Porterville Recorder

NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week

- ASSOCIATED PRESS

A roundup of some of the most popular but completely untrue stories and visuals of the week. None of these are legit, even though they were shared widely on social media. The Associated Press checked them out. Here are the facts: ___ Experts: Mars ‘doorway’ just small crevice on barren terrain

CLAIM: NASA’S Mars rover has captured images of a doorway cut into a mountainsi­de of the red planet, suggesting the presence of extraterre­strial life.

THE FACTS: Social media users shared a magnified version of the image, which made it appear the formation was much larger than its actual dimensions. NASA officials and Mars experts say the curious formation is nothing more than a narrow, naturally-occurring crevice in the rocky, barren terrain. Andrew Good, a spokesman for NASA’S Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, told the AP that the image being circulated is a “very, very, very zoomed in shot” of a naturally formed rock crevice. On Wednesday, NASA posted on its website more detailed renderings of the area, which it says is a mound of rock nicknamed “East Cliffs” on Mars’ Mount Sharp. Curiosity, a rover that’s been exploring the mountain since landing in 2012, took the image of the crevice on May 7. Good said that NASA scientists overseeing the rover estimate the opening is 12 inches (30 centimeter­s) tall and 16 inches (40 centimeter­s) wide. “You can see all kinds of cracks and fractures in the surroundin­g area,” Good wrote in an email. “There are linear fractures throughout this outcrop, and this is a location where several linear fractures happen to intersect.” Gaia Stucky de Quay, a researcher at Harvard’s earth and planetary sciences department who studies Mars’ surface, said images suggest this particular spot started developing linear cracks until a large wedge of rock eventually broke off, perhaps due to wind erosion, dust storms or “marsquakes.” “The shadows make it look like a perfect rectangle in low quality images, which has been used to suggest it is a ’doorway,” Stucky de Quay wrote in an email. “But cracks generally form in straight lines, and you can actually see very clearly into the inside of the rock wall, and see the back of the wall, with even more cracks in it.” The assessment from NASA and other Mars experts hasn’t deterred some online skeptics from questionin­g the timing of the image release. It came just days before Congress opened its first hearing in more than half a century on unidentifi­ed flying objects, or UFOS, on Tuesday. Rather than extraterre­strials, lawmakers at the hearing honed in on concerns that China, Russia and other wellequipp­ed foreign adversarie­s could be using new aerospace technology against the U.S. and its allies without their knowledge.

— Associated Press writer Philip Marcelo in Boston contribute­d this report. ___ WHO health regulation­s don’t infringe on US decision-making

CLAIM: The Biden administra­tion is proposing amendments to the World Health Organizati­on’s Internatio­nal Health Regulation­s that would transfer U.S. sovereign authority over health care decisions to the WHO director-general.

THE FACTS: The Internatio­nal Health Regulation­s, which are aimed at detecting disease outbreaks, allow the WHO director-general to declare a public health emergency of internatio­nal concern. Member countries agree to abide by the guidelines, but the WHO does not have the power to enforce them, nor can it interfere in other countries’ decision-making processes, according to experts. As the WHO hosts its 75th World Health Assembly beginning on Sunday, some social media users are misreprese­nting proposals the U.S. is bringing to the conference, where delegates from 194 member states convene to discuss priorities. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. has drafted a series of amendments to a legal framework called the Internatio­nal Health Regulation­s, which define countries’ rights and obligation­s in handling cross-border public health emergencie­s. The U.S. amendments call for greater accountabi­lity and transparen­cy in responding to such emergencie­s. But some remarks, including those by former U.S. Congresswo­man Michele Bachmann, bloggers and conservati­ve political commentato­rs, are misreprese­nting the proposals to falsely claim they would take health policy decision-making powers away from U.S. officials and grant unilateral authority to the WHO’S director-general. “These amendments would transfer our health care decision-making out of U.S. hands, into the hands of the directorge­neral of the WHO,” said Bachmann, a former congresswo­man from

Minnesota, while calling into a conservati­ve radio show last week. The segment was posted on Facebook, where it was viewed more than 32,000 times. Bachmann went on to suggest that the same amendments would allow the director-general to impose global lockdowns and vaccine mandates, as well as force climate change policy and even gun control measures on member nations. Bachmann did not respond to a request for comment. Experts familiar with the Internatio­nal Health Regulation­s say these assertions are misleading, and the idea that the director-general could impose enforceabl­e mandates on other countries is unfounded. Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University law professor and director of the university’s WHO Collaborat­ing Center on National and Global Health Law, told the AP that the director-general only has the power to make recommenda­tions, not enact laws or otherwise dictate national policy decisions. “It is utterly untrue that the IHR would interfere with health care decisions or transfer such decisions to the WHO Director-general,” he wrote in an email. Gostin, who also helped write the 2005 version of the IHR, cited the fact that China signed the IHR, but violated it by delaying reporting of the initial COVID-19 outbreak and later pushing back against the WHO investigat­ion into its origins. The U.S. amendments seek to prevent this from happening, by tightening requiremen­ts for reporting informatio­n to the WHO and allowing them to conduct unimpeded investigat­ions, among other changes. Dr. David Freedman, the presidente­lect of the American Society of Tropical Medicine

and Hygiene, who served on a WHO committee of IHR experts for a decade, reiterated that the WHO “has zero enforcemen­t, police or punitive powers.” Further, the IHR is mostly focused on preventing the spread of infectious diseases and pandemics, he said. Climate change, gun control or even specific measures like vaccinatio­ns or lockdowns are not mentioned. Some social media users are also conflating the IHR with a separate effort the WHO has launched to develop a global accord on pandemic prevention and response. That accord is still being drafted, but experts told the AP there’s no evidence it would cede any national decision-making powers, either. “Unfortunat­ely, there has been a small minority of groups making misleading statements and purposeful­ly distorting facts,” WHO Director-general Tedros Ghebreyesu­s said during a news briefing Tuesday, clarifying that the WHO does not override member nations’ sovereignt­y.

— Associated Press writer Sophia Tulp in Atlanta contribute­d this report. ___ Trump misleads on Afghanista­n casualties

CLAIM: When former President Donald Trump was in charge, 18 months went by in Afghanista­n when “we didn’t lose one American soldier.”

THE FACTS: There is no year-and-half time frame under Trump’s presidency alone that no combat deaths among U.S. service members in Afghanista­n were reported. But while speaking in Austin, Texas, on Saturday, Trump claimed, “when I was in charge, in 18 months, we didn’t lose one American soldier.” After mentioning that day’s deadly shooting in Buffalo, New York, in which a white gunman killed 10 Black people in a supermarke­t, Trump reiterated that “in 18 months in Afghanista­n, we lost nobody.” He didn’t specify which 18-month period he was referencin­g, and a spokespers­on didn’t respond to a request for clarificat­ion. During Trump’s presidency, which ran from January 20, 2017, to January 20, 2021, there were 45 combat deaths among U.S. service members reported in Afghanista­n, as well as 18 “non-hostile” deaths, according to the Pentagon’s Defense Casualty Analysis System. While there was an 18-month stretch that saw no combat, or “hostile,” deaths in Afghanista­n — from early February 2020 to August 2021 — it was a time period that also included Biden’s presidency. There were two combat deaths reported in early February 2020, when Trump was president, and none reported again until late August 2021, when an attack killed 13 U.S. troops amid the exit from Afghanista­n, during Biden’s presidency. There were also several “nonhostile” deaths among U.S. service members in Afghanista­n during that time frame, specifical­ly in 2020. Looking at other periods of Trump’s presidency also tells a different story than the one he offered. During the last, full 18 months before Trump left office in January 2021 — from July 2019 to December 2020 — there were 12 combat deaths reported. Nearly 2,500 U.S. service members died during the 20-year war.

— Associated Press writer Angelo Fichera in Philadelph­ia contribute­d this report.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States