Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Notre Dame fire conspiracies

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,227 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    thing is, the fire services hardly even showed up, certainly not around the roof area, and very late, and knew as little as anyone during the blaze..
    Before we dive into this more, you're going to have to show this is what happened and not a result of misremembered facts.

    A few posts ago you were saying: "I seem to remember..." implying you weren't actually sure.
    Now you are declaring these things as established facts.

    So first, you should show when the authorities actually stated that they didn't suspect foul play and then where that was in relation to when the fire services showed up.
    Then you should show some backing for your claim about what experts can and can't know and how long it takes them to figure something out.

    If you can't do this, or you are unwilling to do this why should we take you opinion seriously?


  • Options
    #93
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    Ipso wrote: »
    How didn’t they? So are they in league with muslim arsonists or the deep state/planet?

    *Sneaks into conspiracy theories, wonders if I should make an alt account :D..


    Anyways I hope and think it was a definite accident. In fact the workers going off at 5.30 ish, which is about an hour before the smoke first became visible, would kind of specfically implicate a spark/over-heating from machinery/tools that had been used all day therefore heated up etc, a heat source that thus was able to cause a conflagration due to lack of said workers being around to spot it.


    Buuuutttttt...since this is the conspiracy and not the skeptical forum ;) I did have a bit of fun looking crooked at this very blurry video from a security camera (apparently?) that was taken on 15/04 (supposedly?). Big cowboy buckle on a belt shining? Where's the safety hat? Yeah, yeah I know, not a savoury tweeter...whatever.

    https://twitter.com/TipsyPianoBar/status/1118687891364831232


    Also, Professor Benjamin Mouton, who was Chief Architect of Notre Dame from 2003 - 2013 said ''Ca me stupifié beaucoup!'' According to himself he cannot imaginez how such wood as this ancient hard oak - ''c'est tres dur'' - could possiblement catch fire and become an inferno comme it did. It went ''trop vite'', he reckons there must have been ''autre chose''. :eek: :eek: :eek: Autre chose??

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap9JrTWFjVs


    Am I doing this right? :cool:


    Translation of some of video from Youtube comments...
    Interview of the former (up to 2010) architect in charge of the conservation of the Cathedral Notre Dame de Paris :

    “What do you think of what happened?”
    - This type of hard wood does not burn without a massive source of heat.
    - It was quick to propagate, I don’t understand how it propagate so quickly.


    “Before my retirement in 2010, I have ordered and realised several changes to the security of the cathedral”
    - The electrical appliances was upgraded to the 2010 norms : a short circuit is virtually impossible.
    - The fire detection technologies was far beyond what was needed for 2010 norms and the system is very efficient. So efficient that it can falsely be triggered on hot days so 2 people are always (days and nights) into the Cathedral to monitor this system and to check if it is a real or a false alert, these people have to call the fire brigade in case of any doubt.


    I have no credible hypothesis on how this fire started.


    “Could it be a failure of the detectors?”
    - Well, I can’t see why, but seeing this everything is possible.
    - Like any chantier of a national heritage monument, especially at ND, we have some of the most hardened norms.



    “During the 13 years of restauration works, from 1997 to 2013, did you ever see a fire departure?”
    - Thanks God, I am pleased that No!


  • Options
    #94
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    Ipso wrote: »
    How didn’t they? So are they in league with muslim arsonists or the deep state/planet?

    Oh by the way I quoted that post because it made me wonder is there a ''deep planet'' I haven't heard of????? :eek:


  • Options
    #95
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Zorya wrote: »
    *Sneaks into conspiracy theories, wonders if I should make an alt account :D..


    Anyways I hope and think it was a definite accident. In fact the workers going off at 5.30 ish, which is about an hour before the smoke first became visible, would kind of specfically implicate a spark/over-heating from machinery/tools that had been used all day therefore heated up etc, a heat source that thus was able to cause a conflagration due to lack of said workers being around to spot it.


    Buuuutttttt...since this is the conspiracy and not the skeptical forum ;) I did have a bit of fun looking crooked at this very blurry video from a security camera (apparently?) that was taken on 15/04 (supposedly?). Big cowboy buckle on a belt shining? Where's the safety hat? Yeah, yeah I know, not a savoury tweeter...whatever.

    https://twitter.com/TipsyPianoBar/status/1118687891364831232


    Also, Professor Benjamin Mouton, who was Chief Architect of Notre Dame from 2003 - 2013 said ''Ca me stupifié beaucoup!'' According to himself he cannot imaginez how such wood as this ancient hard oak - ''c'est tres dur'' - could possiblement catch fire and become an inferno comme it did. It went ''trop vite'', he reckons there must have been ''autre chose''. :eek: :eek: :eek: Autre chose??

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap9JrTWFjVs


    Am I doing this right? :cool:


    Translation of some of video from Youtube comments...

    the footage with that figure is news to me, is that real? crazy...thanks for putting that all together...and what the guy has to say is pretty much in line with what I have heard other (mostly German) experts say...


  • Options
    #96
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    the footage with that figure is news to me, is that real? crazy...thanks for putting that all together...and what the guy has to say is pretty much in line with what I have heard other (mostly German) experts say...

    Coolio :) Have fun.

    I'm not hanging around for the slagging, though. Unfollows.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,790 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    thing is, the fire services hardly even showed up, certainly not around the roof area, and very late, and knew as little as anyone during the blaze...and people in authority will (almost) always toe the line and keep repeating the official version, no matter what...even the least informed and youngest around here should know that by now...though, as said before, I do not doubt it was an accident, i.e. inexcusable neglect, but am just looking at the bigger picture and trying to keep an open mind...but whatever...

    Where are you getting this information from?

    They did show up, in force and are credited with doing an excellent job in what was a highly complex fire by saving the building, the artifacts and paintings inside

    Also, are you a firefighter?


  • Options
    #98
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Zorya wrote: »
    *Sneaks into conspiracy theories, wonders if I should make an alt account :D..


    Anyways I hope and think it was a definite accident. In fact the workers going off at 5.30 ish, which is about an hour before the smoke first became visible, would kind of specfically implicate a spark/over-heating from machinery/tools that had been used all day therefore heated up etc, a heat source that thus was able to cause a conflagration due to lack of said workers being around to spot it.


    Buuuutttttt...since this is the conspiracy and not the skeptical forum ;) I did have a bit of fun looking crooked at this very blurry video from a security camera (apparently?) that was taken on 15/04 (supposedly?). Big cowboy buckle on a belt shining? Where's the safety hat? Yeah, yeah I know, not a savoury tweeter...whatever...

    Great more fuel for the fire so to speak ;)


  • Options
    #99
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Apparently an attack was stopped at St Patrick Cathedral. It not related to Notre Dame, but interesting news. The man is white and is from Jersey, that all i found out. I did want to make a new thread about it when not a conspiracy.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/18/us/st-patricks-cathedral-man-arrested-gas-lighters/index.html


  • Options
    #100
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Apparently an attack was stopped at St Patrick Cathedral. It not related to Notre Dame, but interesting news. The man is white and is from Jersey, that all i found out. I did want to make a new thread about it when not a conspiracy.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/18/us/st-patricks-cathedral-man-arrested-gas-lighters/index.html

    Why isn't that a conspiracy?


  • Options
    #101
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Overheal wrote: »
    Why isn't that a conspiracy?

    Because they know who did it? Dont know? Tell us?

    I love the Urban dictionaries definition of conspiracy
    Definition cannot be released because the government is keeping it a secret .

    :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    gozunda wrote: »
    Great more fuel for the fire so to speak ;)


    Well, despite the fact that we know it was an accident because the authorities and some smart people around here have said so, I still wonder what the story is with that footage…when exactly it was taken etc., could be nothing or could be huge…


  • Options
    #103
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Apparently an attack was stopped at St Patrick Cathedral. It not related to Notre Dame, but interesting news. The man is white and is from Jersey, that all i found out. I did want to make a new thread about it when not a conspiracy.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/18/us/st-patricks-cathedral-man-arrested-gas-lighters/index.html


    seems burning churches is the latest trend...


  • Options
    #104
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Well, despite the fact that we know it was an accident because the authorities and some smart people around here have said so, I still wonder what the story is with that footage…when exactly it was taken etc., could be nothing or could be huge…

    Theres more footage apparently...
    A time lapse camera installed just hours before Monday’s devastating blaze at Notre-Dame de Paris may contain vital clues as to what caused the inferno, a French scaffolding company working at the cathedral said on Thursday...

    The scaffolders started leaving work at 5:20 p.m. on Monday evening and by 5:50 p.m. – half an hour before the first alarm sounded – all were gone, Eskenazi said.

    “The procedure says that at the end of the day, electricity on the site is turned off. So we turn off the lifts and the scaffolding’s lights, and we hand over the keys to the sacristy’s concierge,” he said.

    “That’s exactly what the workers did. They followed the procedure, and it was of course duly noted in the registers at the sacristy.”

    There was no welding machine or blowtorch on the site, he added.

    Police sources confirmed no welding was being done at this stage to the site.

    The outside scaffolding had no sprinkler system, but was equipped with movement detectors which did not go off, Eskenazi said. The alarms that activated were the cathedral’s own, he added. That may also yield clues as to where the fire started.

    Investigators are trying to understand why the fire was not detected when the first alarm rang at 6:20 p.m., prosecutor Heitz has said. A second alarm sounded at 6:43 p.m., at which point the fire was detected in the roof.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-time-lapse-shots-of-notre-dame-spire-may-yield-clues-on-blaze/


  • Options
    #105
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    SoundsRight wrote: »
    Rooves don't just accidentally catch fire by themselves. Someone started it, either maliciously or through negligence.

    [...]


    that much is clear, and that is the big question...negligence or intent, has to be one of the two...


  • Options
    #106
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Where are you getting this information from?

    They did show up, in force and are credited with doing an excellent job in what was a highly complex fire by saving the building, the artifacts and paintings inside

    Also, are you a firefighter?


    Mostly from watching hours of live stream while it was happening...you will have to forgive me if I cannot go through hours of footage now to find the exact moments certain things were said, and that I cannot remember every last detail in 100% accuracy…but feel free to check if you have the time, think I was watching mostly CBSN and BBC stream, besides a few others…
    of course it was a complex and unusual situation, yet you would think they must have planned and trained for just that for many years…there was not much to see or hear of any firefighting efforts for quite a while, and I reckon it was too late by the time they arrived in some sort of strength, and then they apparently didn’t really have any equipment to reach even roof height anyway…and of course they were praised afterwards, that's again politics...and no, I'm not a firefighter...


  • Options
    #107
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    gozunda wrote: »
    Theres more footage apparently...[...]


    I take it you wouldn't know where to find that? I'd be curious...


  • Options
    #108
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    I take it you wouldn't know where to find that? I'd be curious...

    From the article linked - it is being currently examined. I doubt it's in the public sphere.

    Found a really good site which had a full 3D laser scan both inside and out of the cathedral dating from 2015. Fantastic detail and footage of the cathedral. Went back later and access to the website was restricted :(


  • Options
    #109
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    gozunda wrote: »
    [...]Found a fantastic site which had a full 3D laser scan both inside and out of the cathedral dating from 2015. Fantastic derail and footage of the cathedral. Went back later and access to the website was restricted :(


    crazy...


  • Options
    #110
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,790 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Mostly from watching hours of live stream while it was happening...you will have to forgive me if I cannot go through hours of footage now to find the exact moments certain things were said, and that I cannot remember every last detail in 100% accuracy

    Yup I watched it live for several hours as well
    of course it was a complex and unusual situation, yet you would think they must have planned and trained for just that for many years

    No reason to think that they didn't
    …there was not much to see or hear of any firefighting efforts for quite a while, and I reckon it was too late by the time they arrived in some sort of strength,

    They arrived within 10 minutes
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-notredame-firefighters/paris-firefighters-got-on-notre-dame-site-in-less-than-10-minutes-idUSKCN1RT1N7
    and then they apparently didn’t really have any equipment to reach even roof height anyway

    That wasn't their goal or their strategy
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47945471
    …and of course they were praised afterwards, that's again politics...and no, I'm not a firefighter...

    They were praised for their excellent work. And as you mentioned, you aren't a firefighter.


  • Options
    #111
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    On a side note, kind of funny how they keep repeating how the cathedral “survived two world wars” and all...well, so did my grandparents’ garden shed...and all that only because no-one ever tried to destroy either during any of the two world wars...not like Paris was ever bombed in any serious way…


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,418 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    On a side note, kind of funny how they keep repeating how the cathedral “survived two world wars” and all...well, so did my grandparents’ garden shed...and all that only because no-one ever tried to destroy either during any of the two world wars...not like Paris was ever bombed in any serious way…

    Yer grannies garden shed wasn't smack bang in the middle of the 2 largest wars in history either.


  • Options
    #113
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Yer grannies garden shed wasn't smack bang in the middle of the 2 largest wars in history either.

    To be fair a lot of sheds back then were designed to be bomb proof....

    anderson-bomb-shelters-were-common-britain-second.jpg


  • Options
    #114
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,790 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Latest is that investigators think it may have been caused by an electrical fault


  • Options
    #115
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Yer grannies garden shed wasn't smack bang in the middle of the 2 largest wars in history either.


    Sure, but why would the cathedral not have survived the world wars, considering all of Paris survived with minimal damage…


  • Options
    #116
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    “Before my retirement in 2010, I have ordered and realised several changes to the security of the cathedral”
    - The electrical appliances was upgraded to the 2010 norms : a short circuit is virtually impossible.
    There's a lot more to it that just buying new appliances - which would be 9 years old now. Unless they gutted all the wiring and redid it up-to or exceeding modern building code (I highly doubt it) there's always the risk of a short at any point in the wiring, and there are bound to be miles of it in the cathedral.

    Plus that's assuming that the short would be at one of the appliances he mentions, and not something else left plugged in. Could be as innocuous as a cheap chinese iphone charger someone left plugged in.


  • Options
    #117
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    More reporting on firefighters efforts

    https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/04/17/66-minutes-the-frantic-race-to-save-notre-dame/


  • Options
    #118
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Aaaaaaannd finally.... the proof you've been waiting for.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRKQurD68NM


  • Options
    #119
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    evolving_doors wrote: »
    Aaaaaaannd finally.... the proof you've been waiting for.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRKQurD68NM


    Someone posted that here the other day, could be nothing or could be huge, not least depending on when it was taken…


  • Options
    #120
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,499 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    evolving_doors wrote: »
    Aaaaaaannd finally.... the proof you've been waiting for.

    Proof how exactly? When was that video taken? Wheres the fire?!

    Why are people so thick?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    The Nal wrote: »
    Proof how exactly? When was that video taken? Wheres the fire?!

    Why are people so thick?


    Yes, we would need a timestamp first of all…as I said, could be nothing or could be huge…of course, they will have to check who was walking around up there and why, like who was or was not supposed to be there at that time...site security and all...


Advertisement