# Notre Dame on fire **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [April 15, 2019, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584 "2019-04-15T17:24:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/201 "2019-04-16T22:59:20Z")
Here’s Diane Bish, the first lady of the pipe organ, playing the 8,000-pipe Notre Dame organ that was somehow spared yesterday. [![]( " - YouTube") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crf8XnpbF2Q) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/202 "2019-04-17T00:09:32Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I stated my case with the logic that water planes are very accurate and can change the dispersal pattern with altitude. While stubbornly ignoring the fact that the ability of a centuries-old building undergoing a massive fire to withstand dumping of significant masses of water from planes is very uncertain, and that **that was the reason that such water dumping was not in fact attempted in the Notre Dame fire** , according to many people with significant firefighting expertise who know far more about this matter than you do. Somebody who thinks that figuring out the very complicated physical vulnerability of such a building in such a situation is merely a matter of “calculating mass times velocity” has no idea what he’s talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/203 "2019-04-17T00:36:09Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > While stubbornly ignoring the fact that the ability of a centuries-old building undergoing a massive fire to withstand dumping of significant masses of water from planes is very uncertain, and that **that was the reason that such water dumping was not in fact attempted in the Notre Dame fire** , according to many people with significant firefighting expertise who know far more about this matter than you do. > > Somebody who thinks that figuring out the very complicated physical vulnerability of such a building in such a situation is merely a matter of “calculating mass times velocity” has no idea what he’s talking about. what complicated physical vulnerability is involved in a heavy downpour of rain? What don’t you understand about the relationship of altitude and dispersion rates? ---
**Author:** ![galen\_ubal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/galen_ubal/32/4440_2.png) [@galen\_ubal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/galen_ubal)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/204 "2019-04-17T00:40:19Z")
…while flying over a heavily-populated city, with all of the weird wind effects and updrafts that the various skyscrapers cause, against the advice of experienced fire fighters… ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/205 "2019-04-17T01:18:44Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > The best way to see the building is not as a tourist attraction, or as a monument to architectural history, but performing its true function - as in the [video of vespers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLBF0Zb8Bs4) I posted earlier. An ordinary quiet Monday evening, after all the tourists have been shooed out… and ending only half an hour before the fire started. Nonsense! The world is a theme park. Everything is potentially a money-making attraction. Get with the game. This thing must be restored, only this time with sprinklers, safety rails, concessions, and actors playing at priests and hunchbacks. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/206 "2019-04-17T01:19:38Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > As usual in any disaster, the Daily Mail has the best photos by far. It may be a right-wing tabloid, but they certainly understand visual coverage of a disaster. BTW may I say the Paris Sapeurs-Pompiers, besides doing some truly boss firefighting, really rock the style with those helmets. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/207 "2019-04-17T01:28:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > My opinions are my own. I’m not defending Trump nor did I mention his name. I stated my case with the logic that water planes are very accurate and can change the dispersal pattern with altitude. I also showed clips of their accuracy. > > You on the other hand injected politics into it and ran your pie-hole with a rant that doesn’t belong in this thread. So, feel free to apologize. And everyone else who has looked at the notion dispassionately has reached different conclusions. I was not the first nor the last to question whether you were merely protecting Herr Donald. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/208 "2019-04-17T01:48:22Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > Debate about ‘authenticity’ doesn’t make much sense. > > This is not a building that ever was, or ever was intended to be, frozen in time. It’s not a museum. It’s not an art gallery. It’s a living, changing building in a living, changing tradition, and it always has been. It’s used for church services every day, and that’s its primary function. Everything else is secondary. It’s not there to be a tourist attraction or a museum. > > That why, although Notre Dame was chronically short of funds for restoration for years, they wouldn’t charge an entrance fee to the 12-13 million visitors each year. It’s a church, and you don’t charge entrance fees to a church. End of story. > > The best way to see the building is not as a tourist attraction, or as a monument to architectural history, but performing its true function - as in the [video of vespers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLBF0Zb8Bs4) I posted earlier. An ordinary quiet Monday evening, after all the tourists have been shooed out… and ending only half an hour before the fire started. Really? You want me to see that as its “true” function? You can have a function like that anywhere. I mean good for you if that’s what speaks to you, but if you eliminate architecture, history, art, social science, archaeology, science and technology, design, aesthetics, etc., as reasons I should care, well, I’m going to care a lot less. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/209 "2019-04-17T02:36:46Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > At some point in altitude the water is coming down like rain as it disperses. […] > > what complicated physical vulnerability is involved in a heavy downpour of rain? What don’t you understand about the relationship of altitude and dispersion rates? :rolleyes: Make up your mind. First you suggest that the firefighters should have dumped a huge mass of water in a precision strike on the cathedral, as per the video you showed us of a low-flying plane extinguishing a burning truck. Then when it’s pointed out to you that a massive dump of water could have collapsed the cathedral walls (and would also have required a plane to fly high enough to avoid the spire, while it still stood, and other obstacles), you retreat to claiming that they should just have “dispersed” the water like “a heavy downpour of rain”. As though a momentary shower of water resembling “a heavy downpour of rain” for the length of time it takes a plane to pass overhead would have actually accomplished something in controlling the fire. Hey, why not rally all the local residents to spit in the direction of the conflagration while you’re at it? Every little bit helps, after all. Once again, **Magiver** , the problem here is not me failing to understand basic physics; it’s you failing to understand that your simplistic appeals to basic physics ideas aren’t adequate to describe a situation as physically and logistically complicated as a burning medieval cathedral in the heart of a city. The more you keep doubling down on your clueless assertions, the more clueless you sound. **Spiderman** already explained this to you: > [@Spiderman](#): > > What buildings, antennas, spans (spires) are low & potentially in the path of a plane flying low enough to drop water? Before it’s collapse, the spire was 300’ high. Any plane flying in before it’s collapse would need to be over 300’ high (+ margin of safety) which means that water is coming from hundreds of feet up & can both disburse somewhat (rendering it useless towards firefighting) & have time to gain terminal velocity for what does come down. Enough coming down on the structure might just be enough to cave the roof/destroy a wall/buttress. […] > > Finally, how do you propose filling up your tanker airplanes? Will they just fly under the bridges in the River Seine? > > On first thought, ‘use tankers’ isn’t such an outlandish thought but when you take a second to stop & consider it it doesn’t work for many reasons. You’ve been explained these reasons & just double & triple down on it. > > Planes would be a spectacularly bad idea; helicopters, if available, would be marginally better but still have many of the same/similar issues. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/210 "2019-04-17T02:39:26Z")
Here’s another video from the inside, showing the aftermath. Forgive me if it was posted already. [It’s facebook, but you don’t need an account to view.](https://www.facebook.com/todddavidc/videos/2173748872719309/UzpfSTUxMjUzNzUxMjEyMjA4MzoyNjcxMzU4Mjk2MjM5OTgz/) The candles didn’t even melt. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/211 "2019-04-17T04:36:39Z")
> [@Bear\_Nenno](#): > > Here’s another video from the inside, showing the aftermath. Forgive me if it was posted already. > > [It’s facebook, but you don’t need an account to view.](https://www.facebook.com/todddavidc/videos/2173748872719309/UzpfSTUxMjUzNzUxMjEyMjA4MzoyNjcxMzU4Mjk2MjM5OTgz/) > > The candles didn’t even melt. As horrible as the damage is, it seems it could have been way worse. The interior walls look OK, and the wooden pews are intact. And it looks like a lot of the stained glass survived. All that suggests to me (to be fair, I don’t know what I’m talking about) that the fire stayed mainly on the roof. Kudos to the firefighters! I’m an atheist, ex-Catholic, and I hope the cathedral can be fully restored. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/212 "2019-04-17T07:24:12Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Really? You want me to see that as its “true” function? You can have a function like that anywhere. I mean good for you if that’s what speaks to you, but if you eliminate architecture, history, art, social science, archaeology, science and technology, design, aesthetics, etc., as reasons I should care, well, I’m going to care a lot less. My point was that you should not expect ‘authenticity’. Did you notice the very prominent and highly visible modern art on the front of the altar at the crossing? ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/213 "2019-04-17T08:22:48Z")
> [@Defensive\_Indifference](#): > > As horrible as the damage is, it seems it could have been way worse. The interior walls look OK, and the wooden pews are intact. Some of the wooden pews are intact - the ones under the holes in the vault are gone between the falling stone and the burning beams piled over the mess. It would not surprise me if the floor beneath was damaged. That is repairable, of course. I also wonder about possible water damage to the tile floor, but, again, that is repairable. > [@GreenWyvern](#): > > My point was that you should not expect ‘authenticity’. > > Did you notice the very prominent and highly visible modern art on the front of the altar at the crossing? The nature of a building like that is a certain level of on-going maintenance and change. It’s not a museum, it’s a working building. You’re going to have a mix of old and new, that’s what authentic means in this case. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/214 "2019-04-17T10:29:36Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > The nature of a building like that is a certain level of on-going maintenance and change. It’s not a museum, it’s a working building. You’re going to have a mix of old and new, that’s what authentic means in this case. Yes, exactly. That’s my point, it’s not frozen in time. There are layers of changes being added all the time, even in the normal course of events. In fact, that modern-art altar is very tasteful and fits in well with the building. [At a distance](http://i65.tinypic.com/rupsar.jpg), it looks like four abstract figures, probably meant to be the four evangelists. [Close up](http://i65.tinypic.com/2e3o7io.jpg), it’s seems to be only ‘damaged’ shapes. On another topic, my guess is that the holes in the vault were caused by the spire collapsing. The spire weighed 75 tons, and the force of that falling from a height onto the vault must have caused local collapses. But the rest of the vault did its job and protected the body of the cathedral. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/215 "2019-04-17T12:35:29Z")
Moderating: If anyone wants to discuss dropping water by planes or anything around that topic they can open another thread. Any further discussion about that in this thread will be considered a hijack and will be moderated. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/216 "2019-04-17T13:04:03Z")
I hope this is not out of bounds- what about that Crown of Thorns? How do we know that is indeed a true relic and not something that someone in the Crusades got swindled into buying? Has it ever been carbon-dated? Has the blood on said crown ever been analyzed and found to be human? If it’s a true relic, hooray that it was saved. But I’m a little skeptical. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/217 "2019-04-17T13:14:40Z")
[quote=“nearwildheaven, post:201, topic:832584”] Here’s Diane Bish, the first lady of the pipe organ, playing the 8,000-pipe Notre Dame organ that was somehow spared yesterday. [/QUOTE] The YouTube caption says that’s at the Notre Dame in Belgium. Some striking visual images of Notre Dame in Paris, post-fire: [https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/17/world/gallery/notre-dame-aerials-intl/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/17/world/gallery/notre-dame-aerials-intl/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/218 "2019-04-17T13:29:11Z")
I for one doubt very much that it’s authentic, in the sense of really being part of the crown of thorns that Jesus wore. But that is almost beside the point. It’s part of the cathedral of Notre Dame, like the art work. I am glad it was saved because it is a relic of the Middle Ages. IYSWIM. Maybe there are still pieces of the True Cross or the Holy Grail still around after two thousand years. Maybe the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is really built on the site of the crucifixion. But the record of provenance is not very good. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/219 "2019-04-17T13:34:07Z")
Interesting – reports this morning that there were no construction workers on site at the time the fire started. There goes my first assumption of what happened. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/220 "2019-04-17T13:37:46Z")
That’s interesting. I wonder if there were any live electrical lines unattended, maybe rags with flammable solvents or something, a carelessly thrown cigarette perhaps. I’m not a fire marshal but would they be able to determine a cause? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584.md?page=12)