Speculation: Did the US shoot down its own weather balloons over Alaska/Canada?

[Jeffrey Orling]

Balloons, lacking the heat signature of rockets firing, are probably pretty darn hard to identify at any stage in their deployment.

I don't know what spy satellites are capable of... but a large balloon seems to be something easily detectable.

 

[Mendel]

I don't know what spy satellites are capable of... but a large balloon seems to be something easily detectable.

However, you have to want to detect it, i.e. some data analysis software has to be programmed to find them.

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

However, you have to want to detect it, i.e. some data analysis software has to be programmed to find them.

Come on... Seems that something as large as this moving across a static landscape would be noticed easily. And I presume these "satellites" are looking for such things.

 

[Mendel]

Come on... Seems that something as large as this moving across a static landscape would be noticed easily. And I presume these "satellites" are looking for such things.

You mean clouds? Flocks of birds? Every mundane weather balloon launched in China, which is larger than the USA? Do you want to detect shipboard launches in the Pacific Ocean? How would you justify the expenditure of resources for this?

You are going to want to find these things automatically because there's too much data to find it manually. And you need to pare down the number of such automatic returns because a lot of these are going to be unimportant and would drown the important information in the noise. This means you need a very clear idea of what you're looking for.

 

[Jeffrey Orling]

You mean clouds? Flocks of birds? Every mundane weather balloon launched in China, which is larger than the USA? Do you want to detect shipboard launches in the Pacific Ocean? How would you justify the expenditure of resources for this?

You are going to want to find these things automatically because there's too much data to find it manually. And you need to pare down the number of such automatic returns because a lot of these are going to be unimportant and would drown the important information in the noise. This means you need a very clear idea of what you're looking for.

Agree. I would think there would be "smart" software that would filter this down and alert human watchers.

 

[Mendel]

Agree. I would think there would be "smart" software that would filter this down and alert human watchers.

Right. And this smart software has to be developed by smart humans, and someone has to pay them to do that.

 

[deirdre]

Come on... Seems that something as large as this moving across a static landscape would be noticed easily. And I presume these "satellites" are looking for such things.

you should maybe have this convo in the CHina balloon thread. the claim of this thread is they are U.S. balloons...so...we could just put tracking devices on all our balloons and our military would know they are ours. no?

 

[Mendel]

The topic of this post is a conspiracy theory from a conspiracy website about the US shooting down its own balloon to make Biden look good.

If that's the topic, the evidence for that claim is missing, and it belongs in Rambles.

There's zero evidence supporting conclusions about Biden's intent. Metabunk doesn't deal with conspiracy theories, it deals with claims of evidence.

 

[yoshy]

If that's the topic, the evidence for that claim is missing, and it belongs in Rambles.

There's zero evidence supporting conclusions about Biden's intent. Metabunk doesn't deal with conspiracy theories, it deals with claims of evidence.

Yes, I agree, that's my point!

 

[Mendel]

.we could just put tracking devices on all our balloons

metereological balloons would need to be bigger (and thus more hazardous) and more expensive if they were required to support transponders, so I don't think that's feasible

 

[Duke]

Balloons, lacking the heat signature of rockets firing, are probably pretty darn hard to identify at any stage in their deployment.

Even if we could detect their launches via satellite, all they'd have to do is check the daily "bus schedule" and release them when our (or any other nations') satellites aren't overhead.

 

[deirdre]

metereological balloons would need to be bigger (and thus more hazardous) and more expensive if they were required to support transponders, so I don't think that's feasible

why? people put trackers on their kids cars all the time, they are tiny.

 

[deirdre]

If that's the topic, the evidence for that claim is missing,

the topic isnt the motive, he just threw that in. the topic and alleged (ie. Twitter) "evidence" is in regards to 'did the U.S. shoot down their own weather balloons.

(although i agree the op should be in rambles due to horrendously sloppy links, sources and missing data making it too much work to verify them. Not to mention the 3 opinions/paraphrases/hearsay stated as fact in the first 2 paragraphs.)

Article:

After the object was detected Thursday, NORAD -- North American Aerospace Defence Command --sent F-35s to observe it, a U.S. official said, adding that the military queried U.S. government agencies to make sure it did not belong to any of them, and had confidence it was not a U.S. government or military asset.
...

The mystery around what exactly the flying object was lingered late into Friday night. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued a statement saying it was "not a National Weather Service balloon."

"They do not hover," said NOAA spokesperson Scott Smullen

Source: https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/u-s-jet-shoots-down-unknown-object-flying-off-alaska-coast-1.6268940

 

[Mendel]

Even if we could detect their launches via satellite, all they'd have to do is check the daily "bus schedule" and release them when our (or any other nations') satellites aren't overhead.

Is that still possible with today's LEO satellite swarms?

Apart from the fact that the launch of a helium-filled balloon has absolutely no characteristic that makes it more easily detectable than a balloon in flight.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

metereological balloons would need to be bigger (and thus more hazardous) and more expensive if they were required to support transponders, so I don't think that's feasible

Adding ADS-B Out to weather balloons would require something small enough to fit in your hand. Not a major challenge.

 

[Mendel]

Adding ADS-B Out to weather balloons would require something small enough to fit in your hand. Not a major challenge.

Gliders use a different transponder standard because their electrical systems don't support ADS-B transponders; theirs has a much lower range. So the challenge of finding the output power for that ADS-B transponder on a light balloon is substantial.

The other challenge is that a miniature ADS-B transponder costs around $2000, and it broadcasts its location for everyone to hear, so these are going to get pilfered, and the metereological payload along with it.

I've noted in https://www.metabunk.org/threads/un...intercepted-by-us-aircraft.12866/#post-287541 that weather balloons are historically not causing aircraft accidents. There's no reasonable rationale to require them to carry transponders.

 

[Greene]

Weather balloons already carry a radiosonde & typically broadcast their location in addition to meteorological data.

Tracking them is a hobby among some who are so inclined.

Radiosonde Tracker Database

 

[deirdre]

There's no reasonable rationale to require them to carry transponders.

There is if the OP 'speculation' is correct and we are shooting down our own weather balloons.

(i think again, too many threads makes convo confusing)

 

[FatPhil]

A report from a Canadian newspaper gives a little more information about the object shot down over Canada. The Canadian defence Minister is quoted as saying that the object was smaller than the 'Chinese' balloon and 'cylindrical in nature'. A Canadian military officer is quoted as explicitly calling the object a balloon. A cylindrical object doesn't sound like a standard weather balloon, though of course there are plenty of (roughly) cylindrical balloons in general (blimps, target balloons, etc).

Article here:

https://vancouversun.com/news/norad...irborne-object-currently-over-northern-canada

None of the reports I've seen so far make it completely unambiguous whether the dimensions are referring to the balloon or its payload - I suspect different people are referring to different things. A VW Beetle comparison would be very small for the balloon - they start at about that size, and get several times larger as they rise.

 

[Landru]

Stations that launch weather balloons nowadays stop reporting when the pressure reaches 100 mb. So this balloon that 'hung up' at 100 mb didn't reach that pressure and then couldn't climb any higher and then just floated around. It undoubtedly kept climbing and popped when it was supposed to.

Evidence please.

 

[Mendel]

Source: https://twitter.com/wildweatherdan/status/1624166450670755850

So it was likely a weather balloon?

Do not know but that is a possibility. The location of the balloon does NOT track back to China but it does track back to the Bering Sea. I think it might be the NOME 12 Rawinsonde. It may have partially failed. Data up to 100 mb when I often see 10 mb data.

Sounds like the 100 mb thing is a clue, but not conclusive evidence that it failed.

 

[deirdre]

twitter link is the original post (that shows the track of a balloon months ago from National Weather Service). these quotes are in one of the replies. Bold added by me.

NWS Boise

@NWSBoise
·
Dec 18, 2022

Replying to
@Sunthas
and
@NWSPocatello
Yep, most websites show our balloon data to about 100 mb, since above that is not as applicable to what happens in the troposphere (where weather occurs).

direct link

WS Boise
@NWSBoise
·
Dec 18, 2022

Replying to
@Sunthas
and
@NWSPocatello
Our balloon usually peaks around 100,000+ feet (roughly 10mb to 5mb in the high atmosphere) before popping.

direct link


Source: https://twitter.com/NWSBoise/status/1604646316482523136

 

[Mendel]

Another weather station is in Nome, Alaska, which is in the same area as Kotzebue.

If the measuring stopped at 100 millibar air pressure the balloon failed to rise further up into thinner air.

It didn't stop, though, it's simply not being displayed.

Article:

Source: http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html

I've selected 2/10/2023, 0Z and 12Z soundings.

Article:

Source: http://weather.uwyo.edu/cgi-bin/sounding?region=naconf&TYPE=GIF%3ASTUVE10&YEAR=2023&MONTH=02&FROM=1000&TO=1012&STNM=70200&REPLOT=1

So the balloon in question didn't go all the way to 10 mb, but it doesn't look that out of place. When I look at a longer time span, like 2 weeks, there are several graphs that end between 10 and 20 mb.

 

[deirdre]

It didn't stop, though, it's simply not being displayed.

adding this screen shot from OP, in case readers forgot the claim @Dan_ was quoting and your post debunks. when we hit reply popup it doesnt include the ex tag stuff unfortunately.

 

[captancourgette]

Moonofalabama is not a conspiracy blog, quite the opposite actually....

What are you talking about?
https://www.moonofalabama.org/
eg from a blog post there on the front page, from a couple of days ago

February 13, 2023
The Buildup To War In Ukraine - February 13 2022

In early 2022 Ukraine had finished the preparations for an overwhelming attack on the renegade People Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk (DPR and LNR).

Half of the Ukrainian army, some 120,000 men recruited and trained during the last 7 years, were stationed near the ceasefire line and ready to go. On the opposing side only some 40,000 men were under arms. They would have little chance to withstand an onslaught.
.....
On Sunday February 13 2022, after a phone call with U.S. president Joe Biden, the Ukrainian president Zelensky gave the final order for the planned Ukrainian attack.

Zelensky has shown himself to be very smart since the invasion of Ukraine, so why would he do something so unintelligent as waiting until half the russia army was at the borders and then deciding to attack the dombas.
Who is this blog post aimed at?

 

[Mendel]

Who is this blog post aimed at?

not at critical thinkers, that's for sure

another example we've discussed on metabunk, the North Stream pipeline explosions:

Article:

Hersh's story is true. [..] The story about the pipelines makes complete sense. Unfortunately there are some details that Hersh, for lack of access to the right information, gets wrong.

Source: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/some-small-corrections-to-seymour-hershs-new-nord-stream-revelations.html

Hersh's story is only as credible as his unnamed sources are. Once you say that Hersh's sources are not credible, his story collapses, and no "small correction" can save it.

What the blog author is doing is, by trial and error, evolve a narrative that people will believe and share. That's all QAnon has ever done. The measure of success here is not truth or factuality, it's social (media) impact, and that rides on the narrative's ability to scare people, nothing else.

"Our government is incompetent" is such a scare narrative, which is why they pick up the weather balloon angle with that spin.

Beware.

 

[deirdre]

Hersh's story is only as credible as his unnamed sources are.

you just quoted (and called it 'evidence') a paraphrase of a WPost article all which involve unnamed sources. just saying.

 

[Ravi]

So we are now on the 16th of Feb, and STILL no news? Or did I miss it? (non-US guy here)

 

[deirdre]

16th of Feb

15th

i havent seen anything new.

 

[NorCal Dave]

The measure of success here is not truth or factuality, it's social (media) impact, and that rides on the narrative's ability to scare people, nothing else.

That applies to a lot of stuff out there. It's not if it's factually true, it's does the intended audience think it's true. Clicks and views are more important than facts.

 

[Mendel]

So we are now on the 16th of Feb, and STILL no news? Or did I miss it? (non-US guy here)

the debris is pretty hard to get to, especially in the winter

 

[Dan_]

CONFIRMED: president biden just confirmed the 3 objects shut down in recent days were not linked to the Chinese spy balloon saga, and were rather equipment belonging to private companies

KEY POINTS

• The three unmanned aerial objects that were shot down over the weekend by the U.S. military were "most likely tied to private companies, recreation or research institutions," President Joe Biden said.
• "Nothing right now suggests that they were related to China's spy balloon program," he added.
• The remarks came after days of mounting pressure on the White House, from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, to share more of what was known with the public.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/02/16...nation-on-shootdowns-of-aerial-phenomena.html

 

[deirdre]

president biden just confirmed the 3 objects shut down in recent days were not linked to the Chinese spy balloon saga, and were rather equipment belonging to private companies

that's not what your quote says.

CONFIRMED:

what exactly is "CONFIRMED"?

 

[econ41]

that's not what your quote says.

Agreed. There is a big logical gap between "cannot prove it was them" and the presumed proof of "it was NOT them".

what exactly is "CONFIRMED"?

Also agreed - the term needs definition. IMNSHO what Pres Biden has "CONFIRMED" is (a) "We can't prove they were Chinese" and (b) "We estimate that there is a greater than 50% likelihood they are "NOT Chinese".

 

[deirdre]

Also agreed - the term needs definition. IMNSHO what Pres Biden has "CONFIRMED" is (a) "We can't prove they were Chinese" and (b) "We estimate that there is a greater than 50% likelihood they are "NOT Chinese".

The thread topic and OP is allegedly providing evidence we shot down our own weather balloons. so even if they are school projects out of Russia, or even weather balloons out of Russia or CHina or N.Korea...nothing about the OP claim has been proven or confirmed.

 

[jarlrmai]

It's unlikley Biden/US Mil/Gov will ever say anything is 100% confirmed if they don't have to. This as close as you get to that.

 

[Dan_]

It's unlikley Biden/US Mil/Gov will ever say anything is 100% confirmed if they don't have to. This as close as you get to that.

Correct

 

[Greene]

It's unlikley Biden/US Mil/Gov will ever say anything is 100% confirmed if they don't have to. This as close as you get to that.

We have a very likely match for the 'cylindrical' object shot down over the Yukon. It's very possible matches for the other two will come forward as well.

That being said 'unknown'; which is the current status; absolutely does not equal 'confirmed'.

 

[Mendel]

It's unlikley Biden/US Mil/Gov will ever say anything is 100% confirmed if they don't have to. This as close as you get to that.

Do you want to start a betting pool over in Chitchat how many of these will be publicly identified? I'd bet against the number being zero...

 

[Rocky]

What I don't understand is why are we shooting them down with a $400,000 sidewinder missle when all you have to do is "switch to guns" and use bullets. You also don't have to send up the latest and greatest aircraft to take out a balloon. Especially since they were recorded at 40,000 ft and a threat to passenger airlines. Any military jet can reach that altitude.