
       | time. May be because we let it happen because the growth itself
       | is so fantastic!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-18 23:00 UTC)