Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Stapes said:

Lembit Opik was debating Russia Today with that utter bawbag Alex Massie on Radio Scotland this morning. Opik tore him a new one, although I'm sure Massie and his Massi[v]e ego won't see it that way. 

Massie's argument was that RT is the propaganda arm of the Russian state and Opik and Salmond were being used by appearing on it. At least we have the BBC he was arguing. Until Opik came back to say he was shut down by the BBC when he opposed the Iraq War.

Heard that too. I don't actually mind Alex Massie but his argument was absolutely eviscerated by Lembit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there actually any suspects yet, individuals rather than the Russian authorities, no one acting suspiciously, that need to help the police with their enquiries sort of thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mariokempes56 said:

BBC new now saying they are taking away the Police officers car in case its contaminated ???

EH? Surely he didn't drive home before becoming seriously ill ? (and if so why has it taken this long ?)

This stinks to hell.

If its some form of particle that was used, the presumably it could survive in the open. Possibly take a long time to degrade?

Who knows. Forgot about most of that stuff after high school physics, but just remember reading about world war one troops becoming ill due to holding out in trenches that had been gassed weeks earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stu101 said:

Interesting. There is a good response from the other view here:

 

But Murray says that excludes his side of the argument, which seems so...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/bothered-by-midgies/

And Murray continues today...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Stu101 said:

If its some form of particle that was used, the presumably it could survive in the open. Possibly take a long time to degrade?

Who knows. Forgot about most of that stuff after high school physics, but just remember reading about world war one troops becoming ill due to holding out in trenches that had been gassed weeks earlier.

As far as I can see, they have only told us that this agent is one of the Novichok group of agents. There are dozens of different chemicals in that category. They haven't told us which one it is, and they probably never will. From what I've read, most of them seem to be organophosphates. These are mostly solids. They could be administered as a fine powder but could also be added to an aerosol or just mixed with water and poured into somebody's drink or food. Once exposed to the environment they degrade by hydrolysis (basically they react with water). Some will degrade faster than others. Some organophosphates are used as pesticides on food crops. Residual amounts of these can sometimes be detected on our fruit and vegetables weeks, or maybe even months ,after they have been applied. But it all depends on the specific chemical that has been used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

Are there actually any suspects yet, individuals rather than the Russian authorities, no one acting suspiciously, that need to help the police with their enquiries sort of thing?

Vlad did it obviously, Theresa said so and that's all you need to know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stu101 said:

Interesting. There is a good response from the other view here:

 

Just read the mass spectrometer argument. They still need to know what it is( I thought). I have the advantage of having just read the entire litmenvenko (sp?) inquiry. When they were using a mass spectrometer for him, it was only serendipity that allowed them to identify polonium. They didn't recognise it from the spectrometer, however in the lab was an old scientist who had worked on the start-up nuclear reactors and he happened to nose into what they were looking at and identified it for them as he was the only one who had seen polonium's signature when he was a youngster.

I need to go out as well which is annoying as all the new stuff is interesting and i want to stay in and read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stu101 said:

Interesting. There is a good response from the other view here:

 

Finished it, the guy is a better sophist than he is a chemist. This is another tweet buried in the rubbish.

"No it can't be proven beyond doubt purely on Chemistry but the *balance of probabilities* is heavily skewed towards Russia. And until I hear a more convincing alternative explanation I'm sticking to my guns."

Basically the science says it can't be traced to an origin of manufacture, so he just believes it was Russia, even though it's a family of nerve agents purposely designed to be easily made by amateurs. 

Another educated half-wit allowing his personal beliefs to cloud his science. You can have as many letters after your name all you want but if you're not following the method you're not a scientist.

Anyway enough granstanding from me, my gran has been on the phone to tell me to get my arse in gear as she wants her shopping done today.

Edited by phart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Grim Jim said:

But Murray says that excludes his side of the argument, which seems so...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/bothered-by-midgies/

And Murray continues today...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/

 

I've tweeted the guy to explain he is describing the function and ability of Mass Spectrometer wrong. And read those Craig Murray blog posts which bring up my own objections.

Edited by phart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed arsenal drew cska in the europa league, wonder what spin the media will put on this. Can see hoolies and poisoners getting a large mention, calls for a boycott?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stu101 said:

Interesting. There is a good response from the other view here:

 

That Clyde Davies fella sounds like one angry geezer. My favorite bit is when he says something like "some of my best friends are Russian".:lol:

I didn't read it all, but I think one of the bits he is missing is "Impurity profile fingerprinting". It's commonly used in the chemical industry. It relies on looking at the impurity profile rather than the structure of the compound itself. The impurity profile not only helps you identify where the product was made, but it can also narrow it down to an individual batch of product made on that site. But you do need an impurity profile of the original batch to compare it with.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dan cake said:

Noticed arsenal drew cska in the europa league, wonder what spin the media will put on this. Can see hoolies and poisoners getting a large mention, calls for a boycott?

tbf with the Queen boycotting the world cup, not much else left in the way of heavy hitting sanctions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Orraloon said:

That Clyde Davies fella sounds like one angry geezer. My favorite bit is when he says something like "some of my best friends are Russian".:lol:

I didn't read it all, but I think one of the bits he is missing is "Impurity profile fingerprinting". It's commonly used in the chemical industry. It relies on looking at the impurity profile rather than the structure of the compound itself. The impurity profile not only helps you identify where the product was made, but it can also narrow it down to an individual batch of product made on that site. But you do need an impurity profile of the original batch to compare it with.

 

Exactly, as i said on the polonium case, they were lucky someone knew what the signature looked like so they could go that's polonium 210 signature on mass spectrometer.

Then the interesting bit in that case is they used a female nuclear expert with almost 4 decades of nuclear experience in most of the report She is only identified as "A1" or "she" so she writes on the possible source of the polonium and says not all reactors are accounted for so could come from any of them. Then suddenly this other physicist appears in the hearing stating how it must be a Russian reactor. Specifically this one as no other registered reactors can produce it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may of course be the case that we can't say for sure who did it.

They think it probably is Russia.  What's worse ?

Going strong on a good bet or telling the international community you don't have a clue?

I can't think of any credible reason it's not originated in Russia, to be honest.

 

That Chemist doesn't prove anything.  Hits out with some graphs but doesn't answer the blogger's question and basically 'triangulates' using the same info everyone else is going on.  I happen to agree with him but it's not necessarily provable.

Edited by PapofGlencoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing. They should be giving a sample of the agent to OCPW or whatever the agency is called. But the UK is refusing to follow protocol and just going it's Russia, that makes me think it's not Russia just cause suddenly changing protocols and making accusations. It's more a PR campaign than a scientific investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, phart said:

tbf with the Queen boycotting the world cup, not much else left in the way of heavy hitting sanctions.

The ginger prince "supports" Arsenal, mind you he's not really royalty 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, phart said:

Exactly, as i said on the polonium case, they were lucky someone knew what the signature looked like so they could go that's polonium 210 signature on mass spectrometer.

Then the interesting bit in that case is they used a female nuclear expert with almost 4 decades of nuclear experience in most of the report She is only identified as "A1" or "she" so she writes on the possible source of the polonium and says not all reactors are accounted for so could come from any of them. Then suddenly this other physicist appears in the hearing stating how it must be a Russian reactor. Specifically this one as no other registered reactors can produce it.

I haven't read the stuff on the Polonium case but I think that's a wee bit different? I think you said that the Mass Spec couldn't identify it as being Polonium, but I might have pick you up wrong? Then the auld guy looked at it a said "Och that's Polonium. I've seen it before". Or something like that. In the good old days when we used Mass Specs we had to work out the numbers manually. You looked at the size of all the pieces that the original  molecule had been broken into and used those numbers to try to work out what the original molecule was. I've never used Mass Spec for looking at elements as opposed to molecules. But the point is that nowadays those numbers are just plugged into a computer and it compares those numbers with a database. If Polonium doesn't happen to be in that database the computer just comes back with "no match found". Then it needs somebody who understands the basics of how Mass Spec works to spot it. Lucky the auld guy was around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if it can be shown that this stuff was made in Russia it doesn't mean that they did it . The malware that attacked the NHS last year was made in USA. I can't remember anybody blaming Trump for that.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

I haven't read the stuff on the Polonium case but I think that's a wee bit different? I think you said that the Mass Spec couldn't identify it as being Polonium, but I might have pick you up wrong? Then the auld guy looked at it a said "Och that's Polonium. I've seen it before". Or something like that. In the good old days when we used Mass Specs we had to work out the numbers manually. You looked at the size of all the pieces that the original  molecule had been broken into and used those numbers to try to work out what the original molecule was. I've never used Mass Spec for looking at elements as opposed to molecules. But the point is that nowadays those numbers are just plugged into a computer and it compares those numbers with a database. If Polonium doesn't happen to be in that database the computer just comes back with "no match found". Then it needs somebody who understands the basics of how Mass Spec works to spot it. Lucky the auld guy was around.

The first mass spec thing you do in school is hydrogen atom.

It identified it, but since no one looking knew what polonium210 looked like they didn't spot it. I've went and pulled it from wiki. It wasn't mass spec. It was gamma spectroscopy i confused them.

Scientists at AWE tested for radioactive poison using gamma spectroscopy. No gamma rays were detected; however, a small spike was noticed at an energy of 803 kilo-electron volts (keV). The BBC reported that by coincidence another scientist, who had worked on Britain's early atomic bomb programme decades before, happened to overhear a discussion about the small spike and recognised it as the alpha particle signal from polonium-210, which was a critical component of early nuclear bombs. On the evening of 22 November, shortly before his death, his doctors were informed the poison was likely to be polonium-210. Further tests on a larger urine sample using spectroscopy designed to detect alpha radiation confirmed the result the following day

Edited by phart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

I haven't read the stuff on the Polonium case but I think that's a wee bit different? I think you said that the Mass Spec couldn't identify it as being Polonium, but I might have pick you up wrong? Then the auld guy looked at it a said "Och that's Polonium. I've seen it before". Or something like that. In the good old days when we used Mass Specs we had to work out the numbers manually. You looked at the size of all the pieces that the original  molecule had been broken into and used those numbers to try to work out what the original molecule was. I've never used Mass Spec for looking at elements as opposed to molecules. But the point is that nowadays those numbers are just plugged into a computer and it compares those numbers with a database. If Polonium doesn't happen to be in that database the computer just comes back with "no match found". Then it needs somebody who understands the basics of how Mass Spec works to spot it. Lucky the auld guy was around.

Here's the tit-bit when they suddenly brought in another scientist when "A1" wouldn't say it came from russia

The isotope used in killing of Litvinenko has been traced by a British theoretical physics professor Norman Dombey:[80][85]

The Po-210 used to poison Mr Litvinenko was made at the Avangard facility in Sarov, Russia. One of the isotope-producing reactors at the Mayak facility in Ozersk, Russia, was used for the initial irradiation of bismuth. In my opinion, the Russian state or its agents were responsible for the poisoning.

— Norman Dombey, Supplementary Report by Norman David Dombey

 

Notice "supplementary report" before they were using "A1" then this guy pops up.Check out how political his work is. North Korea/Iran etc.

Edited by phart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Orraloon said:

From what I've read, most of them seem to be organophosphates. These are mostly solids. They could be administered as a fine powder but could also be added to an aerosol or just mixed with water and poured into somebody's drink or food. 

Presumably the agent wasn't added to food in this case, otherwise why did the polis get sick too?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Porton down just got a £50 million cash injection , if only they had the means....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×