Connect with us

Red Pill

News

The mathematics that discredit Kiev’s assertions that Russia is behind MH 17

Just about everything, from expert analysis to simple logic and good old mathematics, now clearly shows that the entire video conversation of Pro-Russian rebels shooting down MH17 is a false flag. The big question no one asks is why did Kiev, the U.S. government and western mass media get this video out so quickly and build the narrative around it so fast without examining its authenticity.

Published

on

0 Views

The false flag video tape conversation that that everyone (and I mean everyone from POTUS Obama, to lap dog publication The New York Times, to all of the twitteratti) was calling THE smoking gun ‘proving’ that Pro-Russian militia (ergo Russian, ergo Putin) were behind the Malaysia MH17 crash has fully been debunked.

Experts in the field, simple hobbyists, bloggers and reputable journalists (notice I stress the word reputable not the shill writers at sites like Business Insider) have easily seen that the video incriminating Russia is a sloppy piece of craftsmanship…and to be honest we wouldn’t expect anything less from the neo-nazi clowns that run Ukraine.

The list of real facts that disprove the false flag conversation is growing everyday…of course main stream media will never report this because they have already done the damage they were paid off to do by polluting people’s mind with this narrative.

By now we all know that the video was created a entire full day before the crash occurred.  This has become common knowledge to those who are not lazy enough to search it. Experts are now weighing in to further discredit the video and point out major flaws in its production and content.

The doctored video means that Ukraine officials, who were so quick to release the video, have some explaining to do. The Obama administration, who so quickly supported the videos authenticity without performing any due diligence, has some serious explaining to do.  Main stream media who, for all their top notch journalists and research capabilities, supported the video without triple checking facts, don’t need to explain anything to anyone because we all know they are paid puppet.

And back to the video, as audio experts noted this Sunday…

“This audio recording is not an integral file and is made up of several fragments,” said Nikolai Popov, a reputable expert in sound and voice analysis.

Specifically, the first of the three audio fragments, in which Gorlovka self-defense militia commander Igor Bezler talks about a plane shot down by the fighters, does not say anything about the type of the plane, the expert said.

At the same time, the name of the town of Yenakiyevo is clearly heard in the tape. However, the town is located about 100 km (60 miles) from the settlement of Snezhnoye where the Malaysian Boeing-777 airliner crashed.

Bezler said the talk had really taken place but the he had talked about a Ukrainian attack aircraft shot down by the militia above Yenakiyevo a day before the Malaysian airliner crash.
The tape’s second fragment consists of three pieces but was presented as a single audio recording. However, a spectral and time analysis has showed that the dialog was cut into pieces and then assembled. Short pauses in the tape are very indicative: the audio file has preserved time marks which show that the dialog was assembled from various episodes, the expert said.

The tape’s linguistic analysis also shows that those who made the faked tape clearly didn’t have enough material and time, the expert said.

That is why, speech fragments can hardly correlate with each other in terms of their sense and the spectral picture of audio materials also differs, the expert said.

If expert analysis of the tape is not enough than how about some solid mathematics. If the content of what the two separatists in the conversation is taken as fact, than the math behind their stated position and the missile’s capabilities to reach the plane simply do not add up.

For the mathematical breakdown we refer to the excellent post from: The Vineyard of the Saker, Evidence Continues to Emerge #MH17 Is a False Flag Operation, as translated by Gleb Bazov.


Dissecting the Fake Intercept Disseminated by SBU (Ukrainian Security Service)

In the disseminated intercept, the place from which the missile was allegedly launched is clearly indicated: the checkpoint at the settlement of Chernukhino.

Pay close attention at the Alleged Map of the MH17 Catastrophe.

As you can see, the distance from the point of launch to the point of the fall is 37 kilometres. At the same time, the elevation of the plane was 10-11 kilometres. For the Russian BUK M2 this distance is, in fact, achievable (although with a very important caveat discussed below).

However, Ukraine does not, and cannot, have modern digital high-tech Anti-Aircraft systems in its arsenal. What it does have, at best, is the older version BUK M1. The system itself is not too bad, and could even fit the stated distance. Except for the caveat that was mentioned.

The thing is that most short to medium range Anti-Aircraft systems work extremely poorly in a “pursuit” mode. There are a number of reasons for this, and I do not intend to belabor the point, but you can take it as an axiom that when the launch is made in “pursuit” of the target, the maximum distance of the launch that successfully hits the target is at least half of the advertised maximum distance (in reality, it even worse, but let’s leave aside the sad part). Accordingly, the real distance of a “pursuit” launch for BUK M1 is 16 kilometres. What’s more, the last 3 kilometres are purely “God willing” and “without guarantees.”

And, so, we have the background. Let’s see how the picture unfolds:

The launch is alleged to have been made from Chernukhino. The maximum distance of the launch is 16 kilometres. The aircraft fell between Snezhnoye and Torez. That’s 37 kilometres, which is 20 kilometres more than the maximum possible point at which the plane could have been hit. You know, even a plane with turned-off engines can’t glide like that. But the trouble is that the aircraft was not whole.

According to the pattern of the spread of fuselage fragments and bodies, the plane was ruptured practically with the first shot. Here it must be mentioned that the high-explosive/fragmentation warhead of the rocket has a mass of approximately 50 kilograms (by the way, Ukrainians have an outdated modification, which is only 40 kilograms).

Overall, that’s not too little; however, it must be understood that it detonates not when it sticks into an airplane, but when it is still at a certain, and fairly significant distance. Moreover, the main strike factor is not the blast wave, but far more significantly – the stream of fragments. These fragments are previously prepared rods (and in the earlier versions – little cubes, if I recall correctly). And yes, for a jet fighter, that, in itself, is more than sufficient.

However, here we are dealing with a huge airliner. Yes, one rocket will rip the casing, cause depressurization, and will kill a lot of passengers. But it will not break up the airliner into pieces. Given certain conditions, the pilots may even be able to land it. And, in fact, there have been precedents (to be provided in future posts). For example – the very same An-28, which is alleged to have been the first victim of a BUK system; even though it was done for, but the crew was able to successfully catapult out. Which, in some way, symbolizes. An An-28, by the way, is far smaller than a Boeing.

Nevertheless, this has relation to the next part of our analysis. For now, let’s accept as a fact the break-up of the aircraft in the air, at a significant height (which is, in essence, what was observed. Allow me to remind you: “fragments spread over a radius of 15 kilometres.” The key here is that this means the following: the aircraft (or, more precisely, the core of the aircraft) fell literally at the point where the rocket impacted it. Clarifying: as soon as the aircraft turned into a host of fragments of different mass, the separation of these fragments began due to air resistance and the difference in inertia. The densest fragment flew a further 3-6 kilometres, falling more and more steeply. The lightest – spread out and, due to gliding and air currents, fell somewhere within a 10 kilometre radius. The medium ones (primarily pieces of casing with high sail-effect and the victims’ bodies) – fell almost vertically.

In other words, the rocket caught up to the plane no closer than 25 kilometres away from Chernukhino. Which is absolutely impossible for a BUK system.

By the way, we can’t overlook the fact that, at maximum distances, BUK can be used only provided there is support from an external radar installation for location and guiding purposes. In other words, even if a rockets flies far, BUK’s mobile radar does not cover its entire distance.

Accordingly, if SBU’s video above is not fake, then, to our surprise, we discover that it was literally impossible for the aircraft to be shot down by the rebel’s BUK. By the way, what exactly this BUK was doing in Chernukhino with the Cossacks is pretty much inexplicable. It is 60 kilometres whether you go to Donetsk or to Lugansk from there, and this BUK would be unable to protect the skies over either of the key cities. Nor are there any hostilities in the area. It’s also strange for the Militia to expect enemy planes there – it’s not like the pilots are their own enemies to make such detours over the enemy’s territory, is it? Well, all right. As I already stated, let’s accept, for the moment, that the intercept is not fake.

And that is what is so strange here: SBU literally offers evidence that proves that that the Militia had no part in the shooting down of the Boeing! The fact that they blame themselves in the recording is quite understandable. Unlike the fascists, they have a conscience, which takes its toll until you are sure it was not you who did it.

Ok. But somebody did, in fact, shoot down the plane?

Of course it was shot down. And here we have another question: what if this recording is a falsification through and through? Then it had to have been prepared somehow? And then disseminated?

That’s when smoke starts to clear, and mirrors – to break.

That’s the problem with tricks.

References:

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/07/evidence-continues-to-emerge-mh17-is.html

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
30 Comments

30
Leave a Reply

avatar
30 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
carlos jose rios grajalescheap car auto insurancexfwmrt5gzngfw5wtrjfgxe85mrwfqdcm59x4ctxckw54mtdfsgw9j5nwmtxm845wctfkdijtfdhskdsftrg83yrer Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Find More Informations here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More Infos here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

this is really a nice post.

I saw this really good post today.

trackback

this is really a nice post.

I saw this really great post today.

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More Infos here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Find More Informations here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] There you will find 2836 more Infos: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]Wonderful story, reckoned we could combine some unrelated data, nevertheless really really worth taking a search, whoa did one find out about Mid East has got additional problerms too […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

xcn5bsn5bvtb7sdn5cnvbttecc

[…]here are some hyperlinks to web pages that we link to because we feel they are worth visiting[…]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/mathematics-discredit-kievs-assertions-russia-behind-mh-17/ […]

trackback

Title

[…]Wonderful story, reckoned we could combine a number of unrelated information, nevertheless seriously worth taking a look, whoa did one particular study about Mid East has got far more problerms also […]

trackback

Title

[…]below you will uncover the link to some web sites that we consider you must visit[…]

trackback

Title

[…]Here is a superb Blog You might Locate Exciting that we Encourage You[…]

trackback

Title

[…]we prefer to honor many other internet web-sites on the internet, even if they aren’t linked to us, by linking to them. Below are some webpages worth checking out[…]

trackback

Title

[…]very few web-sites that transpire to be in depth below, from our point of view are undoubtedly well really worth checking out[…]

trackback

Title

[…]we came across a cool internet site which you could enjoy. Take a appear if you want[…]

Latest

This Man’s Incredible Story Proves Why Due Process Matters In The Kavanaugh Case

Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by James Miller of The Political Insider:


Somewhere between the creation of the Magna Carta and now, leftists have forgotten why due process matters; and in some cases, such as that of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, they choose to outright ignore the judicial and civil rights put in place by the U.S. Constitution.

In this age of social media justice mobs, the accused are often convicted in the court of (liberal) public opinion long before any substantial evidence emerges to warrant an investigation or trial. This is certainly true for Kavanaugh. His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, cannot recall the date of the alleged assault and has no supporting witnesses, yet law professors are ready to ruin his entire life and career. Not because they genuinely believe he’s guilty, but because he’s a pro-life Trump nominee for the Supreme Court.

It goes without saying: to “sink Kavanaugh even if” Ford’s allegation is untrue is unethical, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. He has a right to due process, and before liberals sharpen their pitchforks any further they would do well to remember what happened to Brian Banks.

In the summer of 2002, Banks was a highly recruited 16-year-old linebacker at Polytechnic High School in California with plans to play football on a full scholarship to the University of Southern California. However, those plans were destroyed when Banks’s classmate, Wanetta Gibson, claimed that Banks had dragged her into a stairway at their high school and raped her.

Gibson’s claim was false, but it was Banks’s word against hers. Banks had two options: go to trial and risk spending 41 years-to-life in prison, or take a plea deal that included five years in prison, five years probation, and registering as a sex offender. Banks accepted the plea deal under the counsel of his lawyer, who told him that he stood no chance at trial because the all-white jury would “automatically assume” he was guilty because he was a “big, black teenager.”

Gibson and her mother subsequently sued the Long Beach Unified School District and won a $1.5 million settlement. It wasn’t until nearly a decade later, long after Banks’s promising football career had already been tanked, that Gibson admitted she’d fabricated the entire story.

Following Gibson’s confession, Banks was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. Hopeful to get his life back on track, he played for Las Vegas Locomotives of the now-defunct United Football League in 2012 and signed with the Atlanta Falcons in 2013. But while Banks finally received justice, he will never get back the years or the prospective pro football career that Gibson selfishly stole from him.

Banks’ story is timely, and it serves as a powerful warning to anyone too eager to condemn those accused of sexual assault. In fact, a film about Banks’s ordeal, Brian Banks, is set to premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival next week.

Perhaps all the #MeToo Hollywood elites and their liberal friends should attend the screening – and keep Kavanaugh in their minds as they watch.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

“Transphobic” Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded”

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


A university professor in Sweden is under investigation for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and that genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone,” reports Academic Rights Watch.

For his transgression, Germund Hesslow – a professor of neuroscience at Lund University – who holds dual PhDs in philosophy and neurophysiology, may lose his job – telling RT that a “full investigation” has been ordered, and that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.”

“If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn’t,” Hesslow said.

Hesslow was ordered to attend a meeting by Christer Larsson, chairman of the program board for medical education, after a female student complained that Hesslow had a “personal anti-feminist agenda.” He was asked to distance himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that the sexual orientation of transsexuals is “a matter of definition.”

The student’s complaint reads in part (translated):

I have also heard from senior lecturers that Germund Hesslow at the last lecture expressed himself transfobically. In response to a question of transexuallism, he said something like “sex change is a fly”. Secondly, it is outrageous because there may be students during the lecture who are themselves exposed to transfobin, but also because it may affect how later students in their professional lives meet transgender people. Transpersonals already have a high level of overrepresentation in suicide statistics and there are already major shortcomings in the treatment of transgender in care, should not it be countered? How does this kind of statement coincide with the university’s equal treatment plan? What has this statement given for consequences? What has been done for this to not be repeated? –Academic Rights Watch

After being admonished, Hesslow refused to distance himself from his comments, saying that he had “done enough” already and didn’t have to explain and defend his choice of words.

At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” Hesslow said in a written reply to Larsson.

He also rejected the accusation that he had a political agenda – stating that his only agenda was to let scientific factnot new social conventions, dictate how he teaches his courses.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Kavanaugh Accuser’s Classmate Backs Off Claims She Heard About Alleged Assault

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Amber Athey via The Daily Caller:


A classmate of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is backing off of claims that she knew anything about an alleged sexual assault committed by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Cristina King Miranda, who attended high school with Ford, wrote on Facebook this week that she heard school rumors about an incident involving Kavanaugh and Ford back in the 1980s. Miranda later deleted the post and said she did not want to talk to the media about her claims.

However, Miranda spoke to NPR on Thursday and clarified that she has no information about an alleged assault.

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

Miranda’s new statement directly contradicts her Facebook post, in which she wrote, “The incident DID happen, many of us heard about it in school.”

“In my post, I was empowered and I was sure it probably did [happen],” Miranda told NPR this morning. “I had no idea that I would now have to go to the specifics and defend it before 50 cable channels and have my face spread all over MSNBC news and Twitter.”

Miranda said the Senate Judiciary Committee reached out to her after her post but that she would not testify if asked.

Dr. Ford previously said she had not told anyone about the incident until a therapist meeting in 2012. Ford also said the incident happened during the summer, contradicting Miranda’s assertion that she heard rumors about it in school.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending