MIT Rocket Scientist: White House Claims on Syria Chemical Attack “Cannot Be True”

[beero1000]

I am no expert but why that thing needs an explosive charge to release sarin?
Why not make it fragile and let simply open on impact? Crater does look like there was a serious explosion.
What I see on the picture is consistent with tube with sarin inside placed vertically and and then external charges on the upper end exploded and Sarin simply raptures the tube.

Sarin has low diffusivity. The Tokyo attacks released a couple of liters in enclosed, crowded, rush hour trains and only killed 12 people. The explosives are to disperse the gas (the link says like a "tube of toothpaste hit by a mallet"), in order to get a more widespread plume.

 

[barbos]

That's not to say Postol is wrong, but the only thing that really could be a "smoking gun" in his reporting is that the munition was blown up on the ground, rather than dropped from a plane. That's his area of experitise and it sounds plausible to a layman. However there are always competing theories. Sure you can look at the piece of metal in the crater and say that "okay it looks like a broken toothpaste tube" but that does not conclusively prove that a similar device dropped from a plane would not leave the same kind of result. That's where being a munitions expert (or at least getting a second opinion from one) comes in. I can't draw a conclusion after hearing just one side of the analysis.

White House says there are no competing theories, just their.
As I have said already, I see clear evidence of serious explosion, judging by the crater, at the 80-100cm height. It's clear to me that amount of explosives was way more than it necessary. It's more consistent with someone exploding tube on the ground, not dropping it from the above.

 

[barbos]

I am no expert but why that thing needs an explosive charge to release sarin?
Why not make it fragile and let simply open on impact? Crater does look like there was a serious explosion.
What I see on the picture is consistent with tube with sarin inside placed vertically and and then external charges on the upper end exploded and Sarin simply raptures the tube.

Sarin has low diffusivity. The Tokyo attacks released a couple of liters in enclosed, crowded, rush hour trains and only killed 12 people. The explosives are to disperse the gas (the link says like a "tube of toothpaste hit by a mallet"), in order to get a more widespread plume.

OK, so air drop still requires forced dispersion. But it still does not exclude ground based explosion. And explosion still seems too excessive to me.

 

[Elixir]

Sarin has low diffusivity. The Tokyo attacks released a couple of liters in enclosed, crowded, rush hour trains and only killed 12 people. The explosives are to disperse the gas (the link says like a "tube of toothpaste hit by a mallet"), in order to get a more widespread plume.

OK, so air drop still requires forced dispersion. But it still does not exclude ground based explosion. And explosion still seems too excessive to me.

*yawn*
You still cannot explain why anti-asshat forces had sarin gas and NEVER USED it against asshat.

 

[Jayjay]

That's not to say Postol is wrong, but the only thing that really could be a "smoking gun" in his reporting is that the munition was blown up on the ground, rather than dropped from a plane. That's his area of experitise and it sounds plausible to a layman. However there are always competing theories. Sure you can look at the piece of metal in the crater and say that "okay it looks like a broken toothpaste tube" but that does not conclusively prove that a similar device dropped from a plane would not leave the same kind of result. That's where being a munitions expert (or at least getting a second opinion from one) comes in. I can't draw a conclusion after hearing just one side of the analysis.

White House says there are no competing theories, just their.
As I have said already, I see clear evidence of serious explosion, judging by the crater, at the 80-100cm height. It's clear to me that amount of explosives was way more than it necessary. It's more consistent with someone exploding tube on the ground, not dropping it from the above.

Maybe. But the point is, that since WH has not to my knowledge released a detailed analysis, just the conclusion (which may or may not have even considered what an exploded sarin filled bomb dropped from the sky looks like), what looks more consistent could be just one persons opinion. Another expert who squints his eyes a different way might see something else in the photos.

 

[barbos]

OK, so air drop still requires forced dispersion. But it still does not exclude ground based explosion. And explosion still seems too excessive to me.

*yawn*
You still cannot explain why anti-asshat forces had sarin gas and NEVER USED it against asshat.

Because they did not have it and people who provided it to them explained that for that to be effective it has to look like Assad used it.

 

[barbos]

White House says there are no competing theories, just their.
As I have said already, I see clear evidence of serious explosion, judging by the crater, at the 80-100cm height. It's clear to me that amount of explosives was way more than it necessary. It's more consistent with someone exploding tube on the ground, not dropping it from the above.

Maybe. But the point is, that since WH has not to my knowledge released a detailed analysis, just the conclusion (which may or may not have even considered what an exploded sarin filled bomb dropped from the sky looks like), what looks more consistent could be just one persons opinion. Another expert who squints his eyes a different way might see something else in the photos.

What is the evidence that this thing was dropped from above? I don't see any from the report.

 

[Jayjay]

Maybe. But the point is, that since WH has not to my knowledge released a detailed analysis, just the conclusion (which may or may not have even considered what an exploded sarin filled bomb dropped from the sky looks like), what looks more consistent could be just one persons opinion. Another expert who squints his eyes a different way might see something else in the photos.

What is the evidence that this thing was dropped from above? I don't see any from the report.

Circumstantial.

My point is, that to rule out the air drop, we'd have to have some confidence that the bomb would not look like what it does if that were the case. Just because it looks like it could have been detonated on the ground is not enough to make a conclusion, if we don't know what it would look like otherwise. I can't tell a difference between a bomb detonated on the ground and one dropped from a plane, and I doubt you can either.

 

[barbos]

What is the evidence that this thing was dropped from above? I don't see any from the report.

Circumstantial.

My point is, that to rule out the air drop, we'd have to have some confidence that the bomb would not look like what it does if that were the case. Just because it looks like it could have been detonated on the ground is not enough to make a conclusion, if we don't know what it would look like otherwise. I can't tell a difference between a bomb detonated on the ground and one dropped from a plane, and I doubt you can either.

But WH report ruled out ground detonation, that's what this rocket scientist is mad about.

 

[fromderinside]

So here we are 30 posts in regarding an alt news blog and some are still defending it as 'real'. Oh My.

 

[Will Wiley]

Why are the same Americans who called Donald trump a liar, now defending trump's lies?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I am no expert but why that thing needs an explosive charge to release sarin?
Why not make it fragile and let simply open on impact? Crater does look like there was a serious explosion.
What I see on the picture is consistent with tube with sarin inside placed vertically and and then external charges on the upper end exploded and Sarin simply raptures the tube.

You usually use a low-grade charge to disperse the Sarin. It's a liquid, simply dumping it on the ground doesn't do much--see the failed Tokyo subway attack. It failed because they just opened the container and let it evaporate, they didn't provide a dispersal system.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Why are the same Americans who called Donald trump a liar, now defending trump's lies?

I think it's pretty obvious this isn't some bullshit tweet Trump just threw out from nowhere again. If it's a lie, there's at least more substance, thought and reasoning behind it, whether for good or ill. I think it would be more correct to call it a lie of the administration that includes Donald Trump, as opposed to just Trump being his usual self. Yet, that's the problem with Trump anyway right? It's prudent to be skeptical of the US government at the best of times. Now with Trump even things that seem like they could be or should be truthful have to be second guessed. Seriously, if I were on my phone and I saw Trump tweet that North Korea just launched a missile, I wouldn't know what to believe.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Jesus Fuck. Remember all the crazy fuckers screaming WMDs in Iraq when there never were any and no evidence for same was ever brought forth? It's just the same asinine emotional mindset from the same people that watched Colin Powel make the case using bullshit pictures. Everybody started screaming how we have to take this fuck down.

Americans are typically emotionally driven assholes who go with their feelings and the current propaganda, and not facts. Jesus Fuck already.

 

[Will Wiley]

Why are the same Americans who called Donald trump a liar, now defending trump's lies?

I think it's pretty obvious this isn't some bullshit tweet Trump just threw out from nowhere again. If it's a lie, there's at least more substance, thought and reasoning behind it, .

What the fuck are you talking about. What fucking substance? There is none. Were you cheering on the invasion of Iraq too? Did you think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
Here is the "report". What in there is of any substance?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html?_r=0

 

[RVonse]

Why are the same Americans who called Donald trump a liar, now defending trump's lies?

Because the lies he is telling this time are lies that are consistent with global elite standards. There are actually well reasoned conspiracy theories Trump deliberately did this because he knew his bombing would be easily accepted by the morons who watch main stream news.

Trump needed to do this in order to gain leverage and visibility with China and cool off N Korea. It really had nothing to do with Syria.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I think it's pretty obvious this isn't some bullshit tweet Trump just threw out from nowhere again. If it's a lie, there's at least more substance, thought and reasoning behind it, .

What the fuck are you talking about. What fucking substance? There is none. Were you cheering on the invasion of Iraq too? Did you think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
Here is the "report". What in there is of any substance?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html?_r=0

By substance I mean what I said. That there's more to it than a tweet pulled out of Trump's ass. The White House, Turkey and the UK have all indicated it was Sarin gas, via biometric samples, testimony of victims and medical responders, as well as the supoosed radar track. Could there be collusion between these 3 sources to support that narrative? Yes. However, I think that's less likely than Trump & Trump alone insisting this was a chemical attack.

 

[Will Wiley]

What the fuck are you talking about. What fucking substance? There is none. Were you cheering on the invasion of Iraq too? Did you think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
Here is the "report". What in there is of any substance?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html?_r=0

By substance I mean what I said. That there's more to it than a tweet pulled out of Trump's ass.

No there is not. The whole world knows and ackowledges that people died from chemicals. So there is no substance in telling the world what the world knows.

The White House, Turkey and the UK have all indicated it was Sarin gas, via biometric samples, testimony of victims and medical responders, as well as the supoosed radar track.

A supposed radar track is not substance. This is the problem. saying something supposedly exists is not substance!!

Could there be collusion between these 3 sources to support that narrative? Yes. However, I think that's less likely than Trump & Trump alone insisting this was a chemical attack.

Again, no one denies there was chemicals and that people died. For fucks sake.

This is the frustrating thing about trying to talk to war mongering Americans who blindly support their war mongering government.

If i say there is no evidence Assad was behind the attack you reply with...."" but there was an attack...why are you saying there was no attack."

We see this in your press too. If Assad says .."we did not do this attack"....the stupid media says ..."Ässad denies attack even happened"..or something along those lines.
Usually it is in the form of "Assad say attack fabricated."

And so the propaganda fog continues

 

[braces_for_impact]

This is the frustrating thing about trying to talk to war mongering Americans who blindly support their war mongering government.

No, what's frustrating is someone assuming they know the thoughts and motivations of their interlocutor, instead of taking the time to find out through conversation. Someone that seems to not only think, but want to think that all Americans are Trump excusing warmongers. That always come off like Chomsky apologists in thinking that the US is some awful evil empire - and in fact THE reigning evil empire and instigator of all the world's problems. Anything less is warmongering. Anything less is automatically based on ignorance, fear and weakness to propaganda. Well have fun with your circle jerk. It's not like you have anything beyond blind criticism to offer anyway. There's never a solution found within your ranks, only lots of whining.

 

[Will Wiley]

This is the frustrating thing about trying to talk to war mongering Americans who blindly support their war mongering government.

No, what's frustrating is someone assuming they know the thoughts and motivations of their interlocutor, instead of taking the time to find out through conversation. Someone that seems to not only think, but want to think that all Americans are Trump excusing warmongers.

It's very obvious that most Americans don't want war. But there is no evidence anywhere that supports Trumps case that Assad was behind the chemicals as opposed to Islamic radicals trying to frame Assad.