• EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can’t say I believe that one bit. With how small transmitters can be these days, why wouldn’t it have one? Sounds to me like damage control. Not a whole lot of details in the article anyway.

      • EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t want a war with China, that would be awful. I’m just trying to be realistic about it. Seems silly to go through the trouble to make a surveillance craft like that and it not even have the capability to beam back any data.

        • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Data was obviously transmitted. Weather data, going by recent cyber attacks, there are a plethora of ways where it’s easier to get data.

          • EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m just gonna be open minded about it and not jump to conclusions. I could see the US gov making it into a big deal for reasons and I could see it being a balloon to take pics of bases, etc on the ground. Both seem like logical outcomes. I mean it could be a weather balloon but I sorta doubt it based on what I know about weather balloons (I’m an amateur weather nerd). But I could be wrong! I’ll admit that. Gotta keep an open mind.