Search results

Let's bring some reason back to this thread. The launch site is here: 3.2 miles from the impact point in the driveway. Show us on Google Earth where you think the launch site was.

Where did you get that estimate of 40 miles?

What are you saying? Trajectory. Not falling straight down. Inertia, man. Good grief.

According to the video cited in post 57, the boost phase is 1 to 5 seconds. Given the amount of unburned rocket fuel, It makes sense that the fracture would happen very early in the boost phase. So, reasonable speculation: One second... maybe. Too many unknowns to be sure. Boost phase of...

My speculation, already expressed above, was that this crude artillery rocket fractured in the first few seconds after launch. Please see my argument in post 57...

Are you sure you know what something like that sounds like, falling out of the sky? I'd listen to this before making a decision like that. Inert bombs: concrete cast in the shape of a bomb I believe. Dropped from a preserved B-24. And this: Various artillery: Source...

Gasoline doesn't explode unless it's atomized. And I'm guessing that uncontained gasoline would produce a pretty low velocity explosion. (Or combustion?) These small rockets have a small warhead and a limited number of ball bearings. I can see the relatively low velocity shrapnel puncturing a...

The fireball was (probably) caused by the rocket fuel.

Are you basing that on the "Human Rights Investigators" analysis jazz? That was DOA. If I have time I'll do an analysis of that. Quickly: -This group has no professional standing. -Their audio analysis is invalid. Problems. Cell phone audio is not accurate. Only two sources of recording when...

That was an early speculation. Maybe based on the intercepted conversation. This is the updated version. But I'm not certain if this is an accurate version or just an artist's concept:

That's an unsupported allegation from a state sponsored news outlet: aka, state sponsored disinformation. I'm not going to do any detailed analysis of your problems with the videos/launch site. These are some things I suspect may be a problem with your analysis. -Misidentifying camera...

About the warhead in this video... The video shows the explosive up front and the ball bearings in a separate section behind. That's apparently correct. The explosive is TNT and urea nitrate. The urea nitrate is there as an oxidative material to boost the TNT. It's a kind of amatol. Doesn't...

How a Qassam-type artillery rocket is made. Apparently the more expensive and larger Iranian provided artillery rockets are bigger but just as crude. We don't know exactly which rocket this was, but this gives us an idea of what may have gone wrong. The solid rocket fuel slug is inserted...

Compare the site with the Kramatorsk railway station. In a situation like this the wounded are taken away as quickly as possible. That takes all resources. Sometimes they leave bloody drag marks. The dead are left behind. The blood and tissue are cleaned up days later. That's the...

Show evidence of that. There's no evidence. What we have are videos and stills of people casually wandering through the area. I have found a single bit of evidence for what looks like a fatality. This is it. That's here at the bottom of the stairs: Show me more bloodstains, bodies...

My bold. They wouldn't rush dead bodies to another hospital, so this must be intended to mean wounded. But much more importat: Hamas controls all media, including social media. The eyewitness story cited above can't be trusted. Would you trust a Russian social media story that's at odds with...

I've considered a hypothetical scenario in which the warhead was not involved: In this scenario a large part of the missile body impacted but the warhead was not attached to this part. The crater in the pavement may mark the spot where the missile body hit and skipped. Like an iron cannonball...

Another scenario: The missile ruptured into 3 or more parts. Two parts started falling, then another continued to ascend under power. We only see the one that continued to ascend, while the other two parts are already falling.

Perhaps a post hoc fallacy. The missile we see malfunction in the sky may not be the missile that hit. Given the failure rate, there may have been multiple missile failures.

If there were fatalities withing the buildings, I'd imagine it would be through smoke inhalation. But that's just a scenario with no evidence so far.