Hello team,
I visited this topic before, because (for some reason) the title attracted me, but I didn't get attached to the topic. I didn't watch the video because I trust TC and its synopsis, so I just kept reading. So if my comments seem shallow and shallow, that's because of that.
So let's start in order:
There were 100s of these world's fairs, being built between 1850 and 1920, all over the world. Massive sites: 500 - 1200 acres, 2.3 sq km of site, built in times of two years or less, obviously with no modern type building equipment.
After the expos, they were all dynamited and destroyed.
Really, do they all?
Mickoski thinks this was a time of a last 'great reset'. Human societies reach a certain level of technological knowledge and capability and some sort of elites don't like it and push the rest button, and it all collapses and we start fresh without knowledge of how things were before.
Hmm .... the elites don't push the buttons, others push the buttons of the elites. They are just vectors/signposts, or better yet those cones on the highway that direct you to the other lane from afar.
Mickoski thinks that everything we think and know about our history of modern cultures, civilisation, technology, how everything works, food production, government, education, all has its origin at the world's fairs.
OooooKeeej...... This is acceptable
Nowadays, people are programmed through the media, tv and internet. In the times of the old world's fairs, these means weren't available, so the fairs were built to do the job. The narratives in all the fairs across the world were the same, telling us where we were and where we are, and what's in store in the near future.
and this too.
Host says it's weird that in the US, the architecture of the fairs would use Greek and Roman styles - it's more understandable that the ones in Europe would do so due to their histories - since that style of architecture just isn't present in America.
Well, maybe that's exactly why. Complex of lesser value of "young immigrant population". Well, they won't glorify the culture of the natives at the world exhibition, when in reality they are doing everything to destroy it. Second, if they used "stucco" then they used already existing molds, which can also explain the similarity of the buildings.
The official story is that it is claimed that it's built out of a material called 'staff' which is a type of plaster layered over the top of a wooden structure, similar to a movie set.
If this is true, then from the beginning these buildings were not intended to last, and it is not surprising that they were destroyed. They simply "cleaned up" after themselves.
You see, it as a cardboard box, 3 thin papers flat-corrugated-flat interconnected and you get something durable in which you can carry heavy things (relative to the weight of the box itself). You can even put two or three on top of each other.
In this case, a light wooden structure in the middle, Knauf boards (staff) on each side.
If a cardboard box can handle a load, so can this. By light, I don't mean only that the boards and "beams" (there are none in this picture) were thin, but also made of some light and cheap material. If the buildings were not meant to last long, but to serve their purpose and be destroyed, surely oak and ebony were not used, maybe pine or..... redwood?
I looked up something about lumberjacking at the time and found
this (some text and lots of interesting pictures).
I also assume that the wood was "raw", and such boards warp over time (and the thinner they are, the more) and thus damage the structure. They are also prone to mold and rot. One more reason to remove.
Why did they build such buildings?
Most likely because of the budget. They needed to do
something big, spectacular, to attract both exhibitors and visitors, for little money. And in the end, they should have earned something (expenses should not have been higher than income). I assume that this is the reason for the sale/relocation of the Crystal Palace. Earn extra, fill the budget.
How many people are needed to build such a "wall" (in the foreground)?
I think 4 is enough. One drives two nails up, another two down, and two who bring the planks and hold them.
How long does it take to drive two nails?
Very little. I (who am female and do not need to drive nails often), drive a smaller nail (2-3 cm) in three strokes. These people who did it from morning to night, worked frantically, like machines. In one day they could install meters and meters of this kind of construction. The text mentions 44,000 workers. Well, if we divide them into groups of 4, that's 11,000 groups!.
If all groups installed the structure (driving nails), and if each group installed
only 10 meters per day, that is 110,000 meters or 110 kilometers of construction.
I also think this is a job that kids/teenagers could do as well, also carry containers/buckets with water for the workers.
Q: (LQB) Was some form of alternative energy used in their construction?
A: No.
This is resolved.
He talked to a building contractor and asked if he could build it today. The contractor said yes but it would take 15 years. Two years to plan it because it's so massive. Two years just for the waterworks: lakes, rivers, pools. It's all built on swamps.
All the buildings are supposed to be supported by 1000 wooden poles driven into the swamp and then building on top of it would take another 10-12 years.
He said he would need a workforce of 150,000 people and 15 years.
This is a real, thoroughbred builder. He exaggerates in all segments, in order to inflate the price.
Two years to plan it because it's so massive. Two years just for the waterworks: lakes, rivers, pools. It's all built on swamps.
Well, then these are not; lakes, rivers, pools but
drainage pits and canals.
You dig up the ground, raise the surrounding construction site, a little along the way, the water drains into the holes and the surface layer is additionally "dried".
Afterwards you put; a nice fence, bridges, ducks, geese, water plants, a couple of fountains/jumping nozzles and that's it.
I wouldn't be surprised if after blasting, they stuffed the remaining debris inside and covered it with earth.
(Eco-protectors and "greens" of every kind, please don't get upset. These are natural materials and they have certainly already been decomposed, unlike worn-out wind turbine propellers, which your "green energy" hides underground.)
All the buildings are supposed to be supported by 1000 wooden poles driven into the swamp and then building on top of it would take another 10-12 years.
All right, this is a mitigating circumstance for the builder, because one obviously has in mind longer-lasting structures than those that were built.
Host points out that Mickoski writes in the book that Chicago had a workforce of 44,000 people. Where did they come from? Where were they living? How were they being fed. Right now, the average hotel in America is 313 rooms. If you put two people per room,
then for 44,000 you would need 70 full hotels. (
) Bear in mind that it's two years in Chicago and they have very bad winters. How would they survive building them? You would have to lose 4 months out of each year to the weather conditions.
Mickoski says they were very clear on the fact that they didn't build during the winter and the date of the fair was actually pushed back from 1892 to 1893.
Where were all the
bathrooms for the workers?
Next, you notice in these photos, and the contractor he spoke to noticed that all around the buildings, all you see is mud. Where are all the remnants of human activity,
the facilities for the workers, the garbage (), chairs where they might sit down (
), bathrooms. If you've got 50,000 people working, it can't be so clean and neat. His take on it was that it was as if no one had been at the site for a year. This isn't a worksite. Where are the building materials? Where is all the massive amounts of scaffolding that would be piled up?
Protection at work, working conditions and workers' rights in 1890?
This is almost like asking where Napoleon's soldiers slept, ate and shitted. The boy obviously hasn't heard of tents, field kitchens (cauldron) and field toilets.
And what kind of garbage is that? Are plastic bags, plastic bottles, fast food boxes... People had an aluminum container and a spoon, which they would wash a little in the nearest water source after eating.
See scaffolding!
What did he say :
Where are the building materials? Where is all the massive amounts of scaffolding that would be piled up?
This kind of scaffolding certainly occupies a significant space on, say, 700 hectares.
Here, too, there are only 4 workers and a supervisor ("The Man in Black"
), a professional person, who probably has more groups like this to supervise (and make sure that the chairs mentioned above are not needed), and also
that exactly the right planks/material are used in the appropriate part of the construction site.
Which brings us to this:
Q: (LQB) The World's Fair expositions in the US in the late 18 hundreds and early 19 hundreds are very anomalous. Did some of these massive structures exist prior to the expositions? Was some form of alternate energy used in their construction? Were these expositions used to program the masses and impose false history?
(L) Now, wait a minute. Let's back up here. These World Fair expositions are very anomalous. Why are they very anomalous? Where's LQB? I wanna understand this. LQB, where are you?
(LQB) They were built in very short periods of time. Very large structures and current contractors don't believe they could ever do that today.
(L) Wow. Okay. Did some of these massive structures exist prior to the expositions?
A: Partly and expanded.
These massive structures are exactly the buildings we are talking about, pavilions for trade fairs.
And they
partly already existed, just as your new wardrobe from Ikea
partly exists in shipping boxes, before it is assembled and displayed in your room.
Because these buildings were not built but assembled. Assembled from pre-made parts that came from different regions/factories, in the country
(expanded) and that's why the construction went fast.
(Related to the above-mentioned wardrobe, two professional builders put together a simpler/two-wing wardrobe so quickly that you don't have time to make a real Turkish coffee for them.)
For this kind of construction, you need
clean flat terrain (swamp land? = horizontal land), any unevenness, any existing buildings, tall vegetation (forests) only hinder and slow down construction.
There is no way that anything was standing there before construction.
An example from life:
In the company where I worked, we were building a new production hall.
(some 35 years ago, some other better times) It was made of building blocks that consisted of; rebars filled with lightweight insulating material in a mold/concrete shell with made openings for doors and windows. Only four workers participated in the assembly of the building itself. One on the crane, one hooking the elements to the crane, and two on the building directing the crane operator and fixing/connecting the elements. The building was put together like a 3D puzzle in two days. Not a month has passed since the surveyors came to the
meadow and we started bringing in machines and moving inside. I'm talking about a building with a floor plan of 4,000 m2, on two floors, with sanitary facilities, offices ... and all the accompanying infrastructure.
(I know that the whole project took longer, from determining our needs, creating the project, creating building elements... etc., but here we are talking about the state of the construction sites - so less than a month).
I have another example of a more recent prefabricated construction, a
Wooden skyscraper in Sweden This one is designed to last at least 100 years.
So much for buildings. I join Joe and Jay.
There's not much mystery there.
I saw a recent one on the Paris fair of 1900. One of the claims of “the narrative” is that 50 MILLION people visited and attended.
Another note- everyone in the photos of these fairs is looking so dapper and well dressed. That doesn’t fit the gritty Industrial Revolution narrative. For there to be massive attendance, people, in general, would have to be better off, wouldn’t they?
So visitors.
Let's see, the population in Europe;
had 187 million inhabitants in 1800,
1900 – 406 million inhabitants.
50 million is 12.31% of the total population.
I assume that the number of visitors was determined by the number of tickets sold, which does not mean that there were so many different people. Namely, a fair of this format is
an event. You simply have to be there,
you have to be seen, and at your best, so whatever it costs, even if you borrow from a banker. There is a high probability that they were the same ones more than once during the fair.
Declining nobility, rising bourgeoisie (industrialists, bankers, intellectuals, students, artists...), various suitors and "desirable ladies" who are trying to "squeeze" into these circles
(as they call them today... influencers) , so it could be.
Fairs are never meant for the poor, they don't have a supply of unspent money that needs to be "milked". Maybe only in the amount of the ticket amount. Work is intended for the poor; before the fair (tree fellers, rafters, sawyers, builders...) during the fair itself (service activities), after the fair.
Which brings us to:
Q: (LQB) Were these expositions used to program the masses and impose false history?
A: Not exactly as the question is composed, but yes, there were nefarious systems involved. This topic could be more carefully analyzed for clues.
Q: (L) Huh. Well, I never heard of that, so I guess we'll have to start a thread on it. Okay...
I call that a real hook, which BHelmet additionally sharpened.
To be absolutely clear:
Nefarious comes from the Latin adjective
nefarius and the Latin noun
nefas, which means "crime."
Nefas is a combination of
ne-("not") and
fas, meaning "right" or "divine law."
NEFARIOUS suggests flagrant breaching of time-honored laws and traditions of conduct.
nefarious
nə-fâr′ē-əs
adjective
- Infamous by way of being extremely wicked.
- Wicked in the extreme; abominable; iniquitous; atrociously villainous; execrable; detestably vile.
- infamous for being wicked
Also interesting that systems was pluralized
I don’t think the C’s would use a word like nefarious lightly. One system can be complex enough but to refer to multiple systems that are probably interwoven and also call them collectively or separately nefarious is worth a major Spockian eyebrow raise, IMO. And gets a priority upgrade, I think.
I'm looking forward to the discussion on: "nefarious systems involved", so I can compare my thoughts with yours.
