text:
Comments:Burning debris from satellites spotted over several US cities

??

no direction reported
No one has yet reported the direction of the Russian or Iridium satellite. Most are launched toward the East to get the advantage of the earth's rotation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.68.250.234 (talk) 07:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Who wrote this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.51.52 (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

EKU WRONG
The comment made by the professor at Eastern Kentucky University is wrong, I attend Morehead State University, and am a Space Science Major, and actually saw one of the pieces as I operated our satellite tracking facility on top of a local hill. Satellite debris has a distinct look when compared to meteoric debris, AND some debris DOES simply fall from its orbit. When a collision happens, the debris spreads out radially from the impact site, with a projection in the direction of travel of each craft (imagine two lobes) the debris spreading downward will re-enter rapidly, possibly within minutes depending on angle to nadir, and velocity of travel. EKU should direct comments like that to the experts.

63.164.225.135 (talk) 03:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC) DCG

Comments from feedback form - "not so good"
not so good —122.168.182.32 (talk) 10:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Systems
Not copy


license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: File:16February2009.pdf


text:
Comments:Airplane that crashed near Buffalo, New York 'was on autopilot'

what is the use of autopilot when such a thing can happen
 * Autopilots are currently intended only for very normal situations - for anything else the pilot is suppose to take manual control (else we wouldn't need pilots ;-] ). It's basically like cruise control for a plane (except much more sophisticated). You wouldn't drive in rush hour with cruise control, and you certainly wouldn't drive through an icy school zone with it on. Same thing with autopilot. Note that they *are* working on autopilots for both air and land vehicles that will be able to do such things, but they aren't ready for prime time use yet. Gopher65talk 13:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Plane on Autopilot
Wouldn't seem plausible that the reason the plane was on autopilot is not because the flight team did not handle things correctly but because if the controls were not working properly they may have tried to engage the autopilot in hopes that the planes controls may be able to automatically compensate for the spiraling problem. It may have been a last ditch effort by the captain to eliminate tactical error from the equation and let the telemetry and on board computers use more rational and patterned responses to trouble signals. Thankyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.217.111 (talk) 01:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No. The autopilot was on for most of the trip. The autopilot then detected a problem that was beyond it's capability to handle, and it alerted the pilots. Based on what I've read so far, this airline employees "newbies" as pilots in order to save money. Also based on what I've read so far, once the autopilot detected that airspeed was too low, it sent the plane into a fairly steep dive in order to recover speed (this is the correct thing to do). Then the autopilot was disengaged, and the plane was put into a steep climb. This is EXACTLY the wrong thing to do, and it caused the plane to essentially come to a dead stop in the air. When a plane stops moving, it turns into a floating rock (ie, it falls straight down). The plane then spun toward the ground, crashing a few seconds later.

 * There are two questions to answer here
 * 1) Why did the plane's speed drop to below critical levels, causing the autopilot to attempt to correct,
 * 2) Why did the plane go into a steep climb immediately after the autopilot was shut off, causing the crash?

 * The answer to number 1 is unclear, and will take a long time to answer. It could be weather conditions, it could be maintenance related (airline problem), it could be a design issue (manufacturer problem), or it could be a software issue with the autopilot.

 * But the answer to question number 2, the thing that actually caused the crash, is obvious. A newbie pilot made a really, really stupid mistake (they shouldn't have brought the nose up), and crashed the plane. There is no other likely explanation. As for a the reason why the pilot made that mistake, well, that's harder to explain. Probably, probably what happened was that because they were coming in for a landing, and were already very low to the ground, the pilot saw the autopilot engage a dive an panicked. It's a mistake, but it's an understandable gut reaction that you can see an under-experienced pilot having. Gopher65talk 02:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


text: User talk:Alistairjh

title: User talk:Alistairjh


text:
Two nuclear submarines collide in the Atlantic Ocean

February 18, 2009

The, from France, and , of the British , collided deep under the middle of the  in the middle of the night between February 3 and 4, despite both vessels being equipped with. The collision caused damage to both vessels but it did not release any, a (MOD) official confirmed Monday.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said nuclear security had not been breached. "It is MOD policy not to comment on submarine operational matters, but we can confirm that the U.K.’s deterrent capability was unaffected at all times and there has been no compromise to nuclear safety. Triomphant had struck 'a submerged object (probably a container)' during a return from a patrol, damaging the sonar dome on the front of the submarine," he said.

A French navy spokesman said that "the collision did not result in injuries among the crew and did not jeopardise nuclear security at any moment." Lack of communication between France and other members of NATO over the location of their deterrents is believed to be another reason for the crash.

According to, the vessels collided 1,000ft in the  (Golfe de ; Golfo de Vizcaya  and Mar Cantábrico), a  of the North. It lies along the western coast of France from south to the Spanish border, and the northern coast of Spain west to, and is named for the Spanish province of , with average depth of 5,723 feet (1,744 m) and maximum depth is 9,151 feet (2,789 m).

Each submarine is laden with missiles powerful enough for 1,248, said.

It is unlikely either vessel was operating its at the time of the collision, because the submarines are designed to "hide" while on patrol and the use of active sonar would immediately reveal the boat's location. Both submarines' hulls are covered with to reduce detection by sonar, so the boats' navigational  would not have detected the presence of the other.

Lee Willett of said "the NATO allies would be very reluctant to share information on nuclear submarines. These are the strategic crown jewels of the nation. The whole purpose of a sea-based nuclear deterrent is to hide somewhere far out of sight. They are the ultimate tools of national survival in the event of war. Therefore, it's the very last thing you would share with anybody."

, of the United Kingdom, the most senior serving officer in the Royal Navy, said that "...the submarines came into contact at very low speed. Both submarines remained safe. No injuries occurred. We can confirm the capability remains unaffected and there was no compromise to nuclear safety."

"Both navies want quiet areas, deep areas, roughly the same distance from their home ports. So you find these station grounds have got quite a few submarines, not only French and Royal Navy but also from Russia and the United States. Navies often used the same nesting grounds," said, an independent and analyst primarily known for his work in assessing and reporting upon  and.

President of the Royal Naval Association John McAnally said that the incident was a "one in a million chance". "It would be very unusual on deterrent patrol to use active sonar because that would expose the submarine to detection. They are, of course, designed to be very difficult to detect and one of the priorities for both the captain and the deterrent patrol is to avoid detection by anything," he said.

The development of, making the submarines less visible to other vessels has properly explained that a submarine does not seem to have been able to pick out another submarine nearly the length of two football pitches and the height of a three-story building.

"The modus operandi of most submarines, particularly ballistic-missile submarines, is to operate stealthily and to proceed undetected. This means operating passively, by not transmitting on sonar, and making as little noise as possible. A great deal of technical effort has gone into making submarines quiet by reduction of machinery noise. And much effort has gone into improving the capability of sonars to detect other submarines; detection was clearly made too late or not at all in this case," explained Stephen Saunders, the editor of, an annual reference book (also published online, on  and microfiche) of information on all the world's  arranged by nation, including information on ship's names, dimensions, armaments, silhouettes and photographs, etc.

According to Bob Ayres, a former CIA and US army officer, and former associate fellow at, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, however, the submarines were not undetectable, despite their "stealth" technology. "When such submarines came across similar vessels from other navies, they sought to get as close as possible without being detected, as part of routine training. They were playing games with each other – stalking each other under the sea. They were practising being able to kill the other guy's submarine before he could launch a missile.Because of the sound of their nuclear reactors' water pumps, they were still noisier than old diesel-electric craft, which ran on batteries while submerged. The greatest danger in a collision was the hull being punctured and the vessel sinking, rather than a nuclear explosion," Ayres explained.

are uncommon, but not unheard of: in 1992, the, a submarine belonging to the United States, under command of Gordon Kremer, collided with the Russian attack submarine  that was surfacing in the.

In 2001, the, off the coast of Hawaii. The Navy determined the commanding officer of Greeneville to be in "dereliction of duty."

The tenth of the British  is the lead boat of  of -capable submarines and is based at,. The 150m long, V-class submarine under the, has a crew of 135, weighs nearly 16,000 tonnes and is armed with 16 carrying three  each.

It is now believed to have been towed Monday to its naval base in the, with dents and scrapes to its hull. Faslane lies on the eastern shore of in, , to the north of the  and 25 miles west of the city of.

Vanguard is one of the deadliest vessels on the planet. It was built at by  (now ), was  on 4 March, 1992, and  on 14 August, 1993. The submarine's first captain was. In February 2002, Vanguard began a two-year refit at. The refit was completed in June 2004 and in October 2005 Vanguard completed her return to service trials (Demonstration and Shakedown Operations) with the firing of an unarmed Trident missile.

"The Vanguard has two, a CK51 search model and a CH91 attack model, both of which have a TV camera and thermal imager as well as conventional optics," said , director and a national security analyst for http://www.globalsecurity.org/, an easily accessible , and active in opposing the , and , and consulting on.

"But the periscopes are useless at that depth. It's pitch black after a couple of hundred feet. In the movies like ',' you can see the subs in the water, but in reality it's blindman's bluff down there. The crash could have been a coincidence — some people win the lottery — but it's much more possible that one vessel was chasing the other, trying to figure out what it was," Pike explained.

Captain of HMS Vanguard, Commander Richard Lindsey said his men would not be there if they couldn't go through with it. “I'm sure that if somebody was on board who did not want to be here, they would have followed a process of leaving the submarine service or finding something else to do in the Navy,” he noted.

The is a, lead ship of  (SNLE-NG). It was laid down on June 9, 1989, launched on March 26, 1994 and commissioned on March 21, 1997 with homeport at. Equipped with 16 with six warheads each, it has 130 crew on board. It was completing a 70-day tour of duty at the time of the underwater crash. Its fibreglass sonar dome was damaged requiring three or four months in repair. "It has returned to its base on L'Ile Longue in on Saturday under its own power, escorted as usual by a frigate," the ministry said.

A Ballistic missile submarine is a equipped to launch. Ballistic missile submarines are larger than any other type of submarine, in order to accommodate SLBMs such as the Russian or the American.

The of strategic missile submarines of the  are currently being introduced into service to provide the sea based component (the ) of the French  or, with the. They are replacing the boats. In French, they are called Sous-Marin Nucléaire Lanceur d'Engins de Nouvelle Génération ("SNLE-NG, literally "Device-launching nuclear submarine of the new generation").

They are roughly one thousand times quieter than the Redoutable-class vessels, and ten times more sensitive in detecting other submarines. They are designed to carry the nuclear missile, which should enter active service around 2010.

Repairs for both heavily scraped and dented, missile-laden vessels were "conservatively" estimated to cost as much as 55m, with intricate systems and  having to be replaced, and would be met by the French and British taxpayer, the  reported.

Many observers are shocked by the, as well as the amount of time it took for the news to reach the public. ”Two US and five Soviet submarine accidents in the past prove that the reactor protection system makes an explosion avoidable. But if the collision had been more powerful the submarines could have sunk very quickly and the fate of the 250 crew members would have been very serious indeed,” said Andrey Frolov, from.

“I think this accident will force countries that possess nuclear submarines to sit down at the negotiating table and devise safety precautions that might avert such accidents in the future… But because submarines must be concealed and invisible, safety and navigation laws are hard to define,” Frolov said, noting further that there are no safety standards for submarines.

The unthinkable disaster – in the Atlantic's 41 million square miles – has raised concern among. "This is a nuclear nightmare of the highest order. The collision of two submarines, both with nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons onboard, could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed," said, chair of Britain's.

"This is the most severe incident involving a nuclear submarine since the  in 2000 and the first time since the Cold War that two nuclear-armed subs are known to have collided.  should seize this opportunity to end continuous patrols," Hudson added. Despite a rescue attempt by British and Norwegian teams, all 118 sailors and officers aboard Kursk died.

"This reminds us that we could have a new catastrophe with a nuclear submarine at any moment. It is a risk that exists during missions but also in port. These are mobile nuclear reactors," said, a spokesman for the French anti-nuclear group.

, British Member of Parliament for  has called for an immediate internal probe. "While the British nuclear fleet has a good safety record, if there were ever to be a bang it would be a mighty big one. Now that this incident is public knowledge, the people of Britain, France and the rest of the world need to be reassured this can never happen again and that lessons are being learned," he said.

Westminster leader MP for  has demanded for a government statement. "The Ministry of Defence needs to explain how it is possible for a submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction to collide with another submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction in the middle of the world's second-largest ocean," he said.

,, a Member of Parliament for  and a City councillor for Fratton ward, and who sits on the , has called on the    to make a statement when parliament sits next week.

"While I appreciate there are sensitive issues involved here, it is important that this is subject to parliamentary scrutiny. It's fairly unbelievable that this has happened in the first place but we now need to know that lessons have been learnt. We need to know for everyone's sakes that everything possible is now done to ensure that there is not a repeat of the incident. There are serious issues as to how some of the most sophisticated naval vessels in the seas today can collide in this way," Mr. Hancock said.

defence spokesman, a British politician, currently   and Member of Parliament for , said: “For two submarines to collide while apparently unaware of each other’s presence is extremely worrying.”

Meanwhile,, the French , has denied allegations the nuclear submarines, which are hard to detect, had been shadowing each other deliberately when they collided, saying their mission was to sit at the bottom of the sea and act as a nuclear deterrent.

"There's no story to this -- the British aren't hunting French submarines, and the French submarines don't hunt British submarines. We face an extremely simple technological problem, which is that these submarines are not detectable. They make less noise than a shrimp. Between France and Britain, there are things we can do together....one of the solutions would be to think about the patrol zones," Morin noted, and further denying any attempt at a cover-up.

is known as a submarine graveyard because of the number of German and underwater craft sunk there during the.


text:
Talk:Two nuclear submarines collide in the Atlantic Ocean

I CREATED this interesting news article on maritime collision of submarines amid utter secrecy. I am Philippines Judge Florentino Floro, having registered with Wikinews on December 3, 2008, and is a Editor as of January 12, 2009.
 * In having written more than "69 articles" (here - User:Florentino Floro/MyList and in Wikipedia Encyclopedia User:Florentino Floro/MyList2), I live with my Philosophy and hope to elevate Wikinwews to the phenomenal success of Wikipedia encyclopedia, by writing very comprehensive, detailed and fully synthesized news, amid collaboration of editors and the final touch of the reviewer. Please do not be annoyed if sometimes, (due to stress and human factor - plus the fact that as lawyer and judge, I never ever had enrolled in any journalism subject), I would tend to relax the copyright rules and style guide, but, without however, violating the SPIRIT AND INTENT of both international law of copyright, and Wikinews rules on style guide. REST ASSURED, that in writing every news article, I VALUE fairness, justice, integrity and honesty. This is what NEWS WRITING is all about. Please help in publishing this news. Cheers.--Florentino Floro (talk) 11:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Errors of some sort
"Each of their multiple warheads has a blast yield of up to 3.8 megatons — eight times as powerful as the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, The Sun reported." Um, no. The Hiroshima bomb was around 15,000 tons of TNT. So eight times that is only 120 kt. 3.8 Mt is more like 250 times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Basic math! --98.217.14.211 16:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Typo
editprotected "Britanny" => "Brittany" Van der Hoorn (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * ✅ ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 21:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Category request
editprotected

Please add Category:Submarines. Thanks, Bencherlite (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Pi zero (talk) 12:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


text:
US military says 'fireballs' spotted over Texas are not related to satellite collision

February 16, 2009

The United States military Strategic Command (STRATCOM) has said that the 'fireballs' spotted over areas of Texas in the United States on Sunday February 15, are not related to the collision of a U.S. and Russian satellite in space. According to spaceweather.com, NASA says the object was a meteor.

"There is no correlation between the debris from that collision and those reports of re-entry," said STRATCOM military spokeswoman Major Maj. Regina.

"It's a natural meteor, definitely," said Bill Cooke, an astronomer at NASA's Meteoroid Environment Office.

On Tuesday, February 10, the American civilian communications satellite Iridium 33, launched in 1997, and the defunct Russian military communications satellite Kosmos-2251, launched in 1993, collided over Siberia. On Friday February 13, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issued an alert for falling debris from the satellites, following reports of "explosions and earthquakes" along with "flashes in the sky" in Jackson and Louisville, Kentucky.

Then again on Sunday, calls to 9-1-1 began to come in to Williamson County, Texas sheriff's office around 12:30 p.m. (Central time) that burning debris and fireballs were seen falling from the sky onto parts of Austin, Houston, Waco and San Antonio.

"The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reported to local law enforcement on Friday that these events are being caused by falling satellite debris. These pieces of debris have been causing sonic booms, resulting in vibrations felt by some residents, as well as flashes of light across the sky," said the NOAA on Friday in an public information alert posted on their website. The FAA says the burning material over Texas is not related to this alert.

"We don't know what it was [over Texas]," said Roland Herwig, a spokesman for the FAA on Monday. The alerts still remain in effect in Kentucky until further notice.

Residents in Texas reported their homes and windows shaking and large explosions on Sunday morning. After a search of several areas, the Williamson county sheriff's office reported that no debris or impact sites were found. Earlier unconfirmed reports had said the debris could have been the result of a small plane exploding.

There was previous speculation was that the object in Texas could have been a meteor. Doctor Marco Ciocca, a professor at Eastern Kentucky University told WKYT on Sunday that it's too early for the debris from the satellites to be reentering the planet's atmosphere. "[It could] be months" before any of the satellite wreckage enters the earth's atmosphere. "The debris doesn't simply fall out of its orbit. It will either vaporize or stay in orbit for some time before falling into earth's atmosphere."

However, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) said on February 12 that the debris could have taken 10 days or less to reenter over portions of the planet.

"Within 24 hours of the collision, the U.S. space tracking system had identified 600 pieces of debris. This large number suggests that the collision must have been relatively head-on. If the two satellites hit head-on, rather than a glancing blow, the energy of the collision would completely disintegrate both satellites into clouds of debris," said the UCS in a statement on their website who also added that the collision took place in "the same region of space where China destroyed a defunct Chinese weather satellite with an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon" in 2007. "That January 2007 test created a massive amount of debris." There have been at least eight major satellite collisions since 1991.

The satellites, both of which had a mass in excess of 450 kilograms, and were traveling at approximately 17,500 miles per hour (28,150 km/hour), collided 491 miles (790 km) above the earth. Scientists say the explosion caused by the collision was massive. They are still trying to determine just how large the crash was and how the earth will be affected. STRATCOM continues to track the debris. The results of a plotting analysis will be posted to a public website.


text:
User:Kuvaly

cs.wiki

title: User:Kuvaly


text:
User talk:Kuvaly

Welcome
DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kuvaly


text: Talk:US military says 'fireballs' spotted over Texas are not related to satellite collision


text:
North Korea says it's preparing to launch space program, denies preparations to test missile

February 16, 2009

North Korea has denied in a statement that the nation's military is preparing to test-fire a long range ballistic missile. The country instead says that they are preparing to launch a space program.

"One will come to know later what will be launched in the DPRK. Space development is the independent right of the DPRK and the requirement of the developing reality," said the statement according to the Korean Central News Agency.

The statement also went on to accuse the United States and other nations of "viciously tricking [the country into putting] a brake on the wheel of not only the DPRK's building of military capability for self-defense but also scientific researches for peaceful purpose under the pretext of missile," added the statement.

Earlier reports from the U.S. and South Korean government had said that N. Korea was planning a test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile, the Taepodong-2. In 2006 the country test launched the same kind of missile, but military officials in the U.S. said the missile failed.

Previous reports say that N. Korea was trying to gain the attention of the new U.S. president Barack Obama, but the country denies those claims, saying, "the DPRK has no need to draw anyone's attention and does not want anybody to interfere or meddle in the issue of the Korean Peninsula."


text: Talk:North Korea says it's preparing to launch space program, denies preparations to test missile


text: Talk:US Congress passes $787 billion stimulus package


text:
NATO report on Afghanistan leaked

February 18, 2009

The document-leaking website Wikileaks recently obtained a confidential NATO report that reveals many surprising facts regarding the in Afghanistan. The report, dated January 14, 2009, is comprised of twelve pages of statistics in the form of maps, graphs, and text on the US military statistics in 2008.

The document shows a sharp increase in violence and disorder. Assassinations and kidnappings have gone up by 50%, and attacks on the government of Hamid Karzai have increased 119%. Coalition casualties have also risen nearly 35% and IED attacks are up 27%. Even with an increase in attacks, the overall suicide bombing rate dropped in 2008, down 5%, and civilians are starting to turn in terror suspects to the military, which was up 21%.

The report details various other statistics regarding the war. Outside of Kabul half of families do not have access to basic health care and half of children do not have access to a school. The report also says that 24% of Afghan citizens see an improvement in security, while 19% see the situation worsening.

Although no war secrets were revealed, the leak is still very concerning for the involved parties. In an unrelated leak case, a source from the United Kingdom Defence Ministry told the : "The whole point of defeating the Taliban is winning hearts and minds and stopping the population joining their cause. If they think we’re lying to them, it could become a very dangerous place."

title: NATO report on Afghanistan leaked


text:
Comments:US Congress passes $787 billion stimulus package

Do you think that the stimulus package will help the economy?
of course!

Yes -- while tax cuts and Reaganomics helped us out of the 82 recession, Roosevelts gov't spending and works projects helped us out after the great depression. I lean Republican, but I say let's stop the wrangling -- the Dem's have been voted in, so let them give this a try. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.227.63 (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Contrary to the last supposition, FDR's New Deal did not help us out of the Depression. The force behind our recovery was World War 2 which, ironically enough, is a cause of the current economic crisis right now. --Faustus66

$5 says that none of the people who voted for Obama just because he's black don't know crap about the economy, other than the fact that it's a pile of sheet right now. They probably don't even know what this package will do. - JustinSxE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.165.223 (talk) 05:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Geithner just wants to throw money at his Wall Street cronies while the national debt piles up past $11 trillion. Yay for screwing over the current teens and their kids. --Faustus66

Economy? Let it die. Maybe then we can all live and prosper in reality.
It's an abstract number game with no concrete connection to reality. It's a ruse to convince honest people they're unworthy of the products of their own labor. "Economic Crisis" is some arcane language which somehow fools people into behaving as if food and shelter are scarce, when in reality they're only being abandoned and wasted as the handful of people who own everything don't feel like sharing anymore.

Of the millions of empty houses in America now owned by banks, 2/3 aren't even put on the market for the sake of maintaining an appearance of scarcity.

At the same time, those people who no longer wish to share put on an elaborate media spectacle to somehow convince us all that they're working around the clock to bring back stability to our hollow lives as subservient consumers.

Money is the tool which enables all this madness, and we're supposed to believe that printing more is the solution?

Please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.31.21.15 (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Bailing out this goddamn economy won't do us any favors. We're just digging ourselves a grave. We basically have one foot on the gas, and another in the grave. - JustinSxE

It's a 50-50 -- a lot of crazy stuff on the bill
While stimulus efforts should be made by the government to help Americans who are hurting and to prevent any expansion of the current crises, spending money on other fields—totally ineffective in regard to the current problems—such as global warming, infrastructure, etc., doesn't necessarily help either. Certainly, reducing gas emissions i nice, and so is improving our infrastructure, but I believe that's not as demanding as the economical problem is; therefore, the latter should be given priority. If people were to actually read the bill, which was some 1,000 pages, they wouldn't be so crazy about it, but the Democrats—with absolute control of Congress—can do whatever they please, and the media supports them fully. One thing though, if Obama fails, he cannot expect to be elected a second time just be dubbing his upcoming as "a member of Bush's party." It worked once, not twice. I want him to do well, of course, but he hasn't shown to really be bipartisan. I mean, the way he tries to reach across the isle is like this: "Hey Republicans, I have this bill, do you wanna support it?" Rs: "I might wanna compromise on that." O: "Forget it! You are not bipartisan enough." So, Obama's bipartisanship is only when others agree with him 100%.--96.232.49.24 03:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hopeful that the Stimulus Plan will aid the recession and help our economy grow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.60.197.130 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

the people in charge of doling out the funds will be the problem. Greed and special interests will see alot of the money go to waste. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.45.41 (talk) 07:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You know, you'd almost think we were trying to devalue the US dollar. I wonder if anyone is familiar with the case of the Zimbabweian dollar. It simply doesb't work out when you just keep on printing more imaginary money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.185.83.19 (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Stimulus ?
To hear this monstrous spending bill refered to as a stimulus bill would be a joke if it were not so sad for this country. All we have done is grown the size of government and assisted Obama, Pelosi and Reid in the socializing of America. No one will remember when this started ten years from now but they will certainly still be feeling the effects. The soviet union and china have tried to run a socialist economy in the past and both have given up. We are now starting down a path which I am glad I am old enough that I am old enough to say I will not see the results. I am very concerned for my children and particularly grandchildren as they will pay the price for this lunacy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirdherdnerd (talk • contribs) 17:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

No absolutely not, this would be better if it was given to the people, Companies only serve the people. I would like a 200'000$ check in the mail, I could pay of my debt with it, not some companies debts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Voradin (talk • contribs) 08:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


text:
British writer Edward Upward dies at 105

February 17, 2009

British writer Edward Upward has died at the age of 105. Upward died on Friday, February 13 in Pontefract, England. He was believed to be the UK's oldest living author.

Upward was born Edward Falaise Upward on September 9, 1903 in Romford, England. He attended Corpus Christi College in Cambridge, where, in 1924, he was awarded the Chancellor's Medal for English Verse. He was attending the college on a history scholarship he received in 1922.

Upward joined the communist party in 1932 after the fall of Britain's Labour Party in the summer of 1931. He recalls joining the party because he felt "psychological need" so satisfy his imagination of it. He was convinced his fear of becoming mentally unstable would be cured, because his cousin Allen, who was also an author, killed himself after going crazy. Upward stated he was impressed with his cousin's suicide, because he thought he would die the same way.

Upward's first novel Journey to the Border, was published by the Hogarth Press in 1938. It described in poetic prose, the rebellion of a private tutor against his employer and the menacing world of the 1930s.


text:
Category:Imported news

__HIDDENCAT__

Category for news that has been "imported" from 3rd party sources.

ko:분류:들여온 기사

title: Category:Imported news


text: Template:Imported news

title: Template:Imported news


text:
User:ShakataGaNai/Import news test project

Wikinews has a problem. A chicken and the egg problem. People don't want to contribute to Wikinews because there is such a small readership. People don't read Wikinews because there are so few articles. Wikipedia got around this problem because it was the first of its kind (in many respects), Wikinews is just another news site. It is impossible for us to compete with "mass media" without either A) a _lot_ more contributors or B) other help. I can't do much about A, but B is something we _can_ do.

Our tag line is "The free news source you can write!". Why are we so stuck on the "you can write" part and not using the "free news" part at all? There are hundreds of other sites who write news that is licensed under a compatible "Free" license. So I say we use them. No, not indiscriminately. Obviously someone who is writing Op/Ed's isn't what we want. Nor is someone who is writing massively biased news. Same for someone who writes purely speculated news. That being said, I think we can have a little leeway in putting in some non-Wikinews written news, into Wikinews. Just disclaimer it.

I figure it is worth a shot, so I've set up 2 pieces for this test:

 * Imported news -- A template to go at the TOP of an article as a disclaimer (like wikimediamention )
 * Category:Imported news -- A category to track all these stories that are added. If nothing else, we'll know where to start nuking. This cat is automatically added by the above template.


text:
Large chimpanzee shot and killed by police in US after it attacks woman, officers

February 17, 2009 A 200-pound pet chimpanzee has been shot and killed by police in Stamford, Connecticut in the United States after it got loose from its cage and attacked a woman.

The chimp has been identified as 'Travis' and his owner as Sandra Herold. Travis was said to have gotten out of control, escaped from his cage and attacked a friend of Herold's on Monday around 4:00 p.m. EST (UTC-5). When police arrived on scene they shot Travis four times, killing him, but not before Travis injured two police officers.

The unidentified 55-year-old woman is reported to be a friend of Herold who was visiting her when Travis escaped. She is said to have suffered life-threatening injuries and was taken to nearby Stamford Hospital with multiple bite wounds and cuts. She is listed in critical condition.

This is not Travis' first encounter with the police. In 2003, a police officer sedated him with tranquilizer darts after he said Travis escaped from Herold's SUV. However, The Advocate reports that in that incident, Travis was locked out of the SUV and walked to the other side to try another door when an officer shot him.

Travis' owners, Sandra and her husband Jay, have lived in their home on Rimmon Road in Stamford for several years. WABC-TV in New York City reports that the Herolds' were well known in the neighborhood. For years, Travis would even ride around with Jay in his tow truck and the cars he towed.


title: File:17February2009.pdf


text:
Comments:North Korea says it's preparing to launch space program, denies preparations to test missile

On the title, it should be "it's", instead of "its".

Doesn't anybody think this is strange that the NK's ban UN inspectors from their nuclear plants a few weeks before they test a missile MADE to launch a nuke? Listen, if we don't do something quick, we're gonna be fighting Korean War 2: This Time It's Personal. 72.55.8.70 17:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I think it's a good idea that North Korea is preparing to launch its own space program. Just like any other industrious nation in the world, I doubt they would want to stay behind.

Lopez7.vii (talk) 17:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

they've always amused me.

wow thats what i call strategic lying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.244.55.119 (talk) 19:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


text:
User:Amol.Gaitonde

Amol.Gaitonde at Wikipedia

title: User:Amol.Gaitonde


text: User:Cuaxdon

title: User:Cuaxdon


text:
User:Maschinenmensch

Hi there!

I'm interested in computer related articles.

More
The Pirate Bay back online

title: User:Maschinenmensch


text:
User talk:Arronnbell

Welcome
Thanks for experimenting with Wikinews. Your test worked, and has now been reverted or removed. Please use Sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles may disrupt the site's working and will be reverted quickly. , welcome to Wikinews! Please refrain from using content pages for testing. Here are a few good links for newcomers on how to edit Wikinews:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 11:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how an article should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Arronnbell


text: Talk:British writer Edward Upward dies at 105


text:
General relativity effect confirmed: satellite experiment

February 17, 2009

A team of scientists at Stanford University claim to have detected a subtle, missing element of Einstein's theory of relativity.

In a press release dated February 16th, Robert Kahn, Stanford University's Public Affairs Coordinator, announced the experimental confirmation of frame dragging, an effect in which the presence of a rotating body causes space itself to be pulled along as the body rotates. While the effect was theorized by Josef Lense and Hans Thirring as far back as 1918, the small scale of the effect, as little as one part in a trillion for a satellite orbiting the Earth, made detecting the effect difficult.

The observation was made by the Gravity Probe B satellite, which carries finely-machined gyroscopes. Scientists looked for small changes in the motion of the gyroscopes to detect the frame dragging effect, as well as the much larger geodetic effect – small corrections to the Earth's gravitational field due to differences between Einstein's and Newton's theories of gravity.

The experiment was conducted on the satellite from 2004 to 2005. However, the complexity of the data analysis along with unforeseen engineering problems have made finding the effect in the experiment's results difficult. In particular, the presence of small electrical charges on the gyroscopes interfered with their results.

Francis Everitt, the experiment's Principal Investigator, stresses in an interview with the New York Times that their announcement is only preliminary and that, with further analysis, they hope to improve the precision of their results; currently, they say they have only detected the frame dragging effect to within plus or minus fifteen percent of its expected value.

The theory of general relativity was developed by Albert Einstein in the early 20th century to explain the behavior of moving objects in space, after the discovery that the speed of light was always the same no matter how the person measuring it was moving. While it successfully explains many strange behaviors in space, such as the slow shifting of the orbit of Mercury and the bending of light by massive objects such as black holes, testing the theory on Earth has always been difficult due to the small scale of relativity's effects in everyday life.


text: Talk:General relativity effect confirmed: satellite experiment


text:
Comments:US military says 'fireballs' spotted over Texas are not related to satellite collision

Mario has to lay off the fire flowers. Fephisto (talk) 12:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

quick to dismiss...
A Kosmos satellite that crashed over northern Canada a couple of decades ago was powered by a nuclear thermocouple. I wonder if this is why they were so quick to dismiss the idea the fireballs were related to the crash? Geo Swan (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


text:
Comments:British writer Edward Upward dies at 105

normal
The article were written nice, just a standard obit. Succintly a biography and his acts. Also there's nothing irregular.

--Kays (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


text:
20,000 Californian state workers may lose their jobs

February 18, 2009 On Tuesday, the US state of California announced it is ready to notify approximately twenty thousand state workers that they are being laid off. The announcement was made by a spokesman for California's governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. The cuts would begin at the start of the fiscal year on July 1.

This comes after California lawmakers voted down a budget worth US$40 billion last weekend.

"In the absence of a budget, the governor has a responsibility to realise state savings any way he can," said Aaron McLear, Schwarzenegger's spokesman. "This is unfortunately a necessary decision."

The state is also planning to put all remaining public work projects on hold, which could cost thousands of construction workers their jobs.

California has the world's eighth largest economy. It has suffered from unemployment and the housing crisis, with Schwarzenegger declaring a fiscal emergency last December.

"We are dealing with a catastrophe of unbelievable proportions," said Alan Lowenthal, a Democratic state senator from Long Beach.

The budget plan consisted of $11.4 billion in borrowing, $14.4 billion for temporary increases in taxes, and $15.1 billion dedicated for program cuts. The package initially appeared to have enough support to reach the two-thirds majority needed to make the bill a law, but fell short by a single vote. The Assembly was at one point in session for thirty hours, breaking the record for the longest legislative session in the history of the state.

Many Republican lawmakers say they disagree with the tax increases that are included as part of the budget package.

"People don't realize where California is at — people are losing homes, people are losing jobs," said Republican state senator Abel Maldonado.

"You're not going to go back to the people's pocketbooks to fuel that spending," added Republican state senator Dennis Hollingsworth from Temecula.

Senate leader Darrell Steinberg wants another session on Tuesday, saying that he would put up the tax provisions of the budget proposal for a vote. "Bring a toothbrush, bring any necessities you want to bring, because I will not allow anyone to go home to resume their lives [...] as long as we know [...] that 20,000 people will be laid off," he warned.


text:
Comments:Japan, Australia draw in World Cup qualifier

Premier


text:
Obama signs $787 billion stimulus package

February 17, 2009 🇺🇸 United States President Barack Obama has signed a US$787 billion stimulus package, entitled the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, into law on Tuesday at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science in Denver, Colorado. He called the bill "the most sweeping recovery package in our history" at a signing ceremony. "I don't want to pretend that today marks the end of our economic problems, nor does it constitute all of what we're going to have to do to turn our economy around," Obama said at the ceremony, "but today does mark the beginning of the end — the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans scrambling in the wake of layoffs.

"The beginning of what we need to do to provide relief from families worried they won't be able to pay next month's bills. The beginning of the first steps to set our economy on a firmer foundation, paving the way to long-term growth and prosperity."

Vice President Joe Biden praised the president on his work getting the bill passed. "Less than a month into his presidency, the president is about to sign into law what is, I believe, a landmark achievement," he said. "Because of what he did America can take a first very strong step leading us out of this very difficult road to recovery we find ourselves with. So, on behalf of our country and its people, Mr President, let me presume to say: thank you, we owe you a great deal."

According to Obama, the package is intended to save or create up to three and a half million jobs, and increase rebuilding infrastructure and consumer spending. 34% of the package is devoted to tax cuts equalling $286 billion, and a further $120 billion will be used to fund infrastructure projects, such as road-building and transportation. 64% of the package will be allocated for money for social programs and spending.

Most Republican lawmakers opposed the bill when it was voted upon in the Senate and the House last week. The House passed the bill without any Republican support, and only three Republicans voted for it in the Senate.

"Our nation is in recession, and responsible action is required to help our economy protect and create jobs, this isn't it," said John Boehner, the House Republican minority leader. "The flawed bill the President will sign today is a missed opportunity, one for which our children and grandchildren will pay a hefty price."

Republican National Committee chairman Michael S. Steele said he was disappointed by what he thought was the president's lack of a bipartisan approach in passing the bill: "In these difficult economic times, it is imperative that Republicans and Democrats work together to create new jobs and grow the economy. Instead, Congressional Democrats worked behind closed doors to write legislation that will fall short of creating the promised new jobs, but will guarantee a larger debt burden on our children and grandchildren."

US stock markets were lower today, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average losing 3.29% or 258.62 points at the end of the day to a level of 7,591.79.


text:
Comments:Elephants recognize mirror image of themselves

That's cool.


text:
Comments:General relativity effect confirmed: satellite experiment

I honestly think that the two theories of relativity have only scratched the surface of the surface of what there is to discover. I'm very excited about the course of experiments related to them over the next several years.

Personally I am unsure how accurate and/or on point the article is. I certainly thought there were some unanswered questions raised by the Voyager trajectory anomalies. -- Cimon Avaro (talk) 11:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, but those will be new physics, not a rehash of old physics. Basically, we know that Relativity is correct... as far as it goes. We also know that it doesn't explain everything, and that it is incompatible with Quantum Physics. Those are the things that they're working on right now: creating new ideas that will incorporate all the things we know, and teach us new things as well. But that won't invalidate Relativity. Just like how Relativity didn't invalidate Newtonian Physics. Newtonian Physics is still perfectly correct... but only under specific conditions (like those that exist in our every day lives). Relativity simply goes one step further than Newtonian Physics. Eventually, the same thing will happen to Relativity. Gopher65talk 15:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Newtonian physics weirdly simplistic
and anthrocentric---time to see the universe with more than 3 dimensions. Ralativity a peekaboo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.22.48.13 (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Man, science
Awesome stuff. Fephisto (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Man, more science
"Are you surprised that the weirdness predicted by relativity has been experimentally verified?"

That is a loaded question and harmful to science! Firstly, how is relativity weird? It is an easily observable thanks to both the flesh and blood and mechanical Mr. Hubble. Red Shift is easily explained and understood as the "train whistle of light" by both children and adults alike...once a person understands the rubber-band nature of light, the ability to manipulate and transform space-time mentally naturally follows. Of course all experiments will agree with relativity. The first experiment that doesn't, refutes it and we move onto something better!

Secondly, Relativity is no where near as complex and unpredictable as Quantum Dynamics. Virtual particles? Calabi–Yau manifolds? The mere act of any direct measurement utterly forbidding a direct result?

Gleaning the secrets of light via Relativity is as simple as telling time with a clock...but telling the Quantum time in between the ticks and tocks of our Relativity Clock is as difficult as reconstructing an image of that clock's hands, positioned on it's face, from a snapshot we took from many many miles distant with a long-lensed camera. A moment after that clock was involved in a high speed head on two-car accident....that we orchestrated!

It gets better ... the clock was in the glovebox of one of the cars involved in the accident and now you have to, from that single photograph only, a jumbled images of pieces of car and clock and who knows what else at what angles, tell someone with assurance what time the clock said! That odd description is a repeated analogy of events inside a particle accelerator/atom smasher. Of which relativity must be nearly fully understood to get it to work properly let alone produce meaningful results. The good news in real life is that we can take billions and billions of pictures of those accidents, it's not just a one shot chance...Viva Science! 98.217.120.78
 * I strongly disagree that the question is loaded, or harmful to science. Relativity has held up incredibly well to intense scrutiny, and when you start getting to the limits of applying the theory then you do encounter strange predicted behaviours. Testing that these actually occur is advancement of science - either by strengthening the basis of the theory of relativity, or proving that it is an incomplete model. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "I agree with Einsteins opinion..."
I agree with Einsteins opinion on relativity. C squared happens much in nature. A 3 lb cannonball shot, will put a 9 pound hole in the ground, not a 3 inch hole. Rothenstein@hotmail.com —24.103.123.253 (talk) 19:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)


text: Talk:Obama signs $787 billion stimulus package


text:
Talk:Large chimpanzee shot and killed by police in US after it attacks woman, officers

Edit request
editprotected

Dead image needs to be removed. – Juliancolton  | Talk 06:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

 * ✅ Tempodivalse [talk]  13:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)