The question is stated as delivery of a "S-300 or S-400 missile system." A "system" requires all the major operational components to be delivered (search radar, targeting radar, missile launcher, command post, etc.). Regarding hiding the system, while I agree that generally you don't want to give away the exact location of your military assets, it is important to credibly signal your enemies if you expect to deter them. Most of the Iranian comments to this point are probably inward directed, to create a sense of strength in the aftermath of the nuclear deal with the West. Outward directed statements (to Israel) will come when the system is actually functioning.
Thanks for the news, @Dima-K! And Happy New Year to everyone....wow did this thread ever expand in the last few days. @000 - clearly @GL2814 is over at @einsteinjs's other thread.
This question should be resolved yes or no. We obviously lost our spooks and just as obviously lost anyone with the phone number of a spook for this question has an answer, but GJOpen, Ibc. Is obviously over their head in asking it! How many manned bases are on the moon? None? @cmeinel would say. Yet this week my research indicates between four and forty. Some people should not ask questions they themselves cannot answer. Void the question. Wimps!
@ravel, @000 These lunar base allegations mostly trace back to Richard Hoagland, who purports to have been a NASA consultant. He has been debunked multiple times regarding this and many other activities dating back to July 1975, which is when he went over a cliff. But there's always a new crop of Hoagland believers, year after year.
Nowadays you can buy your own telescope that's good enough to NOT see Hoagland's "structures" -- if you have trouble understanding how hard it would be for ALL astronomers to conspire to hide them. Example: Celestron CPC Deluxe 800 with Edge HD Optics
Credit to the GJO for making the right call with the S-300 question.
Although I completely agree that voiding this question is the correct course of action, I think some of the comments directed at the GJO admins were a little over the top. I believe that they are doing their best, and I do appreciate the fact that they provided a platform for all of us to forecast on. Without the GJO, we wouldn't be forecasting right now. On the other hand, I understand the frustration of my fellow forecasters (after all, my brier score got annihilated on this question: I held my forecast at near 0%).
I think going forward, more open communication between forecasters and the GJO would be constructive. We can all live and learn and make this better.
My one piece of advice for the GJO, is that they shouldn't' close a question until they are absolutely certain (as is practical) of the outcome. Based on all our comments, GJO must have known how controversial the S-300 question was. Many of us (me included) was calling the Iranian ambassador a liar. When there is this kind of doubt, they should leave the question open (for as long as needed) until we have conclusive proof of a resolution. Once the question closes we can't update our forecast; However, if we leave the question open, we can always go back and calculate our brier scores if a specific date of delivery is confirmed.
In this way we could have avoided voiding the question.
@000@cmeinel isn't this my point? Hoaxes are debunked by true science, like this lovely experiment. Discredited sources, the braggarts in Iran and Russia are offset by human, technical and intercepted intelligence. If "they" cannot determine the truth on missile systems as big as trash / dump trucks, how will "they" ever determine the question regarding 300 grams of nuclear material. Therefore GJOpen, Inc. has NO credible sources and cannot discern hoax from braggart from secret maneuver. Void the question. I do not believe there are human bases on the moon. I wish it were a question here though :)
@ravel Excellent point and one we need to address in the CREATE program. IARPA had both GJP and Scicast Predict develop their own questions in the last two years of ACE. However, IARPA maintained control over question resolution. I suspect that IARPA may do something similar in the next four years of crowd forecasting research.
As for credible sources, there are ways to get to the bottom of news stories. But it takes hard work. Given the major world mass media rush to with draw their reporters from foreign bureaus, news stories are becoming less reliable. What they are doing now is relying on freelancers, who tend to get killed or wind up behind bars, or who might even be playing a double game. For this reason, crowd forecasting might become less reliable over time.
OTOH, Twitter and other social media are becoming more useful to get to original sources: eye witnesses with smart phones, geolocation of imagery, etc.
On my infamous third hand, the troll factories are getting increasingly good at mimicking eye witness, video etc. evidence.
Reaffirming my forecast.
The question is stated as delivery of a "S-300 or S-400 missile system." A "system" requires all the major operational components to be delivered (search radar, targeting radar, missile launcher, command post, etc.). Regarding hiding the system, while I agree that generally you don't want to give away the exact location of your military assets, it is important to credibly signal your enemies if you expect to deter them. Most of the Iranian comments to this point are probably inward directed, to create a sense of strength in the aftermath of the nuclear deal with the West. Outward directed statements (to Israel) will come when the system is actually functioning.
Thanks for the news, @Dima-K! And Happy New Year to everyone....wow did this thread ever expand in the last few days. @000 - clearly @GL2814 is over at @einsteinjs's other thread.
@morrell - you have the better of me. Other thread? I didn't realize this was still going on.
@000 - I was beginning to think you didn't like my anymore. ;)
This question should be resolved yes or no. We obviously lost our spooks and just as obviously lost anyone with the phone number of a spook for this question has an answer, but GJOpen, Ibc. Is obviously over their head in asking it! How many manned bases are on the moon? None? @cmeinel would say. Yet this week my research indicates between four and forty. Some people should not ask questions they themselves cannot answer. Void the question. Wimps!
@ravel we need some references please on those moonbases.
@000, as good as the sources to resolve this question, gladly :)
http://dicktracy.info/comic-strip/tracys-team/friends-and-family/mysta-moon-maid-tracy/
@ravel, @000 These lunar base allegations mostly trace back to Richard Hoagland, who purports to have been a NASA consultant. He has been debunked multiple times regarding this and many other activities dating back to July 1975, which is when he went over a cliff. But there's always a new crop of Hoagland believers, year after year.
Nowadays you can buy your own telescope that's good enough to NOT see Hoagland's "structures" -- if you have trouble understanding how hard it would be for ALL astronomers to conspire to hide them. Example: Celestron CPC Deluxe 800 with Edge HD Optics
Everybody knows that brand of telescopes has embedded secret imaging circuits that recognize the bases and smoothes them over in the lens.
Thanks for the update, Dima-K.
Credit to the GJO for making the right call with the S-300 question.
Although I completely agree that voiding this question is the correct course of action, I think some of the comments directed at the GJO admins were a little over the top. I believe that they are doing their best, and I do appreciate the fact that they provided a platform for all of us to forecast on. Without the GJO, we wouldn't be forecasting right now. On the other hand, I understand the frustration of my fellow forecasters (after all, my brier score got annihilated on this question: I held my forecast at near 0%).
I think going forward, more open communication between forecasters and the GJO would be constructive. We can all live and learn and make this better.
My one piece of advice for the GJO, is that they shouldn't' close a question until they are absolutely certain (as is practical) of the outcome. Based on all our comments, GJO must have known how controversial the S-300 question was. Many of us (me included) was calling the Iranian ambassador a liar. When there is this kind of doubt, they should leave the question open (for as long as needed) until we have conclusive proof of a resolution. Once the question closes we can't update our forecast; However, if we leave the question open, we can always go back and calculate our brier scores if a specific date of delivery is confirmed.
In this way we could have avoided voiding the question.
@000 @cmeinel isn't this my point? Hoaxes are debunked by true science, like this lovely experiment. Discredited sources, the braggarts in Iran and Russia are offset by human, technical and intercepted intelligence. If "they" cannot determine the truth on missile systems as big as trash / dump trucks, how will "they" ever determine the question regarding 300 grams of nuclear material. Therefore GJOpen, Inc. has NO credible sources and cannot discern hoax from braggart from secret maneuver. Void the question. I do not believe there are human bases on the moon. I wish it were a question here though :)
@ravel Excellent point and one we need to address in the CREATE program. IARPA had both GJP and Scicast Predict develop their own questions in the last two years of ACE. However, IARPA maintained control over question resolution. I suspect that IARPA may do something similar in the next four years of crowd forecasting research.
As for credible sources, there are ways to get to the bottom of news stories. But it takes hard work. Given the major world mass media rush to with draw their reporters from foreign bureaus, news stories are becoming less reliable. What they are doing now is relying on freelancers, who tend to get killed or wind up behind bars, or who might even be playing a double game. For this reason, crowd forecasting might become less reliable over time.
OTOH, Twitter and other social media are becoming more useful to get to original sources: eye witnesses with smart phones, geolocation of imagery, etc.
On my infamous third hand, the troll factories are getting increasingly good at mimicking eye witness, video etc. evidence.