Great fire of London  


New Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 3
24/06/2019 3:07 am  

Just wanted to get other opinions on a few hard to believe so called facts about the great fire of London.  

Historical fires raise my suspicion for a number of reasons , here are a few reasons why this particular fire makes little sense to me.

First of all the date which the fire is said to have started.  6th of September 1666. (hmmm)

Next is good old Christopher Wren.

By the stated number of subjects this guy was educated in his entire adult life would have been spent studying, not leaving much spare time to literally build london single handedly!

Astronomy,Geometry,Meteorology,Mathmatics,physicist,Anatomist, mechanics, Optics to name just a few of the strings to this guys bow. That is an impressive list, with out yet mentioning the field which he is best known for.

Mr Wren is with out a doubt the most famous Architect in British history. After the fire he is credited for the design of the new street layout of the city it self, as well as no less than 54 churches, one of which is St. paul’s cathedral, an impressive achievement in its own write. other buildings he also is recorded to have built include the Royal naval college and the south front of hampton court palace. there are others to. 

Construction time of st. paul’s also seems to be an almost super human feat. only 36 years from start to finish... other similar cathedral s through out history take a minimum of 120 years to complete, others much longer.

love to hear others opinions.



love, light and prosperity to one and all.

Zack liked
Active Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 10
02/07/2019 6:41 pm  

That's a very interesting phenomenon that's definitely worth mentioning. I'm not that familiar with London history, even though I love its architecture and esoteric aspects, perhaps more than the modern form the city has taken. However, the other day I was having a beverage with an American friend of mine, who talked to me about the scam that was the 9/11 terrorist attack. After talking with him, it became clear to me that the only terrorists involved were the people who benefited from all this, at least financially. It seems that this whole operation was very meticulously planned for rebuilding certain parts of Manhattan, something that was not feasible through a conventional approach since controlled demolitions are not permitted in that city. Now, it may be a bit of a leap to say that the fire of London had a similar agenda behind it, but the aforementioned facts point towards that. Perhaps the date was not a coincidence either. I'd love to watch a video on this topic by Rob, who probably is more knowledgeable about these topics than anyone else I know. Cheers for the insightful and thought-provoking post!