[cbgb]

For the record, I just read about the use of eagles (not falcons, though they are kept at falconries in France) in combating drones in a daily newsletter I highly respect. Here is the article they cite: http://en.rfi.fr/wire/20170220-born-killers-french-army-groo...

I guess I don't understand how at least the anti-drone eagles can be considered "fake news."

[OldSchoolJohnny]

Do you honestly think a bird is a good solution to deal with what is, to the bird, a whirling blade flying death machine? I also saw people pushing the story about millions of wind powered devices to freeze the arctic, it's just impractical nonsense on the face of it.

[Tenhundfeld]

I think you're using an older definition, wherein "fake news" means unworthy of attention. In recent weeks and months, "fake news" has been used by President Trump and others to mean factually incorrect.

Something being a bad idea or stupid or impractical doesn't make it factually incorrect, i.e., does not make it fake news under the new definition.

The article asserts several facts, among them:

- birds of prey are often already kept near airports to scare birds away from the runway to reduce accidents during takeoff and landing.

- the French air force has an experiment running with 4 eagles to train them to attack small drones, in addition to their normal scarebird duties.

- the French air force thinks the experiment is promising enough to order a second group of 4 eagles.

If those facts are correct, it is not "fake news." It is a silly puff piece about something that is not important, because it will almost certainly never turn into anything beyond an experiment.

[lstroud]

Simply, current definition "fake news" == propaganda

[shepardrtc]

Anything someone doesn't like can be considered "fake news".