Slashdot Mirror
Alleged Satellite Photo Says Ukraine Shootdown of MH17
theshowmecanuck (703852) writes A group calling itself the Russian Union of Engineers has published a photograph, picked up by many news organizations (just picked one, Google it yourself to find more), claiming to show that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter plane. The interesting thing is the very quick ad hoc crowd sourced debunking of the photograph using tools from Google maps, online photos/data, to their own domain knowledge backed up with the previous information. It would be interesting to understand who the "Russian Union of Engineers" are and why they in particular were chosen to release this information.
Why would they bother with the missile if they had disabled the flight deck?
To make sure the plane is dead.
There are quite a few anomalies with this particular incident. I'm not saying Russia is innocent or that Kiev is guilty, this if for investigators. That out of the way we have flight data showing Ukrainian fighters operating in the area. We have Vladamir Putin's airplane in nearly the same exact airspace a short time before MH17 was shot down. We have a lack of sightings for a BUK plume or launch. We have a civilian jet that was directed to fly over a war zone (this does happen but is not common). Finally we have a lack of tower data and radar data from the Ukrainian government (could be innocent but surely appears suspicious).
Oh, and it's the same airline company that lost a whole plane under very suspicious circumstances a few month's prior.
The whole situation in the Ukraine is a mess. Both sides (East and West) are being dishonest about everything. Who do you trust when everyone is a liar?
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Like it or not, dialogue is a two way street. I have tried, often pretty hard, to have a rational dialogue with you. With you, it's a one way street and you are the only one on the street. You can't, and never have said "hmm, I never thought of it that way" or "I never realized other people perceive things that way", to you it's what the establishment said. You consistently cherry pick fragments of fact to back your pro establishment opinion. You ignore facts that don't back the pro establishment opinion and name call "conspiracy" anything you dislike.
I made the statement above that both sides are being dishonest about the Ukraine, not the first time I have made that statement ,and your response is to name call and attack that statement. You called me an "apologist" and my perspective "biased", then you want to complain about being called a shill and troll?
The two historical post examples you provide are no exception. In both cases read the whole goddamn thread instead of cherry picking a fragment. Read what is written by you and the people you respond to from top to bottom, because that is a conversation. Make sure you take note of the moderation and who is moderated a "troll" in both threads.
In the first example you pointed to a particular response from a person who claims that anyone investigating what Architects and Engineers say about the government report on the 9/11 attacks is "dishonoring the dead". They are entitled to their opinion, but I find the facts laid out in ae911 reports to be relevant and, well, facts. His opinion does not make facts go away, and does not make the Government's reports magically valid. His defense is not explaining how the Architects and Engineers are wrong, but to attack my signature and label the subject "conspiracy theory". That should sound very familiar to you, since you do the same thing often enough.
Most importantly, look at your posts and what you responded to in that whole thread. The first post is an active military person who hopes that things don't escalate in Syria because they are on active duty, to which you respond "Sniff..sniff..?? ... sniff..sniff....... smells like a troll to me.". Someone else, over a year ago, provides their opinion of you as "It's not - cold fjord is our resident boot-licking statist, and you just stepped on his dick with your honest account."
In the second example you provided, again, read the damn thread. I stated that there are many abuses that should have officials in jail. Such as the establishment telling the police to attack journalists. Now look at your answer, which is paraphrased as "You support people killing cops". Look at the moderation on the thread, who is a troll and who is insightful? I did not moderate the thread, I provided a fact based opinion which you attacked. When I showed you that your response was nothing but a stream of fallacies you retort with CNN opinion pieces. This is a trend, not a one time event (see the thread we are currently in).
I don't post pro establishment nonsense, because much of it is nonsense. People can get the pro establishment opinion by turning on any "news" station in the US. I don't believe what I'm told, I question what I'm told. You consistently attack anyone that questions the establishment, often with very elaborate fallacies trying to mask the attack and belittle the people you are responding to. Then again, you frequently attack people openly and don't try to hide it.
You brought the bias on yourself. Contrary to your invalid attempt to diminish the amount of people that perceive you as a shill, look at how your posts are consistently moderated negatively. That is because of _YOUR_ method of attacking people, your lack of ability to hold courteous dialogue, your policy of cherry picking facts you like and negatively labeling facts you don't like. Either change your mode of dialogue, which would change people's perception of you, or expect that you will be ignored and labeled.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.