Yesterday, a reader sent me a link to a hi-spec AI ‘recreation’ of how the Surfside Condo is meant to have collapsed all by itself.

You can see that below, replete with it’s grating AI female voice-over (but otherwise, shmirat eynayim friendly.)

====

We’ll get to the version of events being laid out in this video in a moment, but before we do that, let me ask you something:

Who has the time, money, information and motivation to put out 5 minute long videos ‘recreating the scene of the collapse’ at Surfside?

I mean, the explanation in the video above is so very detailed, from an architectural point of view, and appears to include so very much information about what really happened inside the building that I haven’t come across in official statements anywhere else, that it really got me to pondering:

Who has the time, money, information and motivation to put something like this out?

====

So, I went to check that out.

The guy who put this video up is an artist / musician who lives in Bucharest, Romania.

He didn’t post a sausage about the condo collapse on his Twitter feed – literally nothing! – before coming out with this glorious AI ‘recreation of events’, but is now saying that he was motivated to do it because he’s visited Surfside on holiday….

Really?

I don’t know about you, but all this just doesn’t sound so RE-ALI-STIC to me.

====

I also spend a lot of my time researching….

I know how much time and energy all this takes, and how hard it is to come by the information and evidence required to piece these type of stories together.

And now, some guitar player in Bucharest has come out with a stunning 5 minute long AI ‘recreation of events’ that tries to clearly paint the picture that the Surfside Condos just fell down because there was water damage by the pool.

PUH-LEEZE.

====

So now, let’s move on to examine ‘the story’ being laid out in the video above.

Here’s the explanation as he writes it in the description under the video, then we’ll start to unpack what he’s saying.

Update to the causes that created the collapse

Hidden corrosion of the pool deck (only 10% of the corrosion was visible on the ceiling of the garage – it is a hidden enemy)
“Punch through failure” of 11 columns on The Pool deck (6 of the columns were around cars parked on pool level that all fell one level even the tower next to them is still standing – see Green columns on video)
– the pool deck dragged to the south 3 main columns – see the RED columns on the video simulation that I made bellow
– the 3 columns bent to the south did not sustain the building, anymore, and the middle structure of the building failed on itself (see security video of the collapse in the description)
stair number 2, next to the ocean, kept the other tower 2 seconds more, and then it failed, too (see yellow columns and stairs on the video below)
the elevator kept the building sustained by the Green column still standing (the green columns did not have direct contact with water from the pool or flowers)

====

Dorin (the artist-guitar player from Bucharest) has sure been busy!

He’s also done another video putting together 10 minutes of various images of Champlain Towers, including a bunch of hard-to-come-by shots of ‘water erosion’ in the garage.

You can see that below:

====

Here’s some shots of the MINOR concrete erosion from that video:

Patch of eroding concrete on external roof of the underground garage

Close-up shot of peeling concrete under a balcony ledge.

====

Salt-water ‘stalactites’ on roof of the underground garage

====

More patches of peeling concrete under balconies

====

Eroding concrete around a pillar / wall in the underground parking.

====

Look at these pictures carefully, then tune into your gut.

Does the minor concrete erosion on one pillar here, and patches of peeling concrete underneath balconies really add up to the massive structural failure that would see half a 12 story condo collapse?

Here’s more of Dorin’s official explanation for what occurred:

2018 report found a lot of water next to parking lot 78 that was next to the 3 columns that failed first (the water was from the pool, 2 flower beds next to the building and probably other sources) There are 2 more identical buildings one block away, on the beach; I hope they get structure testing soon See a birds-eye view before the accident, all 3 Champlain Towers (South, East, and North)https://youtu.be/5naMGbAe8EI
====

He’s saying that water leaking from the pool, and water ‘leaking out’ from watering two flower beds next to the building caused the collapse.

Does that sound credible to you?

Also, if you go through and read Dorin’s comments underneath both videos, here is what he keeps repeating over and over and over again, even when it’s not connected to what’s being discussed or said:

There are 2 more identical buildings one block away, on the beach; I hope they get structure testing soon.

Just file that away for now, but I have a feeling more of the real motive for what happened at 8770 Collins Avenue is starting to swim into view.

Now, let’s go unpick the super-fancy ‘reconstruction’ video, a little

====

His main thesis is that:

‘Water from the pool, flowers and rain were found at underground parking lot Number 78’.

This parking lot number 78 is directly infront of the middle section of the condos that collapsed first. I’ve circled it in the screenshot below:

Parking lot 78

====

Ionescu says that all the leaking water from the pool – that you see a long, long way away on the bottom right – and from watering the plant pots on the pool deck (!), flooded down to parking area 78.

There, it started to erode the three structural columns holding up the front part of the central building that collapsed first (marked red in his video).

====

Does this really make sense?

We saw that the pool was still standing long after the rest of the ‘pool deck’ had collapsed, thanks to 12 storeys of rubble slamming down on it. (See image taken the morning after, below).

====

Also, this reconstruction shows that the garage descends down to the pool, from area 78.

To put this another way, you can clearly see that all this ‘pool water’ would have to have ‘flown up hill’ (and off to the side….) to congregate around those three ‘red’ pillars.

====

This goes against a very basic law of physics.

And of course, all this is assuming that water damage could make three steel columns collapse in this way, at exactly the same moment, in the first place.

Which is clearly absurd.

====

Let’s take another look at the ‘3D’ model, to see if we can get more clues as to what really might have happened down in Surfside that night.

====

Let me walk you through what we can see in the screenshot above:

1: Three red columns at the building.

Ionescu says these collapsed first, and then the pink and the orange columns collapsed afterwards, bringing the whole middle section of the building down.

Again, press pause, and let’s run this through a little more slowly.

IF those three red pillars collapsed first, all at once, that would have brought the very front part of the building down.

Then, -at most! – we would have seen a staggered collapse as the pink columns would be stressed, and would start to sag, and bits of concrete would have sagged and started to fall – but NOT to pancake!

And then – again, at most! – some while after that, the back part of the building with the orange columns would be next to start sagging and drooping.

====

All this would have taken way more than the 12 seconds is took for BOTH parts of the building to drop to the floor, neatly pancaked, and it would have looked way different.

We’d see the red area ‘fall forward’ first; then the pink areas start to sag and ‘fall forward’; and then finally – maybe – we’d see the orange columned area start to sag and fall forward.

Here’s what we actually saw:

====

This clearly shows that most of the red, pink and orange columns COLLAPSED SIMULTANEOUSLY!

At precisely the same time.

Which is why the building ‘pancaked down’ the way it did, in under 8 seconds.

====

If we were hard pressed to believe that water from flower beds and the pool could cause three steel pillars to fatally ‘erode’ at exactly the same second, are we really meant to believe that ‘water damage’ buckled 20 steel columns fatally – ALL AT ONCE!?

And then, that same ‘water damage’ went on to buckle another 18 of the ‘yellow’ steel columns to the right hand side, two seconds later, ALL AT ONCE?!

Really?

====

The facts are important.

The facts matter.

This whole fairy story, above, rests on the assertion that the pool sank first, and the garage then collapsed.

But the pool didn’t sink first, and the garage didn’t collapse first.

====

The three pieces of ‘evidence’ used to assert that this happened are:

i. The many, multiple, conflicting statements of Sarah Nir and her family (I’m now up to 5 conflicting accounts, each one different in some very key, very crucial ways, that flat-out contradict crucial elements of what is meant to have happened that night.)

ii. The impossible to verify account of Cassie Stratton, killed in the collapse, who is meant to have called her husband at 1am to tell him she’d just seen the pool disappear in a sink hole – which clearly didn’t happen, because IT’S STILL THERE.

iii. The dodgy video of running water and ‘debris’ by the entrance to the garage.

 

Just to remind you, this video was apparently shot by people in the  hotel next door who were swimming in the pool – at 1:06 am, in the middle of a thunder and lightning storm – who stopped swimming to take pictures of water running in the garage next door, because they just knew that meant that whole building was going to suddenly collapse, 5 minutes later.

Really?

====

Here’s that video again:

While the MSM told us that this video was taken by a Spanish speaking couple holidaying at the hotel next door, you can hear that the people speaking over this original clip are actually English speaking Americans.

Just more of the things that clearly don’t add up about this story.

Here’s a screenshot, where I arrowed the ‘water’ and what’s meant to be concrete blocks, or something, on the ground:

====

Now, here’s another weird thing.

If we go back to the spiffy 3D model, we notice that the ramp for the underground parking is NOWHERE NEAR area 78, the area that Ionescu (and the people who are actually just using him as a puppet…) want us to believe collapsed first, bringing the Champlain Towers down.

This screenshot shows the UNDERNEATH of the building. I’ve highlight the parking ramp where the video (above) is meant to have been shot.

And you can clearly see where ‘Area 78’ and it’s mythical, steel-busting pool of water is meant to be.

And I included a big red arrow, to show that if you looked straight through the entrance to the garage, you couldn’t see ‘Area 78’ in a million years… even if it wasn’t pitch black, and you weren’t video-ing down a ramp.

====

====

And IF  that shot of the concrete is real and not faked (big if…), then it shows that the BACK of the building, furthest away from the pool deck, seems to have been the first to be compromised.

Which also blows a massive hole in the ‘official narrative’.

====

I could go on and on with all the anomalies here, but just wanted to finish this post with this screenshot:

====

Can someone explain why the middle part of the building came down with such force, EVEN THE PAINT WAS SCRAPED OFF THE WALLS?

How did that happen?

And why didn’t the same thing happen to the right-hand part of the building, when it too ‘suddenly’ collapsed?

How do we explain the big difference in how the middle section looks – all ‘clean’, and precisely sliced, as though by a laser beam – while the right hand side collapse still has remnants of furniture and flooring hanging on, and is anything but ‘cleanly sliced’?

I have some ideas.

But we’ll keep that for another post.

====

You might also like these articles:

 

3 replies
    • Rivka Levy
      Rivka Levy says:

      Yeah, I watched it a few days ago.

      It’s basically the same story being spun in this 3D version – and I just don’t buy it.

      I covered it in a previous post, but if you takeaway the 2 ‘first hand’ witnesses that said they saw a) the pool collapse into a sink hole prior (from 4th floor resident Carrie, now dead, so unable to verify if she really did call her husband in the middle of the night to tell him this, which would be weird as THE POOL WAS STILL STANDING LONG AFTER THE TOWERS FELL DOWN, AND STILL HAD WATER IN IT) and b) Sarah Nir and her family who claim they saw the underground garage ‘collapsing’ – which the 3D model of events makes even less likely to be true, as it means she would have had to have seen with x-ray vision through the back of the elevators,plus the timing just doesn’t fit AT ALL, plus there are at least 5 conflicting stories of that account PLUS her interview with CNN looks like it was filmed against a ‘green screen’ in Atlanta…. – then this version of events makes absolutely no sense.

      Pools of water can’t flow uphill, and even if they ‘eroded’ the base of one steel column – big if – it wouldn’t then ‘pancake’ down like this.

      It’s a cover up.

      Did you see the official controlled demolition of the remaining part of the Champlain Towers? Spot the difference (if anything, the official controlled demolition was sloppier, and took longer to bring the towers down…What does that tell us?)

      Reply
  1. Darin Sunley
    Darin Sunley says:

    This /is/ weird.

    Some rando Eastern European /musician/ posts a detailed architectural animation?

    That openly contradicts the still to my mind highly suspicious, highly edited and processed security light flashes video that is either a highly processed security camera feed or some other rando who just /happened/ to film exactly the right building from a block away at 2 in the morning?

    And /actual/ security camera footage from the /actual/ building complex is /still/ nowhere to be found, despite the fact that this isn’t 1975, they record digitally rather than to VHS, and the footage would all be stored offsite so they can’t use the destruction as an excuse?

    The enemy is doing a different strategy this time from 9/11, and it’s smart. Instead of promulgating a single story and sticking to it with viscious tenacity, they’re flooding every channel they have access to with different, contradictory “evidence”.

    Like the cruelty in foie gras, the confusion and incoherence /is/ the point. They don’t care how many people have the wrong story [or even if some people have the right story], as long as there are a bunch of different stories of approximately equal provenance circulating and, most importantly, everyone who might oppose them is fighting each other over which version of the story to believe instead of fighting them.

    Clever.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
30 + 14 =


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.