Notre Dame Cathedral In Flames

#452
#452
SamRebel35 said:
I think it pretty well illustrates that someone was in the area though. We were told nobody was there.
Click to expand...
sure fine, but one grainy video that doesn't actually show the event is a really weak basis for a conspiracy.

for all we know that video was a day old, a week old, or however long that scaffolding has been up. which is why I would be interested in seeing a longer version showing the fire actually starting from the observed actions.

heck I don't even think we know where the fire started.

and of course people were there, the fire department and security had to escort people out. that means people were there.
 
#453
#453
SamRebel35 said:
I heard the fire started because of the faulty 12th century electrical system.
Click to expand...
ever been on a construction site?
ever been on a construction site of an 800 y.o. building?
ever been on a construction site several hundred feet up in the air?
 
#456
#456
LouderVol said:
sure fine, but one grainy video that doesn't actually show the event is a really weak basis for a conspiracy.

for all we know that video was a day old, a week old, or however long that scaffolding has been up. which is why I would be interested in seeing a longer version showing the fire actually starting from the observed actions.

heck I don't even think we know where the fire started.

and of course people were there, the fire department and security had to escort people out. that means people were there.
Click to expand...

It is a time stamped web cam. It shoots 50 seconds of footage every hour. That was taken at 5:05. At 6:05 the footage shows a person is still up there. So after that flash, and after everyone was said to have been gone, there is still a person on the roof less than 15 minutes before the fire was said to have started. And as for the fired department having to escort people out, that may be. But the story initially was that construction crews were not present.
 
#457
#457
82_VOL_83 said:
Me thinks you missed the sarcasm.
Click to expand...

I figure Louder will be like this when he finds out what Sam does for a living.

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AirVol, SamRebel35 and 3 others
#458
#458
volfanjustin said:
You also had the guy in New York trying to burn down St. Patrick's Cathedral and how often is it while the fire is still being put out they come out and say it's an accident?
Click to expand...

Awww, the guy was just takin' them in to get the gas blessed before mowing lawns to look good for Easter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#459
#459
SamRebel35 said:
It is a time stamped web cam. It shoots 50 seconds of footage every hour. That was taken at 5:05. At 6:05 the footage shows a person is still up there. So after that flash, and after everyone was said to have been gone, there is still a person on the roof less than 15 minutes before the fire was said to have started. And as for the fired department having to escort people out, that may be. But the story initially was that construction crews were not present.
Click to expand...

It takes the French a little while to get their act together and come up with a plan ... or story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: azVolFan, 82_VOL_83 and FallCreekVols
#463
#463
LouderVol said:
lol at the Chinese saying "too much liberty" for them that's access to the internet.
Click to expand...

I love that a social studies research fellow in China would know as a matter of fact that Paris doesn't have their preventive fire measures in proper order.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#471
#471
SamRebel35 said:
It is a time stamped web cam. It shoots 50 seconds of footage every hour. That was taken at 5:05. At 6:05 the footage shows a person is still up there. So after that flash, and after everyone was said to have been gone, there is still a person on the roof less than 15 minutes before the fire was said to have started. And as for the fired department having to escort people out, that may be. But the story initially was that construction crews were not present.
Click to expand...
So an hour after setting off the mysterious flash he is still hanging around with no fire?

I mean what's the angle here? Mysterious flash turns into nothing burger so he sits around for more than an hour?
 
#473
#473
LouderVol said:
So an hour after setting off the mysterious flash he is still hanging around with no fire?

I mean what's the angle here? Mysterious flash turns into nothing burger so he sits around for more than an hour?
Click to expand...

What are the odds that a single anomaly would be picked up in the one minute per hour interval in which the camera is recording? I'd say it is plausible and even likely that it was one flash that was recorded of a series of flashes that weren't recorded during the other 59 minutes. And let's not under sell the flash. It was a flash that was bright enough to be picked up by a Webcam half a mile away in the daylight. That's an intense flash. And remember, we were repeatedly told that no construction crews were present. But clearly someone was up on that roof less than fifteen minutes before the fire started. And it is likely the same person who was up there the previous hour creating an intense flash by unknown means. Is it even remotely possible that the flash caught on camera was an attempt at creating a fire? And that a successful attempt could have occurred during the 59/60ths of an hour when the camera wasn't recording?
 
#474
#474
SamRebel35 said:
What are the odds that a single anomaly would be picked up in the one minute per hour interval in which the camera is recording? I'd say it is plausible and even likely that it was one flash that was recorded of a series of flashes that weren't recorded during the other 59 minutes. And let's not under sell the flash. It was a flash that was bright enough to be picked up by a Webcam half a mile away in the daylight. That's an intense flash. And remember, we were repeatedly told that no construction crews were present. But clearly someone was up on that roof less than fifteen minutes before the fire started. And it is likely the same person who was up there the previous hour creating an intense flash by unknown means. Is it even remotely possible that the flash caught on camera was an attempt at creating a fire? And that a successful attempt could have occurred during the 59/60ths of an hour when the camera wasn't recording?
Click to expand...
you said the clip was time stamped from 5:05, and the next clip we don't see was 6:05, which was shortly before the fire started. IIRC 15 minutes or so. sounds like the worst arson.

He could be the guy, but one video that doesn't actually show anything criminal is a weak piece of evidence. I just really hate conspiracies that start off with things so weak.
 
#475
#475
LouderVol said:
you said the clip was time stamped from 5:05, and the next clip we don't see was 6:05, which was shortly before the fire started. IIRC 15 minutes or so. sounds like the worst arson.

He could be the guy, but one video that doesn't actually show anything criminal is a weak piece of evidence. I just really hate conspiracies that start off with things so weak.
Click to expand...

For a second, just assume that, instead of trying to concoct some wild conspiracy theory, that I'm just trying to figure out how the roof may have caught on fire. Because, if you'll notice, I have not yet been dismissive of any theory. I have not said that I know this was arson. However, if looking for ways in which the fire could've started, it doesn't seem unreasonable to start by trying to find the person who was on the rooftop causing flashes bright enough to be seen from blocks away and who was on that very rooftop less than fifteen minutes before the fire was noticed. That isn't a crazy notion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top