Posts of TruthHammer ๐Ÿ™๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ (DM's & Channel Spam are FAKERS.)

newest first

#20375Photo
Views4,234โˆ’26%vs avg
Forwards93
Reactions397
Comments52
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
1 h2,312
7 h4,234
  1. After 1 hour2,312
  2. After 6 hours4,234
  3. Total to date4,234
#20373Text
Views4,708โˆ’18%vs avg
Forwards40
Reactions222
Comments32
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
2 h3,340
8 h4,708
  1. After 6 hours4,708
  2. Total to date4,708
#20371Text
Views4,397โˆ’23%vs avg
Forwards8
Reactions131
Comments26
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
2 h3,355
8 h4,397
  1. Total to date4,397
#20366Photo
Views5,472โˆ’5%vs avg
Forwards76
Reactions344
Comments9
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
6 h4,940
12 h5,472
  1. After 6 hours4,940
  2. Total to date5,472
#20365Photoedited

Ok I waited... now I'm gonna wreck the nonsense calling the plane crash in Florida a missile. Impact crater is about 7 meters across by 2 meters deep. This is consistent with raw calculations of the energy discharge of a 10,000 kg mass impacting the ground at almost 1,000 kph (~600+ mph), yielding roughly 386 MJ or 92 kg TNT explosive yield. Any conventional missile of similar size would have a warhead which produces most of the force (not just kinetic impact). Missiles in a similar size will range anywhere from 500 kg TNT to 2,000 kg TNT yield. A mid-range value of 1,000 kg TNT yield would produce a crater along these lines: Crater linear dimensions from near-surface high-explosive charges roughly scale with the cube root of yield (W ^ 1/3) in soil, with substantial variation by soil type, burial/coupling, and exact configuration. Reference data for conventional munitions (e.g., ARES summaries of MK-series bombs). Scaling the model gives an expected diameter on the order of ~15โ€“17 m (and correspondingly greater depth) for a 1,000 kg surface or near-surface detonation in similar media. SUMMARY TLDR: The yield of explosion, as modeled from the crater size, indicates it was a plane and not a missile. Actual mystery worthy of investigation: Why this plan was headed towards Mar-a-Lago and could it have been remote hijacked? This is a real thing intel agencies have done to planes, especially given recent anti-aircraft defenses installations that just went up in recent weeks around Mar-a-Lago (indicates they were aware of threats). ๐Ÿ‘‰So, not a missile, but still possible foul play.

Open in Telegram
Views4,836โˆ’16%vs avg
Forwards49
Reactions223
Comments28
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
6 h4,332
12 h4,836
  1. After 6 hours4,332
  2. Total to date4,836
#20364Photo
Views4,897โˆ’15%vs avg
Forwards40
Reactions284
Comments18
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
7 h4,424
13 h4,897
  1. After 6 hours4,424
  2. Total to date4,897
#20363Photo
Views4,774โˆ’17%vs avg
Forwards19
Reactions277
Comments9
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
7 h4,319
13 h4,774
  1. After 6 hours4,319
  2. Total to date4,774
#20360Photoalbum
Views3,989โˆ’31%vs avg
Forwards44
Reactionsโ€”
Commentsโ€”
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
7 h3,679
13 h3,989
  1. After 6 hours3,679
  2. Total to date3,989
#20359Photoalbum
Views3,991โˆ’30%vs avg
Forwards44
Reactions436
Comments9
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
7 h3,686
13 h3,991
  1. After 6 hours3,686
  2. Total to date3,991
#20357Link preview
Views4,110โˆ’28%vs avg
Forwards66
Reactions211
Comments22
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
8 h3,830
15 h4,110
  1. Total to date4,110
#20356Photo
Views4,739โˆ’17%vs avg
Forwards58
Reactions348
Comments16
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
9 h4,444
15 h4,739
  1. Total to date4,739
#20355Link preview
Views4,192โˆ’27%vs avg
Forwards42
Reactions422
Comments18
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
9 h3,911
15 h4,192
  1. Total to date4,192
#20353Photo
Views5,327โˆ’7%vs avg
Forwards48
Reactions500
Commentsโ€”
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
1 h1,610
12 h5,081
18 h5,327
  1. After 1 hour1,610
  2. After 24 hours5,327
  3. Total to date5,327
#20352Photoedited
Views6,428+12%vs avg
Forwards73
Reactions333
Comments16
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
3 h867
12 h4,502
29 h6,428
  1. After 24 hours6,428
  2. Total to date6,428
#20351Photo
Views5,246โˆ’9%vs avg
Forwards18
Reactions324
Comments10
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
3 h915
12 h3,835
29 h5,246
  1. After 24 hours5,246
  2. Total to date5,246
#20350Photo
Views5,120โˆ’11%vs avg
Forwards21
Reactions200
Comments2
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
4 h1,069
12 h3,777
29 h5,120
  1. After 6 hours1,069
  2. After 24 hours5,120
  3. Total to date5,120
#20349Text
Views4,983โˆ’13%vs avg
Forwards18
Reactions74
Comments50
Views growthHide views growth

Views growth

Hours after publication

Show as table
Hours after publicationViews
0 h0
4 h1,046
12 h3,670
29 h4,983
  1. After 6 hours1,046
  2. After 24 hours4,983
  3. Total to date4,983