John Bolton Paid Cambridge Analytica To Make Facebook Users Less 'limp-wristed' About War.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

What was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagaski were, for all intents and purposes, science experiments. Very destructive and horrible science experiments. These were not practical military weapons.

Just because the Trinity test proved that the Fat Man bomb should work, didn't mean it would work in a real world application being delivered by aircraft. It also had no bearing on the Little Boy bomb, though the math said that this less complicated device should work, so they didn't bother testing it prior to its use.

The first Fat Man bomb had 32 detonators that needed to go off within a millisecond of each other in order to create the conditions necessary for the bomb to cause a fission chain reaction detonation. The first bomb also could not be assembled in their final configuration until shortly before usage (before the airplane took off) due to the nature of the neutron generators used.

Some modern weapons use only 2 detonators and can be stored in their fully functional configuration for years without degradation of their yield or risking that they do not work when they are used. The first bomb did not have these capabilities.

I believe the nuclear test ban treaties were more about preventing other countries from developing nuclear weapons than limiting the US or USSR from further testing. By the time the test ban treaties were signed, both major powers had the ability to accurately simulate nuclear weapons designs with computers. They could also simulate existing weapons to see if the stockpile was still viable after long term storage. Almost all modern nuclear weapons have components that degrade over time and need to be replace regularly to ensure that the weapon will work when it is used. Before the use of these computers to simulate nuclear weapons the only way to know if a new design would actually work was to test it.

Since the hand cannon was invented and tested in the 13 century, perhaps we should have stopped development? After all, it worked, why continue to test and innovate? Perhaps we should all be driving in Model T cars? After all, they were a viable means of transportation. Why did we need to continue to test and develop the car?

So CBS ABC NBC MSNBC CNN etc. feed propaganda to viewers 24/7. But you actually think some data harvesting site somehow changed the opinions of millions of Americans?

Wow. Just wow.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
So CBS ABC NBC MSNBC CNN etc. feed propaganda to viewers 24/7. But you actually think some data harvesting site somehow changed the opinions of millions of Americans?

Wow. Just wow.

When it fits into the lefts mental breakdown drama we have been seeing since Trump won yes, Democrats will believe almost anything to explain why they lost..

So long as its not Democrats holding themselves accountable for rigging their primaries, for nominating a candidate who has ethics that would raise eyebrows in the Court of Caligula and finally being forced to admit that regardless of how much people hated Trump, even more hated Clinton.

Hence we have a massive ocean of denial that Democrats are slowly floating around in circles in.

To further support my argument the left, and left wing media, were all for Obama and the manner he used social media to get elected. When Trump uses social media it is somehow an affront to the first amendment. The left, and left wing media, had no problems with Obama and his campaign using CA data-mining information and facebook even helped them out. However, Trump never used any information from CA and yet here we are.. Democrats bitching about a nonexistent application of information that Trump never used all the while remaining silent on the fact Obama did the same and took it one step farther by actually using the info.

Joseph Goebbels would be proud of Democrats... Democrats have successfully, and I use the word loosely, blamed their opponents for the very crimes they themselves have committed and are still committing today.

a reply to: Annee

I call it "Elevator Thinking"

I like that

When it comes to thought it can get very boring walking the same halls and climbing the same stairwells.

Personal, emotional, viewpoints - - are usually the worst and easiest to influence (FOX news is a good example of that). 

Yeah and they're usually broken records, the same song and dance... Skipping on the good bits.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Lol

So basically you might have been influenced but it's OK the other side do it too?

Why not get over the partisan bs and realise we are all emotional little cretins known as humans who are susceptible to influence, especially when it comes to emotionally driven topics, like politics or war?

Because most of the public's reactions to such topics are generally emotional, those wishing to influence tend to know this.

Be logical. Don't be ignorant and most if all don't be a mouthpiece...