North Korea’s Huge New ICBM Casts Doubt on Trump’s ‘No Longer a Nuclear Threat’ Claim


North Korea showcased a series of new weapons at its 75th anniversary military parade marking the founding of the ruling Workers’ Party Saturday, including what South Korea officials say was a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

a sign on the side of a road: North Korea showcased a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) Saturday as part of a military parade celebrating their Workers Party's 75th anniversary.

© Screenshot: NK State TV
North Korea showcased a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) Saturday as part of a military parade celebrating their Workers Party’s 75th anniversary.

North Korea has not broadcast a live military parade on television since 2017, when leader Kim Jong Un heightened U.S. tensions by showing off several large ICBMs. The country showed off its “new strategic weapon,” which analysts described as a much larger, liquid fuel ICBM complete with an 11 axle transporter erector launcher.

The first hint of the new weapon came earlier this week when South Korean officials relayed surveillance of thousands of North Korean soldiers in march formation as they displayed what was possibly a new ICBM, or submarine-launched ballistic missile.

Kim’s showcase of the new missile technology highlights his regime’s intention to follow through on 2012 promises to develop state-of-the-art weapons with international attack range. The images of the Pukguksong-2 have raised questions over whether such missiles have actually been tested by the regime.

Military experts say the new liquid-fueled ICBM appears to more powerful than anything previously known to be in the nation’s weapons arsenal, and a derivative of the Hwasong-15, unveiled back in 2017. This type of seemingly state-of-the-art missile is developed to better evade detection, have a longer range and the capability of holding a much larger payload.

John Bolton: North Korea Will ‘Never Give Up’ Nuclear Program



According to Harry Kazianis of

Wakashio Captain’s ‘Wifi’ Story In Doubt Following New Revelations In Mauritius Oil Spill Case


The Indian Ocean island of Mauritius is still reeling from the devastating oil spill caused by the Panama-flagged, Japanese-owned vessel, The Wakashio. More questions are now being asked about the cause of the incident as the original claims start to unravel.

The first day that the Panama Maritime Authorities landed in Mauritius on September 8, they claimed that the captain had ordered a change of course to “find internet or a telephone signal.” 

While this captured many headlines, most in Mauritius were doubtful about this account, given that internet connectivity was easily available even 12 nautical miles off shore, where most vessels on the busy shipping lanes pass by the island.

Many tourists who travel to Mauritius (around 1 million a year), are able to access the internet many miles offshore on catamarans to share photos of themselves on several of the dolphin and whale watching tours or visits to the outlying islands of Mauritius.

Free, unlimited satellite internet available on ship

Such a story about the ‘search for Wi-Fi’ now appears to be even less credible given a statement from Wakashio operator, Mitsui OSK Lines to Forbes this week, that revealed that all crew on Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL) vessels have access to unlimited, free satellite internet while on board and at sea.

This means there was no need to be searching for any coastal internet connectivity or telephone signals, given this was a MOL-operated vessel.

In a statement to Forbes on October 6, a spokesperson for MOL said “Our fleet has the most

Why Doubt Is Essential to Science


The confidence people place in science is frequently based not on what it really is, but on what people would like it to be. When I asked students at the beginning of the year how they would define science, many of them replied that it is an objective way of discovering certainties about the world. But science cannot provide certainties. For example, a majority of Americans trust science as long as it does not challenge their existing beliefs. To the question “When science disagrees with the teachings of your religion, which one do you believe?,” 58 percent of North Americans favor religion; 33 percent science; and 6 percent say “it depends.”

But doubt in science is a feature, not a bug. Indeed, the paradox is that science, when properly functioning, questions accepted facts and yields both new knowledge and new questions—not certainty. Doubt does not create trust, nor does it help public understanding. So why should people trust a process that seems to require a troublesome state of uncertainty without always providing solid solutions?

As a historian of science, I would argue that it’s the responsibility of scientists and historians of science to show that the real power of science lies precisely in what is often perceived as its weakness: its drive to question and challenge a hypothesis. Indeed, the scientific approach requires changing our understanding of the natural world whenever new evidence emerges from either experimentation or observation. Scientific findings are hypotheses that encompass the state of knowledge at a given moment. In the long run, many of are challenged and even overturned. Doubt might be troubling, but it impels us towards a better understanding; certainties, as reassuring as they may seem, in fact undermine the scientific process.

Scientists understand this, but in the dynamic between the public and