Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 132

Thread: Why HRW is untrustworthy

  1. Top | #21
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    25,088
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    35,565
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Arctish View Post
    Weren't there a lot of explosion shockwave survivors in WWI?
    Yup. And even more in WWII, with civilians bombed in urban centres.

    There are some truly strange cases of people surviving despite those around them being killed.

    And then there's the famous milk bottle from the documentary 'Blitz Street', where they detonated WWII munitions in a replica of a 1940s era London street:


  2. Top | #22
    Elder Contributor barbos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mlky Way galaxy
    Posts
    12,170
    Archived
    8,047
    Total Posts
    20,217
    Rep Power
    71
    Actually strong wind can pick you up and knock you over without much damage. large and distant blast can transform itself into a wind.
    Just look at videos of nuclear explosions, it's just wind which destroys buildings.

  3. Top | #23
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,402
    Rep Power
    23
    I worked on an IR sensor for in the 80s that decded on a paracute, about the size of a large coffee can.

    That particular device was an anti tank weapon. Launched by artillery or drooped in a canister it drifted gow on a parachute and looked at an IR image to id a tank and shoot a shaped charge down through the top. Google Sense And Destroy Armor or SADARM and you might find it.

    An anti personnel device drifting down slowly would not be out of the question. Such a device would explode above the ground to spread shrapnel. Today such a weapon launched by artillery could have some form of terminal guidance to increase accuracy.

    We were also working on a sensor for an Israeli similar weapon, I met somebody from the Israel IMI.

    Israel tries to prent a moral position saying they are not like terrorists, they let people in a building know it is going to be destroyed.

    Whether Israel is intentionalytargeting civilians can be debated, that non combatants are being killed and injured can not. It would be like debating American drones and smart bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan did or did not kill civilians. We make the same argument as Israel, we use precision guided weapons and try to minimize collateral damage.

    Adding the weapon may not be intended to kill. The death threshold for pressure is well known.

    For a spherical shock wave I imagine energy will decrease by 1/r^2. It all depends on wher you are.

    In a book I read on D-Day a French family was found killed at the dinner table by the shock wave from a close bomb.

  4. Top | #24
    Member *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    24,504
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    41,057
    Rep Power
    0
    A 50 year violent occupation with the constant stealing of land is a form of terrorism.

    And Israel targets civilians.

    That is clear.

  5. Top | #25
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,402
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    A 50 year violent occupation with the constant stealing of land is a form of terrorism.

    And Israel targets civilians.

    That is clear.

    I agree, terrorist depends on which side you are on.

  6. Top | #26
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    No, but it is a Hollywood scene.

    The blast force to kill is less than the blast force to throw you through the air.
    These are not fixed quantities. A blast can easily kill only some of a group of people. People frequently survive overpressures that are fatal to others. Blast overpressure injuries are some of the least predictable events out there, and depend on a vast number of variables including (but not limited to) the orientation of victims relative to the explosion; reflected blast wave interference; whether victims have their mouths open or closed; and the victim's body type and muscle to fat ratio. And all of that is before considering impact injuries.

    The probability of surviving a blast that knocks you over is low, but certainly not zero.
    It's actually not that unpredictable--what's unpredictable is how much blast energy actually hits you.

    And note that this doesn't say "knocked over", it says "thrown through the air".

  7. Top | #27
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Actually strong wind can pick you up and knock you over without much damage. large and distant blast can transform itself into a wind.
    Just look at videos of nuclear explosions, it's just wind which destroys buildings.
    Wind, yes, you can be thrown by wind without injury if you somehow land soft enough. The force of the wind is tiny compared to the shockwave of a detonation, though.

  8. Top | #28
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33,055
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    129,807
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Adding the weapon may not be intended to kill. The death threshold for pressure is well known.

    For a spherical shock wave I imagine energy will decrease by 1/r^2. It all depends on wher you are.
    Which has nothing to do with my point.

    In a book I read on D-Day a French family was found killed at the dinner table by the shock wave from a close bomb.
    But this is exactly what I'm talking about.

    Dead, but not thrown by the blast wave. The energy to kill is less than the energy to throw them.

    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    A 50 year violent occupation with the constant stealing of land is a form of terrorism.

    And Israel targets civilians.

    That is clear.

    I agree, terrorist depends on which side you are on.
    No. Terrorist depends on who you are targeting. Hamas is almost always firing at civilians. Israel is firing at combatants.

  9. Top | #29
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    25,088
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    35,565
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    No, but it is a Hollywood scene.

    The blast force to kill is less than the blast force to throw you through the air.
    These are not fixed quantities. A blast can easily kill only some of a group of people. People frequently survive overpressures that are fatal to others. Blast overpressure injuries are some of the least predictable events out there, and depend on a vast number of variables including (but not limited to) the orientation of victims relative to the explosion; reflected blast wave interference; whether victims have their mouths open or closed; and the victim's body type and muscle to fat ratio. And all of that is before considering impact injuries.

    The probability of surviving a blast that knocks you over is low, but certainly not zero.
    It's actually not that unpredictable--what's unpredictable is how much blast energy actually hits you.
    It's more than sufficiently unpredictable for your claim that this account is impossible to be absurd.
    And note that this doesn't say "knocked over", it says "thrown through the air".
    Like anyone in close proximity to a large explosion could tell the difference.

    It's OK that you don't want to believe this account. It's not OK for you to rationalise that desire into a specious claim about its plausibility, much less its possibility; Nor is it OK for you to defame HRW on the basis of your personal and unsupported lack of belief.

    I understand that you don't want this to be true. But that's not the same as your being able to be reasonably certain that it's not true. Even though it probably feels very much like it is.

    False, but desirable, beliefs often feel like certainty, and even rationality; That's why we still have religion in the world.

  10. Top | #30
    Elder Contributor barbos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Mlky Way galaxy
    Posts
    12,170
    Archived
    8,047
    Total Posts
    20,217
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Actually strong wind can pick you up and knock you over without much damage. large and distant blast can transform itself into a wind.
    Just look at videos of nuclear explosions, it's just wind which destroys buildings.
    Wind, yes, you can be thrown by wind without injury if you somehow land soft enough. The force of the wind is tiny compared to the shockwave of a detonation, though.
    Exhaust from the rocket produce wind. And shaped charges, dog knows what they produce in different directions.
    So I am not sure that witness's description is impossible. But if I had to bet I would bet on them making part of the story up. Palestinians are well known to do that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •