Jet fuel can explode!? LV shooter?
26 2017-10-11 by th3yc3b
So I was mass downvoted in /r/Topmindsofreddit on a linked topic I was upvoted on mostly on this subreddit. All of them were basically saying I was a liar and stupid. I'm not going to call them shills, today, if anyone hurts your mental ego or model of reality they are called a shill. I really don't blame them. My theories are quite a stretch from the norm. Anyways if you want to see the discussion it's in my history. Here's a link to the topic I posted here previously describing my theory more fully. I am not claiming my theory to be absolute fact.
Actual Post: What I want to post about here is that I believe the LV attack was supposed to be much bigger. Another redditor pointed out in another thread that the Tannernite in the LV attacker's car may have been planned to be used to blow up the 44,000 barrels of jet fuel tanks. Ordinarily just shooting at jet fuel tanks will not make them explode. However, that does not mean they can not explode if Tannernite is first exploded next to it. The other sub-reddit basically completely disagreed with this proposition both theoretically and scientifically. Mostly we were talking about aerosolizing jet fuel. I don't understand why they completely misunderstood what I was saying. Perhaps I was being unclear. My grammar has sucked these past few days.
Anyways, here are a few link bombs regardless of who was right in those threads:
http://www.aaccessmaps.com/images/maps/us/nv/lasvegas_sostrip/lasvegas_sostrip.gif
http://cdn.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/webSHOOT-targets-Oct5-17-copy-600x368.jpg
Notice the right window and the gun picture of the right window and the note probably being reported by police as calculations.
CNN reports that he fired two incendiary rounds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_liquid_expanding_vapor_explosion
And...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon#Fuel-air_explosive
Exactly what I was trying to describe to them. Two explosions, first one creates the environment necessary for the second one.
My best guess is that the plan somehow failed and the other person who was supposed to help place the car bailed.
26 comments
1 Rayfloyd 2017-10-11
I'd say Weinstein is a sacrifice to take heat off the botched cover up rather than Trump's response, tho we just need to push it a bit more and we can send in the dogs
1 BallP 2017-10-11
Its an unpopular thing to say here right now, and I didn't click your links, but to me it's been pretty clear for a while that ISIS nearly pulled off a 9/11 level casually event . The metal in those tanks would have shredded thousands of people. To me the conspiracy is the cover-up. The FBI has no clue how or when the involved parties made contact with each other and they are slow rolling the reveal to maintain order.
1 mastigia 2017-10-11
In case you weren't aware, topmindsofreddit (TMOR) is comprised of the most retarded trolls money doesn't need to buy. They aren't shills really, that is just a place for top tier useful idiots to gather and coordinate.They exist primarily to make fun of the efforts of our sub.
Usually if you are getting called out by TMOR, you are doing something right. But I wouldn't pay attention to anything they have to say really.
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
I kind of figured that out after reading their replies for a while.
Thank you for confirming (echo-chambering?) for me. I really thought I was going insane.
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-10-11
They really are awful. I'd have come in that thread to help you out but I'm banned from there. You did a really good job holding your own, though.
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
Holy shit, I just realized after reading someones post. If they're claiming such things about jet fuel not exploding isn't that a direct contradiction to the official claims of 9/11?
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-10-11
Yes. That was what I was dying to point out. I almost posted a 9/11 jet fuel post to see if they would take the bait but I was stuck on the phone. They are 100% contrarian.
1 Diskothique 2017-10-11
If the plane crashes then the jet fuel sprays i.e. Aerosolising would take place.
I'm confused how was he going to get the bomb to the airport jet fuel tanks exactly ?
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-10-11
Someone was supposed to drive the car with explosives to the tanks and something went wrong.
1 6CCOm877zVorg 2017-10-11
I knew i'd have some fun if i rechecked your post history.
A plane smashing into a building at hundreds of miles per hour is definitely enough to aerosolise the Jet Fuel and make it burn, 50lb of a low grade explosive isnt.
1 TheGingerGlasses 2017-10-11
I think a 9/11 level event was planned, but foiled whilst it was in operation and ultimately failed.
The first interview with Eric Paddock was strange to watch and appeared unprepared, possibly because Stephen Paddock wasnt supposed to be the centre of a mass media focus - the massive casualties of 1-October and what was going to be done about that would have been.
I believe this may have been in part, orchestrated by a defeated Democratic Party, to force the Republican Administration into war, and gun control talks. At some point that practically guarantees the Democrats will return to power (because who really wants Republican war) and can be the heros that withdraw us from war. 16 years ago, something similar happened.
Perhaps Harvey Weinstein has fallen on his sword to fill up air time and distract us from what the real focus should be.
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-10-11
This has been my feeling from the beginning. My big question is how did it fall apart? Was it thwarted?
1 TheGingerGlasses 2017-10-11
I'm really hoping that Aaron Rouse and his team were the people to have thwarted it as part of an existing Federal investigation, rather than something they helped arrange.
1 PoofartChampion 2017-10-11
the plan was to blow up the fuel tanks and push the crowd of 22k people closer to him and make escape in that direction slower. as the crowd is right under his window he opens fire on the far side of them, make escape that direction more difficult and keeping them nearer his window. he continues to shoot as many as possible, kills a few hundred. makes his escape, gets his tannerite car and suicide bombs all the emt's and ambulances
1 ragegenx 2017-10-11
This is a dumb theory. Most people know it is very improbable that a bullet would cause an explosion. That's TV BS
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
Except that isn't what i'm claiming. Read again please.
1 DKmann 2017-10-11
I think the blowing up fuel tanks thing is a media angle gone too far. Yes they are kind of that direction and yes what a nightmare that would have been... but... you don't plan on making a fuel tank explode from 400 plus yards away and use the equipment he had. He had the money and he could have bought a .50 cal on several different platforms to get this job done. Seems to me that a guy who did all this planning and bought all these guns would have just thrown the big boy in there to light the fire. And that's assuming this was all his idea and acted alone. If there was someone behind this in a bigger conspiracy, they'd have thought of that.
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
A .50 cal would not cause an explosion. This was the point of the thread.
The media posted about this conspiracy theory and it was promptly shut down with exactly the above. That jet fuel can not explode from being shot at/high impact from a bullet
1 DKmann 2017-10-11
Can't say that i've done it, but an incendiary round seems to me like it would do the trick on a gas tank... I've seen them set a hillside on fire with morning dew on it. I would assume dew covered grass is less flammable than a tank full of liquid designed to burn.
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
It would to an ordinary gas tank, but jet fuel is designed to function under different circumstances (e.g temperature, pressure, amount of oxygen needed for combustion).
If the tanks were to explode the damage would not be from the explosion but from the effects of the explosion.
Even if you were not in line of sight you are going to suffer from tremendous pressure exerted from the blast
1 vensorvi 2017-10-11
Causing leaks is all you need to get the vapor building up on the outside though. Then you just needed a tracer.
1 sweaty_clitoris 2017-10-11
I think you might be onto something. Every video of the shooting showed people running away from the hotel towards the fuel tanks. If they exploded, this would have been 100x worse.
1 12fjf12 2017-10-11
Is there any evidence he actually shot at the tanks.
Are there photos showing bullet holes?
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
Yup, can't find it at present but they're out there.
1 CIA_Gangstalker_lol 2017-10-11
So I'm also having a hard time seeing your point.. Are you saying he wanted to use the tannerite to cause a thermobaric explosion? I'm not sure how that would work. A thermobaric bomb works by dispersing fuel with oxygen already in the air and then igniting it. How was he planning on getting all the fuel in the tanks dispersed into the air?
Personally I just think he was ignorant enough (thanks hollywood) to think shooting a big gas tank with an incendiary bullet would cause a big explosion.
1 th3yc3b 2017-10-11
By the first tannernite explosion. The explosive force would be enough to get fuel dispersed into the air. Biggest threat is not a fireball anyways. It's the pressure/shockwave that can instantly kill.
1 CIA_Gangstalker_lol 2017-10-11
wouldnt the exploding tannerite just ignite the fuel? How would you disperse it with an explosion without igniting it?
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-10-11
Yes. That was what I was dying to point out. I almost posted a 9/11 jet fuel post to see if they would take the bait but I was stuck on the phone. They are 100% contrarian.
1 6CCOm877zVorg 2017-10-11
I knew i'd have some fun if i rechecked your post history.
A plane smashing into a building at hundreds of miles per hour is definitely enough to aerosolise the Jet Fuel and make it burn, 50lb of a low grade explosive isnt.