More fake investigation stuff from the Postthruthbenders at #Bellingcat.
So, the engineer Henderson was wrong and Captain Underpans was right?
Is there any reason to rescale the cylinder without rescaling the crater?
youtube.com/watch?time_con…
So, the engineer Henderson was wrong and Captain Underpans was right?
Is there any reason to rescale the cylinder without rescaling the crater?
youtube.com/watch?time_con…
If this Bellingcat image is scaled to a 1.66m crater then the Bellingcat cylinder becomes a 1.35 x 0.32 meters nonsense. 
And the funny thing is that the 1.66m doesn't really change even if you rotate the crater. The Bellingcat cylinder is just too small.
The problem Bellingcat tries to exploit is that nobody can read the numbers in Henderson's drawing because the graphical resolution of the leaked file is too bad. So strictly speaking, the cylinder with its known size would be the most reliable measure at this drawing.
If you now scale Henderson's drawing to a length of 1.66m then the crater is only 91cm wide instead of 105cm (FFM). So there can be no doubt that Henderson's drawing represents the inner dimension of the actual breakthrough, ...
... while the dimensions in the FFM report (166cm x 105cm) refer to the outer dimensions. The box around the hovering valvles cylinder should represent these measurements, while the red arrows should represent Hendersons drawing.
If one were now to make a serious study of the Henderson drawing, then without readable dimensions the known size of the cylinder would be the best and most reliable initial size.
If you scale it to 1.4m, the internal dimensions of the crater are approximately 159cm x 90cm.
If you scale it to 1.4m, the internal dimensions of the crater are approximately 159cm x 90cm.
Furthermore, if the outer rectangle (turquoise) corresponds to the FFM dimensions 1.66m x 1.05m, then one can now ask oneself whether an inner dimension (green) of about 159cm x 90cm is credible.
I say it is, but...
I say it is, but...
I am deeply indebted to Bellingcat for pointing out this contradiction in the drawing. When I modeled the shape of the crater 2 months before the Henderson leak, I stupidly scaled the inner dimension to 1.66m and the cylinder to 1.40m, as you can easily see on the grid.
The correct relation of crater and cylinder should look like this.
Bellingcat continues by using a cylinder from Aleppo for comparison. Of course Bellingcat does not mention that this cylinder was found under a hole, which is too much like a mortar impact.
Also this cylinder, like the #Douma bed cylinder, apparently hit with the fins first, which seems aerodynamically impossible from a drop height of at least 100m. It didn't bounce but left a perfect fragmentation ring across the wall like exploding shells do.
So Bellingcat shows us by means of the Aleppo cylinder that the red marked strut is bent against the direction of force. The deformed side of the cylinder I marked green. Pink also shows how the securing bands are deformed in the most unexpected way, because the yellow arrow...
...points also in the opposite direction of the expextable forces that deformed the bottom side of the cylinder and bowed fin and securing band upwards. Which force could bent the middle fin upwards, the struts downwards and flattens the ends of the securing ring onto the fins?
IMHO almost exclusively a force like this. And that, in turn, would explain why the cylinder apparently slipped during the fall. It was never really in it. A deformed cylinder was inserted into the harness. And that, in turn, explains why the valve and frontring survived.
In the next paragraph Bellingcat repeats her assumptions about corrosion and of course without mentioning that everything indicates that the video activists have repeatedly turned the valve on and off.
The best proof of this was provided by Forensic Architecture and you only have to follow the link to image 1 or 2.
Finally, on corrosion, it should be mentioned that Bellingcat's comparison cylinder from Aleppo was collected on the same day, according to the White Helmet Video. Surprisingly, it is completely rusted while the freshly welded armour in Douma took two weeks to look the same.
Let's talk about this recreation that according to Bellingcat fits perfectly.
And let's start with the shape of the fins (red circle).
And let's start with the shape of the fins (red circle).
In the attached article I described why the model of Forensic Architecture has cut off wings. It was simply because their pointcloud tool could not know that the fins were under a blanket. And Forensic Architecture obviously didn't know that either.
docdro.id/mfXh78B
docdro.id/mfXh78B
This front ring is also highly questionable. Bellingcat has successfully sold the braking corner kick to the anonymous OPCW successor team, but no vertical deformation to the front edge can be seen.
Instead, this ring is deformed in a lateral way that could not possibly have happened with a virtually undeformed cylinder sticking inside. So the question is, when did the armour come loose and how could it be deformed in such a way without leaving a long scratch on the surface?
Of course Bellingcat refers to the reports of the pland spotters, who allegedly saw two Mi-8 helicopters take off at 7:16 and 7:23. Actually Bellingcat is the only source that claims so but refers here to the NYT, which also got the information from Bellingcat.
Let us first of all note that the people who ought to know it claim quite different times. And Eliot knows it without letting you know.
Second, those plane spotter only reported one helicopter with drums at 7:23. The circling helicopters were reported by Sentry Syria - the plane spotter network - one hour later. But the most important thing is whether a helicopter with drums is a Mi-8 helicopter.
The New York Times interprets a "helicopter with drums" in this way, despite the fact that it is impossible to attach such chlorine drums to the suspension units of such a helicopter.
In other words, only a Mi-8 with tailgate could drop a chlorine cylinder, but it would not be recognizable as a "helicopter with drums". In contrast, numerous helicopters with drums were reported on 6 and 7 and 8 April.
In other words, Bellingcat's claim is not based on any known source and contradicts all known sources. Nevertheless, Bellingcat simply claims it and then, by a small detour, self-referentially cites itself as the source. It would be unbearable for Higgins if Russian media...
...so far only about the misleading images in this article. Tomorrow I will try to read it.😉
Good Night and Good Luck
Good Night and Good Luck
@threadreaderapp unroll
