3 ms·

>fairly strong evidence Got some?

• _djo_ 19d ago
  Sure. https://www.ifri.org/en/studies/current-and-future-trends-chinese-counterspace-capabilities https://www.ifri.org/en/studies/current-and-future-trends-ch... https://www.swfound.org/publications-and-reports/2026-global-counterspace-capabilities-report https://www.swfound.org/publications-and-reports/2026-global... https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402390.2024.2388658#d1e1232 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402390.2024.2... https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4431/1 https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4431/1 https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Annual_Report/Chapters/Chapter%202%2C%20Section%202%20-%20China%27s%20Space%20and%20Counterspace%20Programs.pdf https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Annual_Report/Chapt...
  • aa-jv 19d ago
    I see a lot of fear-mongering reports from sources claiming authority. I don't see any evidence.
    • _djo_ 19d ago
      What kind of evidence are you expecting? Detailed photographs of the satellites on orbit? These are credible institutions, with their statements regarding unusual orbital movements backed up by observations made by several independent groups.
      • aa-jv 19d ago
        I'd like to see evidence which supports the claims and not have to rely on a call to authority fallacy[1] in order to agree with this collective-derived reality. I have no doubt that there are weapons in space - Russian, Chinese, American - why wouldn't there be? - but I still want to see actual evidence. None of the sources you give are impartial - all of them serve to profit from perpetuating fear of Chinese space activities. Too often, xenophobic movements rely on authority figures to perpetuate their myths. Don't you agree? [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
        • voidUpdate 19d ago
          What evidence would satisfy you that there are weapons in space? You either have to check yourself somehow, or trust a third party. Is there a third party you trust to provide evidence?
          • aa-jv 19d ago
            The article from The Space Review comes pretty close to providing some actual evidence. There are no trustworthy third parties when it comes to xenophobic agitprop.
            • voidUpdate 19d ago
              What extra would you want from the space review article that would constitute actual evidence for you?
              • aa-jv 19d ago
                [flagged]
                • andsoitis 19d ago
                  > There are lots of claims and speculation that China is developing space weapons, and there is an allusion to evidence (but no actual evidence) Why do you keep avoiding the question?
            • gowld 19d ago
              Space Review website has malware-download ads all over the page. That spooks me.
          • scottyah 19d ago
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TP-82 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TP-82
      • etiennebausson 19d ago
        I personally don't trust elements provided by U.S. agencies and foundations since the Irak war and the "proof" they delivered to justify it. Proxy at work is stopping me from reading most of grandparent links, so it'll have to wait for home.
        • hunterpayne 18d ago
          The Chinese themselves blew up one of their own satellites as a test of their own capabilities. The missile was launched from the ground but targeted from orbit. They themselves say this and have since they did it 8 years ago. Your ignorance isn't an argument.
      • mc32 19d ago
        It’s like they’ll believe any rumors about the US doing things but then need concrete evidence irrefutable evidence when it comes to its adversaries.