Mike CernovichVerified account

I'm a former SF engineer; have done site exploitation, forensic fire, blast etc. examination. From what I've seen about the recovery effort: not yet. If they could know by now it would be something so obvious a layperson could grok it if an investigator talked through it on TV.

BUT the escalation of the fire from a *simple* accident is just unreal. Scaffolding can provide quite the tinderbox, but the utter lack of precaution and care that would be required to unthinkingly introduce an igniter massive enough to NOT get suppressed is unbelievable.

Example: Major welding work applied directly to a large mass that was *touching* the wooden structure (scaffolding or primary) and overheating it entirely. No welder in their right mind would make such a mistake, though, and I doubt metalwork of this kind is even involved.

Former Navy firefighter here: Way too early to rule anything out.

In the article: "Paris public prosecutor Remy Heitz said there was no obvious indication the fire was arson" Headline: "No sign of arson in Notre-Dame blaze as nation grieves for symbol" The omitted the word "obvious". Misleading. They're trying to control the narrative.

As always! If there was arson, we will never know!

It wasn't arson. It was just some people who did some things.

25 years as a FF.. unless they have some first hand witness “I was using a torch and...”. Then no.

The fact that's been ruled out so fast means it was arson.

It is inconceivable that investigators have had time to do the forensics on the charred remains. Witness also that authorities have been mostly mum about the desecration of twelve churches in recent weeks in an apparent attempt to not antagonize the vandals.