Experimental replication shows knives manufactured from frozen human feces do not work
You can read the full article at the link. A highlight or two:
Fecal samples were formed into knives using ceramic molds, “knife molds” (Figs. S1–S2), or molded by hand, “hand-shaped knives” (Fig. S3). All fecal samples were stored at −20 °C until the experiments began...I have even downloaded the supplementary material so you can see what a frozen human poo blade failing to cut looks like. Here:
Neither the “knife mold” samples, nor the “hand-shaped knives” could cut through hide (Figs. S5–S6). Despite the hide being cold from refrigeration, instead of slicing through it the knife-edge simply melted upon contact, leaving streaks of fecal matter (Fig. S4).
And now I have no idea how to end this post appropriately...
22 comments:
I told them. I told them. But no-one listens to me.
As long as you aren't trying to blame White nationalists and Muslims for terrorism I'll try to cut and down on my comments level so you can open up your blog again. Major terrorism is ALWAYS false flag terrorism. Thats just a fact. One which you can find out for yourself. I don't know about the small stuff. The terrorists are so busy no-one takes the time to look into the small stuff. But the big ones are always false flag.
That's amusing, Graeme.
Graeme: it is ridiculous conspiracy-think to believe that major terrorism is ALWAYS false flag terrorism.
It's also incredibly personally offensive to victims relatives in many cases - such as the parents of kids killed at Sandy Hook who had nutjobs led by Alex Jones harassing them with claims that their kid had not been killed at all. Can you imagine how you would feel in that situation?
Conspiracy-think gives a thrill of being an insider who knows what's really going on - which wouldn't matter much if it just gave you a thrill and you weren't re-broadcasting it to the world.
But it's not a purely private game these days, and that's why I won't tolerate it.
steve
I assume 'false flag' can mean it happened but it was set up by the opposite of the ppl you think did it, not necessarily 'it didn't happen'
not that it makes it any less insane
Bird, stop threatening stepford.
Bird, stop threatening Stepford.
Jason: yeah, that's always what "false flag" means, no? I'm not sure why you might have thought I didn't get that...
Oh, OK - was it because I was talking about Sandy Hook?
Yeah, I guess the conspiracy there (as promoted by Jones) was that no killing happened at all, which is not your typical "false flag".
God knows if you ask Graeme though: he would probably say that either it was all crisis actors, or if that's wrong, the you-know-who's were behind it.
"Graeme: it is ridiculous conspiracy-think to believe that major terrorism is ALWAYS false flag terrorism."
No no no. By the very logic of the event it ALWAYS has to be that way. On top of that to gain from it requires media control. There is no major terrorist attack that is an exception.
The terrorist is without exception disadvantageous to whosoever is blamed for it. So in order for the terrorist attack to have a positive effect for team A it must be blamed on someone else other than team A. No exceptions for the big stuff since deliberation is involved.
False flag in military training is short for ......
"False flag, stand down, denial and deception."
You have all these aspects thrown in. Except for with Pearl Harbour, years of effort induced a Japanese attack, rather than actually doing an American attack and pretending it was Japanese. But thats a pretty minor difference.
"It's also incredibly personally offensive to victims relatives in many cases - such as the parents of kids killed at Sandy Hook who had nutjobs led by Alex Jones harassing them with claims that their kid had not been killed at all. Can you imagine how you would feel in that situation?"
I wouldn't involve myself in a faked event and make money that way. Even facing imminent poverty I wouldn't do that. The school had been closed down for many years. The portable toilets were delivered ahead of time. The actors were wearing various lanyards. The kids photos were out of date. And the children all showed up alive, well and five years older, in order to sing at the football game.
Graeme, I have left your nut case Sandy Hook conspiracy comment through to show how deep into conspiracy fantasy you are prepared to go.
Happily, I see that defamation cases are succeeding in the US against the conspiracy nutters on this issue. Good thing you don't live there.
You haven't investigated Sandy Hook. You are simply saying it didn't happen that way because it couldn't happen that way. You didn't look into it at all did you? This is the thing about science. Its not about looking at your belly button and assuming stuff. You don't have any gift of second sight. You need to go with the evidence every time. Not just when you feel like it. For starters you never feel like it.
The Boston Bombing was also a purely faked event. After that it was very hard to know when they were doing hybrid events, real killings, or pure fakes. Christchurch was hybrid in that they killed heaps of Muslims but faked up some camera-work. That seems to be the normal pattern now, and with ISIS. ISIS would film its fake stuff and commit its real crimes off-camera. So ISIS makes a film of killing a couple of Japanese people. Purely faked. But they murder all these ethnic groups for real. Ethnic groups with 6000 year callanders and other crimes against humanity and our heritage.
That is the formula they seem to have settled on. When you think about it thats the safest strategy. Do fake crimes in front of the camera and murder people off-camera.
But with Sandy Hook and the Boston Bombing they tried purely imaginary events. I wish they could have continued this way. But it never held the ring of authenticity.
You ever noticed, Graeme, that:
* no one ever confesses to being part of these elaborate conspiracies? Let's say a minimum of 50 people involved in any conspiracy involving more than a handful of people killed. There's the actors, the responders, the hospital treating "fake" victims, the relatives appearing on TV - not one of them ever, EVER confesses.
* That the conspiracy mongering comes from sad sack men in their private or public basement looking at photos and googling stuff on the net, and coming up with their absurd and offensive theories from a thousand km away - never from someone who was there?
* That people are now suing the most ridiculous ones for lying about their relative not being really dead, and winning.
You don't believe just in conspiracies as being possible - you believe they happen, and in this day and age, when everyone has a camera in their pocket, no one ever gets a shot of the fake blood, or a "dead" actor getting up, or overhears a conversation about how the fake operation is going.
Instead, you prefer to believe the armchair losers who have nothing better to do or (worse) do it for profit, like Alex Jones.
You are very, very gullible.
"* no one ever confesses to being part of these elaborate conspiracies? "
Yes they do. You just don't listen to them. For example James Files was using a Remington Fireball on the grassy knoll. He confessed. He was working with Mr Nicoletti. Whether the video of him confessing is still there doesn't change the fact that it was once on youtube and may well be now on bitchute. Youtube now closes down all these videos.
Handsome Johnny confessed back in 76 and was found in a floating steel drum just a few weeks later. They confess all the time. But you won't look at the evidence and you won't listen to the confessions. You never notice that the data is rigged. If Michael Mann draws a graph with no medieval warming period and no maunder minimum, who are you to question him right? Wouldn't that be kind of racist to question him?
You are projecting. YOU believe in armchair losers. I checked it out for myself. I wasn't watching Alex Jones. He was working for the Bronfman family as a limited hangout. So after awhile he got pretty boring.
I saw all the footage of the actors walking around in circles. Watched the interviews of the parents who were ecstatically happy when they were supposed to have been grieving. You could check it out yourself. But it used to be on youtube. Now you'd probably have to go further afield for all this incriminating footage.
So, you're citing a 1976 "confession" to the Kennedy assassination, on a video which has gone underground?
For your more recent ridiculous claim about Sandy Hook, it's videos that used to be on Youtube but have probably gone underground. Put on line by who? Actually investigated by who?
Where's your videos of a hospital worker saying "you know, they bought in 30 people for treatment, and I don't know what they had, but it wasn't gun shot wounds"?
Or is the circle of imposters into the hundreds? They send fake ambulances to collect fake injured to fake hospitals?
If that's the case, where are the actual hospital workers saying "I don't know where they sent the injured, but they didn't send them to us, the nearest hospital. That's really odd, isn't it?"
Or "it's really weird, but they treated the injured in only in Ward X with staff I had never seen before".
Or the company that supplies fake blood to some government organisation?
Just own up to it: faked incidents attacks with scores of "victims" would involve hundreds of people to set up, and you think that many people can keep an outrageous, scandalous secret?
It's idiotic.
Video evidence is always the best evidence. Always. Written evidence is second class evidence because its just somebody typing. So with Handsome Johnny I had to go to second class evidence from a book I had prior to the internet era. This was back when I thought that the hit was a communist plot. They have a great way of tricking conservatives into thinking this stuff and I fell for the same tricks after 9/11. They don't work real hard on tricking lefties. Lefties have great instincts about some things but will go along with the official story. The plans to bugger up conservatives is far more involved since they have to fool them on logical grounds. They make a mockery of their hatred for ambiguity.
This book was not a conspiracy book. It didn't go out there to disprove the Warren Report. It wasn't one of those books.
The really good stuff is with James Files and his interview in prison. But we have tracked down a picture of Oswald at street level right before the shooting started. The angle of the shots show bullets coming from the Daltex building and not the book depositary. And on and on. So the plot is about is uncovered as it could be. A 38 year old George HW Bush is right there supervising the Daltex nest. Jacob Rubinstein, gun-runner for proto-Israel, was seen carrying a rifle near the overpass ahead of Jack and to the far side of the road near the overpass. Which means he WASN'T one of the shooters. The shooters show up, get handed the rifle, do their job over a few seconds, someone else gets rid of the gun, and on and on.
Its not even 100% clear that Oswald was killed on TV. We know he wasn't a shooter but thats about all we know about his role in the hit.
Lets go through some of your objections from memory:
Where's your videos of a hospital worker saying "you know, they bought in 30 people for treatment, and I don't know what they had, but it wasn't gun shot wounds"?
"Or is the circle of imposters into the hundreds? They send fake ambulances to collect fake injured to fake hospitals?"
There were no bodies so in this case there were no bodies, fake or otherwise, collected. The story was that the parents were being prevented from seeing the bodies. They did not go to the trouble of faking up fake dead bodies in this particular case.
"If that's the case, where are the actual hospital workers saying "I don't know where they sent the injured, but they didn't send them to us, the nearest hospital. That's really odd, isn't it?""
There were no hospital staff involved in this story since there were no bodies taken to any hospital.
"Or "it's really weird, but they treated the injured in only in Ward X with staff I had never seen before"."
There was no injured people treated. All the kids were alleged to have been shot dead or survived unscathed. Clearly they weren't going to repeat such an unrealistic scenario on future occasions. I've seen a lot of injured adult interviews in other scams. But I don't think there was even one of these in Sandy Hook. Clearly they needed to change their methodology at that point. Which hospital do you think the kids were taken to? They weren't taken to hospital. They weren't officially declared dead. They were said to be all dead at the time.
"Or the company that supplies fake blood to some government organisation?"
Did you see a lot of blood, fake or otherwise, in that incident? I think I saw some in the set of the Mothers room or something of that nature. They didn't show the inside of the school. Since the school was in a state of disrepair.
You may be having a flashback to a lot of pictorial evidence that you never actually saw. So with their follow-up at the Boston Bombing they needed to have a lot of graphics because people saw nothing but ghoulishly happy parents when it came to Sandy Hook.
The hatred of the conservatives for ambiguity is a thing to behold. I'm at turns impressed and frustrated by "Bruce Of Newcastle" when it comes to science subjects. His scientific range seems to me pretty awesome. But he buys the most foolish mainstream things. For example he knew that the Pharaohs couldn't have carved out granite blocks with bronze. So he said flat out that they were carved out with a type of rock knife, harder than granite. He named the rock and made the claim outright as a statement of fact. Fine from a science esoterica point of view but crazy as a cut snake, and all down to normalcy bias.
He could prove to me that there was a lot of dust 7000 light years away, but he assumed it was all dust, and his solution to how the dust got there was red giants spitting what amounted to crushed sand, but at the same time he accepted the mainstream view of stars which absolutely precluded any capacity for this dust to make its way out of these stars. He managed to come up with some sort of completely delusional theory of the collapse of building seven because its beyond his belief that people he is aligned to politically could do such a thing. And on and on. In turn brilliant and foolish, and all to do with the conservatives poor instincts and lack of tolerance of ambiguity.
Anon I heard you had only 13 years to live and that you were having health trouble to do with your eyes? Why didn't you ask me what to do? I told you the grudge was over?
Post a Comment