US Army and USAF intercept cruise missile for first time with JLENS-guided

[gambit]

Ad hominem one-liners are an indication of cowardice and an intellectual deficit.

Now where did you copied/pasted that one liner from?

Buddy, so called 'studies' about IQ and race/ethnicity associations, no matter where they came from, have been shot full of holes. Anyone who uses them is a coward and have that intellectual deficit.

 

[China_Rising]

In every instance where the Chinese are given the opportunity to show us that IQ, not copy paste, but IQ when it relates to its masses in an open , fair and level playing field. They come out as sub par.

The only "level playing field" is the objective scientific 'universe', where things are peer-reviewed, replicated, and when the findings have been found to be the same again and again, are held to be 'facts'.

The mean Indian American IQ in the USA is 110-112. THIS explains why they are high-performers; they are the top 0.5% of Indians living on this Earth, and they have been snatched by Americans (and other countries like GB).

It's explained rationally and objectively. You can't refute it because there is nothing to object to. The mean Indian American IQ is a full 30 points higher than that of the average Indian. That's *two* standard deviations above the Indian mean. Comparing the top 0.5% of Indians against the average Chinese or White or WHOMEVER, is not only intentionally misleading and dishonest, but is also an indication of your inherent desperation to prove the world what you already know not to be true: that Indians are superior.

Instead of comparing the highest 0.5% of Indians against the distinctly average Chinese, why don't we compare the average Chinese with the average Indian? Does that seem to be objectively fair, or is that too offending to your pamperedness?

Around 95% of Indians and Chinese live in India and China, respectively. What more could you ask for? The average Indian IQ is 82, while the average Chinese IQ is 106.

The lack of such high IQ is further evident, when we notice how its own govt treats them as citizens. I have yet to hear a creative explanation from you in regards to why such a high IQ lot is censored from reading mere words?

1: There is no reliable data on the positive correlation between individual freedoms and IQ. Post some.

2: High-IQ nations/races have had a history of living under brutal regimes. Try Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

3: China is, as are most East Asian nations, largely conformist in nature. Regardless of the underlying innate intelligence of the population, advocating for a revolution as you "smart" Indians would do, would probably cause more destruction than it would an improvement in the economic and social outlook of the country. Our political system is a remnant of a time of social and political upheaval. We are not going to do the "smart" Indian thing by destroying our country in a revolution simply because we wan't things to advance more quickly. So actually, now that I think of it, the lack of Chinese calls for a revolution or violence (as is currently happening in India) is probably an indication of our ability to control our impulses and refrain from violence on a mass scale.

I hope I helped you with your overly simplistic assessment and your contemptible, poorly expressed rebuttal.

 

[TheFlyingPretzel]

Not worthy wasting time on him.

He is a highschool drop-out, knowing nothing what he posted.

i don't read media from mainland China or Hong Kong, and the Indian keeps on droning on about brainwashing and censorship.

[/QUOTE]

Ad hominem one-liners are an indication of cowardice and an intellectual deficit.

Gentlemen, allow me to interject. The only proper way to beat sense into a Hindu is with a stick. Please continue.

 

[China_Rising]

Something is wrong with this thread. Posts are not being added when they are submitted.

 

[China_Rising]

Now where did you copied/pasted that one liner from?

You might be projecting your level of intellect onto me. I don't need to copy-paste such a simple response; and it has no indication of being an "ad hominem one-liner", other than the fact that it's one sentence long.

so called 'studies'

Let's start here. There is *NO* so-called when it comes to IQ. If you had even the slightest underlying scientific background (which I'm sure you'll claim) then you would easily know how to pull up references and studies on the valdidity of IQ in assessing differences in intelligence. I'm guessing you can't name me TWO major scientists in the world today which regard IQ as invalid.

have been shot full of holes.

No, they haven't. It's just too bad that twin studies and longitudinal adoption studies largely demonstrate that it is heredity, and not the environment, that is responsible for the overwhelming majority of the variation in IQ differences.

Your predetermined response will of course be something along the lines of, "yea but you forgot the cultural biases, environmental differences, blah blah blah ". Well, unfortunately for you, we have multiple GWAS studies that largely replicate the same heritability figures for IQ. None of these are biased by the confounding variables that are traditionally blamed for inflating the genetic component to IQ.

So really, anyone who says something like "Anyone who uses them is a coward and have that intellectual deficit" (and says so with broken English might I add; American my butt) is not really capable of an intellectually stimulating debate, and most of all, is WRONG on just about everything.

How's that for your daily buttkicking?

 

[gambit]

Not really, the success rate of interception is still fairly unknown. As far as I'm concerned, all China needs to do is overwhelm the defences with the missiles, a few are bound to get through and cause major damage.

Also, don't be rude.

The DF-21D against a moving target in open water testing is still pending. Anytime you have a deliberate collision of two or more bodies, regardless of their courses and orientations to each other, you have an interception. So where is that DF-21D/ship interception?

As far as supposedly overwhelming the defense goes...

It is really poor tactic and financial management in trying to overwhelm the defense with sheer numbers. Despite what PR photos may show, in actual combat, the entire battle group is arrayed to where each ship is either out of line of sight or just barely at the horizon to each other.

Which one of the above is the DF-21D? The best choices are either 1 or 3. Either 'High accuracy, High precision' or 'High accuracy, Low precision'. Against a passive target, either choice will have high odds of success. But against a non-cooperative target, the odds is inversely proportional to the level of sophistication of the defenses. Target mobility and agility is a major factor. Target defenses against sensors contributes to that decline of success. Now add in physical assault on the attacker itself by the defender and the odds of success decreases dramatically, perhaps to lower than 50%. At this point, the solution for the DF21-D is either to scrap it or go nuclear just to destroy an aircraft carrier.

 

[gambit]

You might be projecting your level of intellect onto me. I don't need to copy-paste such a simple response; and it has no indication of being an "ad hominem one-liner", other than the fact that it's one sentence long.



Let's start here. There is *NO* so-called when it comes to IQ. If you had even the slightest underlying scientific background (which I'm sure you'll claim) then you would easily know how to pull up references and studies on the valdidity of IQ in assessing differences in intelligence. I'm guessing you can't name me TWO major scientists in the world today which regard IQ as invalid.



No, they haven't. It's just too bad that twin studies and longitudinal adoption studies largely demonstrate that it is heredity, and not the environment, that is responsible for the overwhelming majority of the variation in IQ differences.

Your predetermined response will of course be something along the lines of, "yea but you forgot the cultural biases, environmental differences, blah blah blah ". Well, unfortunately for you, we have multiple GWAS studies that largely replicate the same heritability figures for IQ. None of these are biased by the confounding variables that are traditionally blamed for inflating the genetic component to IQ.

So really, anyone who says something like "Anyone who uses them is a coward and have that intellectual deficit" (and says so with broken English might I add; American my butt) is not really capable of an intellectually stimulating debate, and most of all, is WRONG on just about everything.

How's that for your daily buttkicking?

When?

When I see the sorry DAILY failures of the Chinese members here in logical thought processes, am still waiting for that mythical 'buttkicking'.

The reason those predetermined responses exists because of the predetermined arguments racists spewed in trying to support their beliefs that there are inherent IQ differences independent of environmental factors. You have a problem with my broken English? I work with Chinese engineers on a daily basis and you have no idea how often we have to correct their broken English in their reports, technical and else. There is no need to conduct any 'intellectually stimulating' debate with racists because they have nothing relevant to contribute outside of how they view life through a racist/racial prism.

When I see a Chinese, on a publicly accessible Internet forum, claimed to be a physics professor, and yet made a technically horrific declaration without supporting it, then ran away from said declaration, I see no need to consider relevant any Chinese claim to be racially superior to anyone else. The only daily buttkicking I see is you guys doing it to yourselves and the sorry part is you guys do not even realize you are doing it.

 

[shuttler]

The DF-21D against a moving target in open water testing is still pending. Anytime you have a deliberate collision of two or more bodies, regardless of their courses and orientations to each other, you have an interception. So where is that DF-21D/ship interception?

As far as supposedly overwhelming the defense goes...

It is really poor tactic and financial management in trying to overwhelm the defense with sheer numbers. Despite what PR photos may show, in actual combat, the entire battle group is arrayed to where each ship is either out of line of sight or just barely at the horizon to each other.

Which one of the above is the DF-21D? The best choices are either 1 or 3. Either 'High accuracy, High precision' or 'High accuracy, Low precision'. Against a passive target, either choice will have high odds of success. But against a non-cooperative target, the odds is inversely proportional to the level of sophistication of the defenses. Target mobility and agility is a major factor. Target defenses against sensors contributes to that decline of success. Now add in physical assault on the attacker itself by the defender and the odds of success decreases dramatically, perhaps to lower than 50%. At this point, the solution for the DF21-D is either to scrap it or go nuclear just to destroy an aircraft carrier.

the same trash that is dusting all over your postings

do you have something better, marginal?

where is the us' claim for the success other than text description

 

[shuttler]

That's an India killer..

:

 

[gambit]

the same trash that is dusting all over your postings

do you have something better, marginal?

where is the us' claim for the success other than text description

Be careful now. I see a lot of broken English here and your fellow Chinese with the high IQ may go into a rage for that.

 

[shuttler]

Be careful now. I see a lot of broken English here and your fellow Chinese with the high IQ may go into a rage for that.

what is your problems? The tiltle of the OP who is a notorious China hater starts taking on the issue with us!

He had the AMRAAM wrongly written as a start! So pathetic!

 

[gambit]

In every instance where the Chinese are given the opportunity to show us that IQ, not copy paste, but IQ when it relates to its masses in an open , fair and level playing field. They come out as sub par.

The lack of such high IQ is further evident, when we notice how its own govt treats them as citizens. I have yet to hear a creative explanation from you in regards to why such a high IQ lot is censored from reading mere words?

That is to protect the Chinese from broken English.

 

[That Guy]

The DF-21D against a moving target in open water testing is still pending. Anytime you have a deliberate collision of two or more bodies, regardless of their courses and orientations to each other, you have an interception. So where is that DF-21D/ship interception?

As far as supposedly overwhelming the defense goes...

It is really poor tactic and financial management in trying to overwhelm the defense with sheer numbers. Despite what PR photos may show, in actual combat, the entire battle group is arrayed to where each ship is either out of line of sight or just barely at the horizon to each other.

Which one of the above is the DF-21D? The best choices are either 1 or 3. Either 'High accuracy, High precision' or 'High accuracy, Low precision'. Against a passive target, either choice will have high odds of success. But against a non-cooperative target, the odds is inversely proportional to the level of sophistication of the defenses. Target mobility and agility is a major factor. Target defenses against sensors contributes to that decline of success. Now add in physical assault on the attacker itself by the defender and the odds of success decreases dramatically, perhaps to lower than 50%. At this point, the solution for the DF21-D is either to scrap it or go nuclear just to destroy an aircraft carrier.

Okay, thank you for the information, but that still doesn't change anything. The fact remains is that we still don't know much about either the DF-21 and this so called "China killer", besides random claims from their respective sides.

That is to protect the Chinese from broken English.

Again, rude.

At least they can speak English. How about you try learning Mandarin? It isn't easy.

For someone who's this knowledgeable, you seem to be very childish at times.

 

[gambit]

Okay, thank you for the information, but that still doesn't change anything. The fact remains is that we still don't know much about either the DF-21 and this so called "China killer", besides random claims from their respective sides.

And this uncertainty is what I have been trying to educate the Chinese members.

If I wanted to, I can draw up on a piece of toilet paper a missile that can knock down the Moon and declare it 'operational'. Then every scientists and engineers in the world would tell me that my claim is not worth the paper it was written on.

Until the DF-21D successfully completed open water testings...

Again, rude.

At least they can speak English. How about you try learning Mandarin? It isn't easy.

For someone who's this knowledgeable, you seem to be very childish at times.

Please...Do try to read the responses...

The Chinese criticized my English -- first.

I have never commented anyone on their English given the fact that this is a publicly accessible forum. Try not to keep your sucking up to the Chinese so obvious.

 

[SQ8]

And this uncertainty is what I have been trying to educate the Chinese members.

If I wanted to, I can draw up on a piece of toilet paper a missile that can knock down the Moon and declare it 'operational'. Then every scientists and engineers in the world would tell me that my claim is not worth the paper it was written on.

Until the DF-21D successfully completed open water testings...


Please...Do try to read the responses...

The Chinese criticized my English -- first.

I have never commented anyone on their English given the fact that this is a publicly accessible forum. Try not to keep your sucking up to the Chinese so obvious.

Would the AMRAAM be the right missile for a BM target though? Again, i am basing it on missile range and flight based on known parameters of the 120D. Unless they plan to add boosters as on the RIM-161 it would have difficulty getting to the RV would it not?