/pnd/ - Politics, News, Debate

>>131540

>Undeclared unconventional warfare? IDK.

No, that's too subtle. If it were that, it would be a sabotaged control system for the damn. Much easier than rigging a dam to slowly fail. This is likely just usual chink behavior where the subs use shitty materials, mix literal trash in the concrete, etc.

Here's an example:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-12/30/content_9244857.htm

But hey, someone saved some sheckles by using trash in place of concrete for fill!

>>131540

>shitty jewish modeling software renders something incorrectly

>IS DAM BAD HURR

Come the fuck on.

The heightmap for that area is pretty low res. Looks like affine texture mapping almost. Turn off globe mode.

>>131540

That's just image distortion, dude. Nothing to worry about. I used to work with classified imaging and targetting programs in the military. You have to remember that satellite images are NEVER going to be 100% accurate, ever. Because no matter how good the camera is, you're still taking an image from 10 miles away, through the entire earths atmosphere. So, depending on the time of day, ambient air temperature, cross winds, sun brightness and all kinds of shit, that can distort the image. Think of it like a mirage. A mirage is a distortion of an image due to light being altered, refracted and bent caused by heat, humidity and wind. Updrafts of hot air can bend light and distort an image you're looking at, making it appear distorted. A good experiment of this is to start up a gas or charcoal grill, put the top on it and watch the lid. The hot air rising with bend the light just above the grill and make it appear wavy and distorted. You also have to think of the errors in the images, themselves. Sometimes images overlap, files get corrupted, pixels get rearranged and it looks really fucky. I remember some maps we would use would have giant distorted black lines through them, where the two images or datums didn't quite match up or they overlapped so there were 2 different images layered on top of one another.

Don't take satellite images as gospel. Literally take them with a grain of salt.

>>131540

I didn't read the second half of your post. You're fucking retarded, dude. You can't just "seed" clouds using magic, idiot. You have to physically fly an aircraft into the cloud or shoot artillery into the cloud and "seed" it with silver iodide or dry ice (frozen carbon dioxide). Technically you can "seed" clouds with a massive wild fire or volcano, but that's something completely different. Learn how to cloud, idiot.

Sage

>>131599

But I thought the chinese acknowledged it and said the dam was built to be "elastic".

https://youtu.be/L9Di-UVC-_4

Video debunks Google earth as a reliable source

>>131540

There was a burst of digging into this on other sites. The outcomes were various, from 'its-a-glitch-bro', to sensationalization for various sides both pro and against china, etc. On the physical dataset side, independent data is limited, resulting circles of nothingburgers while the chinese 50 cent army (and the cucks that go with them) ran around making a nothing burger out of what was itself a dataset nothing burger.

If you wanted to resolve the question, first ask it the right way: Why did automated mapping systems release elevation algorithm corrected photos that turned a straight structure into something rendered-as-not-straight? Obviously, the question refines itself then to: What is registering as differential elevation change data, resulting in differential algorithm-driven-pixel-corrections on digital plane/satellite map photos?

The resolution would require something that was not available at the time: either (1) a recent+past detailed elevation plot of the river area (that also includes a detailed map on the dam structure), or (2) a cartographer/surveyor distancing map of the dam wall from 4 separate points along the river (i.e. look down the dam perpendicularly, is it straight?, how straight or what is the variance of 4 perpendicular point surveys?).

Since this data does not exist, and likely will not exist, this (the digging for info and chans recycled posting) then deprecates.

For future: Yes satellites and planes. Ignore them. If trying to show dam moving, then require detail resolution elevation-maps (and not picture-maps that derive changes from the elevation map data to manipulate the photo to improve 'curacy'). Also, if trying to show dam moving, specify if lateral or height, and demonstrate with surveyor and/or cartographer survey.

For present: Yes, the damn is likely deferentially sinking in some areas, either relative to the elevation of those areas along the adjacent riverbed, or less-likely-but-possible sinking relative to the elevation of other dam segments. Dam not likely to collapse any time soon regardless, therefore millions of chinks will still drown due to upstream watershed flooding and landslides + endure shittier economics + have to continue their forced poverty under the chinese communist party .

Result: Nothing Not Already Known. Though entertaining.