See ABC / CNN. Must be reported by a major US news outlet to count. The balloon can be this balloon or another, as long as the outlet reports are confident that it is from China.
Close date updated to 2023-02-04 4:02 pm
Close date updated to 2023-12-31 4:02 pm
After consideration, I will not consider any shoot downs where the balloon lands off the coast to count, but I will consider it to count if it lands in a lake or river within US territory.
Some further clarifications in light of recent news: Frozen ocean water will be considered "ocean" and so will not count. Also, dirigibles and any other objects which are primarily supported by buoyancy will be considered balloons.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,235 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,121 | |
| 3 | Ṁ981 | |
| 4 | Ṁ814 | |
| 5 | Ṁ694 |
@blake Alaska is included in the continental US here. However note that the object that though many articles indicate something was shot down "over Alaska", on further reading they generally clarify that it was shot down over frozen water north of Alaska, which does not count.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/chinese-spy-balloon-lake-huron-latest-b2280980.html?page=10
Does this count, Lake Huron?
@EugeneBixby Looking at this ABC article. The video shows it to be in US territory in Lake Huron, so it meets the location condition. However, it says
"There is no sense they are anything but meteorological balloons or some sort of weather balloon, not spy balloons," the official said. None appeared to have any payload; they are much smaller, and such vessels are known to go off course, according to the official.
So this does not meet the "spy" criterion. Additionally, it seems unclear whether this Lake Huron object is of Chinese origin. If the media's assessment of these facts change my ruling on this could change.
@Khaos "
After consideration, I will not consider any shoot downs where the balloon lands off the coast to count, but I will consider it to count if it lands in a lake or river within US territory."
The clear intent of the President and the military was to shoot this down over undisputed United States territory. As a former submariner who engaged in freedom of the seas exercises specifically against countries in question the idea that a shootdown 6 miles offshore which the sole intention was to engage safely in Uas territory does not count is laughable.
Here's my take (I also had no stake in the market until after @BoltonBailey made the decision):
Firstly, I don't think the "continental" part is important in my mind - how I understood that was referring to the 48 or 49 states (Alaska is sometimes included, sometimes not). I do not interpret the phrase "continental US" to have any bearing on whether territorial waters are or are not included.
The big question for me is what "over" a "country" means. I think the question can be boiled down to an analogous question: If a plane flies over the ocean off the coast of Mexico, in the airspace above Mexico's territorial waters, would you say that the plane has "flown over Mexico"?
I don't know! I think answers would be split between yes and no.
@jack I would agree but it seems like the debate is about whether or not continental includes US waters
Hello folks, in light of the water shootdown apparently being considered "CONUS" by the military and also being over the "continental shelf of the US" I am now mildly inclined to resolve the market YES. If anyone wants to provide further arguments I'll listen to those too, with special consideration to those who don't hold a stake.
@BoltonBailey I'll come back in a few hours and look at any further opinions and either resolve YES or reopen.
@BoltonBailey I have always interpreted continental US to refer to the actual landmass and would not have bought NO if I’d thought it included US territorial waters!
@BoltonBailey The jurisdiction of the United States (beyond vessels flying the USA flag) ends (at most) at the end of the contiguous zone, 24 nautical miles from the coast. The exclusive economic zone extends to 200 nautical miles. The distance to the end of the continental shelf varies significantly and the US can control other economic interests there but is not supposed to exercise jurisdiction over it.
It doesn't look like it's clear exactly how far out into the ocean it was, but I would say that if it was within 24 nautical miles of shore it should count. Further out it should not.
@njmkw i interpreted continental referring to the fact that territories or military bases or like was not included. has probably something to do with the fact that i am not american.
24 nautical miles is a long way and even if it is outside we neet to find out if it is over the continental shelf too.
@Birger and past that. if we are talking about continental as : not territories, it would not mater if it is furter than 24 nautical miles.
@BoltonBailey I have no positions in this market. I would not have expected this to resolve as YES off of this.
Best attempt I have at an intuition pump: if I ask you 'what is the area of the continental US' or for that matter 'what is the area of Hawaii', it seems obvious to me that you would give me the land area rather than the land-plus-lots-of-nearby-water area.
Best attempt I have at an argument the other way: if I ask you how many murders happen in the US, murders that happened to take place in the ocean should probably still count?
@AndrewHyer To muddy the waters a little, what if it had been shot down over the Great Salt Lake, the Potomac, or the Chesapeake Bay? I think most would agree the Salt Lake would count as the continental US, so I don’t think being over land is required. I imagine opinions would diverge more with my second and third examples.
Your first example adds the word “area” which I think does most of the work towards ruling water out of my intuitive response to it, rather than from the word “continental”
@AndrewHyer If you ask for the area of Utah, you're probably going to get Salt Lake included. Ask for California, and you'll probably include SF Bay. Ask for the US, you'll probably get Lake Michigan (unambiguously American, unlike the other four which are half Canadian) included. Ask for Denmark and you'll get halfhearted answers because what parts of the water should be included is ambiguous.
Usually 'the area of <polity>' is interpreted to mean 'land area' because that's where the people go, and that's usually why you're asking. When there's relevant water, that changes.
https://samm.dsca.mil/glossary/continental-united-states-conus – “including the adjacent territorial waters” – arguably relevant military context
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/CONUS – some more confusion
(I have no idea what the correct answer is, nor a horse in this race.)
@Birger This is good evidence, but I think not quite enough. Wikipedia describes "CONUS" as a military technical term, and I would default towards using the non-technical definitions of terms (although maybe slightly less in this case because the market is contextually about military action). Also seems ambiguous if this is short for "continental" or "contiguous".
When the US state department uses the term "the continental US" do they consistently mean to include the waters? This could put me over the edge.
@BoltonBailey cool. i wil endeavor to find common usage of "the continental US" in US state department
@Birger Here is Dept of State definition
"Continental United States" means the several States of the United States of America, excluding Alaska and Hawaii, but including the District of Columbia.
Not particularly clear to me this is meant to include waters.
@BoltonBailey mention of territory sometimes do and do not based on purpose. this is a arguably a big debate in how big countries are. the us usually inflate there size by including great lekes and territorial waters. countries with a lot of water territory usually includes it in country size. like Norway or Portugal have an order of magnitude more ocean water than land territory. but if you live in a places like Montana ocean wil newer even cross your mind. to me a Norwegian ocean territory is an given but i can se how others dont.
@Birger this is laglig because ure ocean territory is tied to the continental shelf tru the articular of the sea. there it is stated (in international law) that underwater continental landmass (if it is proven and approved by the courts) is a part of that countries EEC. in international law continental landmass includes ocean.
@Birger in us law continental is defined as: Pertaining or relating to a continent; characteristic of a continent; as broad in scope or purpose as a continent Continental Ins. Co. v. Continental Fire Ass’n (C. C.) 96 Fed. 848
@Birger I do find the continental shelf argument compelling. I also ask my sister and she said it should resolve YES. I'll close the market now and wait to see if anyone without a stake objects.
@BoltonBailey nice, also : what we mean by continental when talking about continental US is US without its various territories. in would presume it is clear that it do not have a lot to do with being on land.
@BoltonBailey It feels very reductive, you could consider all US territories or US naval bases as Continental US