Producer @ Avoiding Babylon

Basic logic and physics applied to the Charlie Kirk exploding mic theory. Explosions, by nature, proceed omnidirectionally from their point of origin–unless inhibited by a large external force strong enough to resist said explosion and allow its propagation in only one direction. Everyone knows this and has known this since they were kids playing with pop caps. It’s what an explosion is. Explosions, as such, do not proceed merely in one direction… because they *cannot* do so due to these stubborn things called the Laws of Physics. If you want an explosion, or an explosion-like event, to direct its effects in one direction, then you need to be able to contain that explosion in all other directions. Guns use omnidirectional explosions (technically, deflagrations– i .e., rapid combustions–but I’ll continue to use the colloquial term) to produce a unidirectional effect only because the explosion takes place within an extremely strong and rigid chamber with only one opening, and that opening is blocked by the bullet itself. Thus the explosion’s effects are threefold: observed kickback, extreme (but balanced and thus negated and unfelt) force applied to the outside of the chamber/barrel, and the ejection of the explosion/bullet out of the barrel, towards the target– with a momentum equal and opposite to the kickback (cf. The Law of Conservation of Momentum). The omnidirectional explosion is hereby directed to only one lethal direction. If Charlie was killed by an exploding microphone, then there are only two ways this could have occurred: 1⃣First, the explosion proceeded from its point of origin – the microphone – omnidirectionally. But in this case Charlie’s mortal wound would have been immediately adjacent to the position of the microphone, on his right chest. Just like all the 2024 Israeli pager attacks against Hezbollah in Lebanon––the wounds (lethal or not) these exploding pagers caused were directly adjacent to wherever the victim had his pager, and everything else in the vicinity. If the pager was in a pocket, then the torso immediately adjacent to that pocket was devastated. But in many cases, the pager was being held, because the detonation was preceded by the pager ringing and then saying “error,” at which point the user had to look at the screen and then press “okay,” whereupon the device was detonated. Thus, both the hand holding the pager and the face looking closely at it were severely disfigured. Papers have been written on this. ⤵️ Of course, everyone knows this wasn’t the case with Charlie. Charlie’s wound was on the left side of his neck, not adjacent to his Rode mic, which was on the right side of his chest. Even his shirt near the Rode mic remained intact--whereas it would have been torn to shreds if the mic underneath it exploded. No omnidirectional explosion occurred there, period. Therefore, this possibility is ruled out. 2⃣Second, the explosive device was itself like a miniature firearm. It contained a charge and a barrel-like component with which to direct that charge, and at the right time, it was triggered to shoot its projectile into his neck. This, however, is clearly false for a number of reasons: 🔎A barrel strong enough to contain an explosion that powerful so as to successfully shoot a lethal projectile, with even a modicum of accuracy, and capable of ripping open a man’s neck could never be concealed within an object that lightweight and tiny. The smallest gun-like device in existence is the MAC stinger. At 3.25 inches long, it is far larger than the Rode mic Charlie was wearing. Suppressors added to it would make it far larger still. Moreover, the amount of energy such a projectile contains would be insufficient to cause the type of wound we all saw Charlie had. Such miniscule micro-guns can only, at most, fire a 22 round (or some custom made projectile of a similar size/weight). Yes, the MAC stinger is decades old, but that’s irrelevant. Advances in technology have not changed the Laws of Motion which define the absolute boundaries of what is possible here, nor can the CIA’s or Mossad’s “top secret tech” violate these laws. 🔎Even if such a weapon could be concealed within an object that tiny, it would be extremely easily detected. Picking up a Rode mic rigged like that would feel nothing like picking up an actual rode mic, which Charlie would have done innumerable times before. Charlie never would have put it on, and even if it were put on him, it would have exerted obvious excessive force in his t-shirt, tugging it sharply down. Furthermore, Rode Mics (I use them too) are very compact devices with no unused space within them. While it’s conceivable that a miniscule charge could be embedded within them, it’s absolutely inconceivable that a miniature firearm-like device could be. All the mic’s internal components would have to be removed to make room for just a fraction of the space such a device would require. Not only, again, is that impossible, but secondly, the mic would not work. (Charlie’s did.) 🔎No assassination device would ever be designed that way (to shoot off the side – by definition parallel to the intended target), as a miss is likely if not practically guaranteed. In fact, it is virtually impossible, just geometrically, that a projectile shot out of the position of Charlie’s Rode Mic could have struck his neck where we all saw the wound emerge. 🔎Due to kickback, the rode mic would have been propelled – again, Law of Conservation of Momentum -- in the direction exactly opposite the direction of his neck wound. This would also be an easily noticeable result, as there would be nothing other than the mass of the remaining rode mic components to provide the counteracting momentum (as it was only clipped to a light t-shirt–it was not rigidly affixed to a much more massive object which could imperceptibly absorb the momentum). Yet no such thing happened, and this is obvious from all the footage. Both possibilities, therefore, are definitively ruled out. So, no. Charlie wasn’t killed by an exploding microphone. Yes, there are oddities with official accounts of Charlie’s assassination, and they should be explained. I’m not saying the official story is entirely correct either. I haven’t researched it deeply and have no plans to. Here, I’m just addressing one particularly silly theory. Forgive me if this has all been said many times before. (It probably has been. At least, I hope it has been.)

With the fires going on in my area, I can't be sure I'll be able to join the livestream tonight so the Rerum Novarum episode is getting delayed again. Instead, there is going to be a mix bag of topics. Should still be fun. Link below

I walked my daughter down the aisle this past weekend for the Catholic sacrament of Holy Matrimony. What a blessing! Please say a prayer for our newly married couple in Christ! 🙏🏻 “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother: and shall cleave to his wife. And they shall be two in one flesh. This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the Church.” (Eph 5:31-32)