CathInfo.com

Other things speaking to Irlmaier's credibility ...

1) he was a devout Catholic and says he saw Our Lady
2) he was a very simple and uneducated man (God and Our Lady like to use such for their instruments)
3) predictions of what cannot be anything other than smart phones
4) the weapon he describes in WW3, where people's flesh was blackened, and falling off the bone, and yet things like equipment, houses, etc. were unscathed ... sure sounds like a neutron bomb, which wasn't produced until 1974 (and development started in 1962) ... he died in 1959, and despite his attributing what he saw to the green/yellow powder (fits the description of some chemical weapons the US has had), it could be a combination even where there was a neutron bomb and some chemical agent dispersed creating a combined effect
5) he describes another weapon, a bomb dropped off the coast of England that would cause much of the island to be submerged.  Why would he make up something that sounds like complete nonsense if he's making things up ... except that the Russians have developed precisely this type of weapon and during the Ukraine conflict, some Russian media talking heads actually were calling for England to be submerged by such a bomb.  There's other prophecy out there about England being partially submerged.  Perhaps, then, for instance, if Trump does get taken out, our Traditional Catholic friends in the UK could move away from the coasts for a bit, or be prepared too when some of the other events take place.

Just a series of dumb luck guesses, right?

https://thebulletin.org/2023/06/one-nuclear-armed-poseidon-torpedo-could-decimate-a-coastal-city-russia-wants-30-of-them/

In January 2023, the Russian news agency TASS reported that Russia had produced the first set of nuclear-powered, very long range, nuclear-armed torpedoes known as “Poseidon.” Strategic experts are warning that the Poseidon torpedo would have the potential to devastate a coastal city, cause radioactive floods, and result in millions of deaths. Over the past few years, tabloid news outlets have painted a hauntingly vivid picture of a towering, 1,000-foot-tall radioactive tsunami violently crashing onto British shores, pulverizing everything in its path, and transforming whole cities into barren, lifeless lands.

Elsewhere:

In May 2022, prominent Russian state television host Dmitry Kiselyov discussed on-air the possibility of Russia wiping out the UK with a nuclear-armed underwater drone. During the segment on the weekly current affairs show Vesti Nedeli, Kiselyov suggested that using Russia's "unstoppable" Poseidon underwater drone could create a giant tsunami, annihilating the UK.

Irlmaier:

Then a single aircraft comes from the East and throws an object into the great water—by England. Then the water rises in one piece, as high as a tower, and falls back down. There is an earthquake, and everything is flooded—almost all of England and the European coasts as far as Berlin.

There's a gaggle of these guys here, mostly SV types, who tend to deny and rationalize away anything that seems extraordinary or unusual.  You'll notice these are the same actors who are constantly agitating against FE and other topics that entail "conspiracy theory".  I'm not sure if it's because they have such a strong programming that they're afflicted with a very high degree of normalcy bias, or it's because they claim these types of things "make Traditional Catholics look bad", etc.

Yes, I think it's a combination of all 3 reasons above, plus a 4th - their fantasy-land idea of how they *think* the Church operated pre-V2, under an actual pope.  Some of these dogmatic SV'ers think that in pre-V2 times, an 'imprimatur' on a book meant that it was 100% error free.  Or they think that the 'true pope' could never do x, y or z (some minor mistake).  Or a 'true pope' could never appoint some lying scoundrel to some official post (as if the pope could read hearts and be an oracle).  Or that a 'true church' would approve/deny apparitions within 1 day of hearing of them, and/or respond to every single questionable person, place, idea, book, etc.  In other words, a 'true pope' would provide some time of 'orthodox utopia' where there was no error anywhere, no heretics (or if there were, they would be punished immediately), no scandals (or if so, they would be reprimanded immediately), etc.

So they look at a guy like Alois, from the 40s/50s, and since they don't see/can't find any church "approval" (in their minds, the church would approve/disapprove of any and all manner of people like Alois), then we have to ignore Alois.  But the foundational error is that the Church has the TIME and MANPOWER to even investigate a guy like Alois.  In reality, unless Alois was causing some kind of scandal, it was the job of his bishop to do something.  And that didn't happen.  Which means that Alois is neither approved or disapproved.  But to many people with a fantasy-like outlook on how the 'true church' worked, this is unfathomable.

"Traddieland" is a denigratory term for the Catholic Church. You should be ashamed.

Thank you for your perspective on my choice of terms, but I respectfully and completely disagree.  Traddieland is, IMO, a sadly-accurate term for the present landscape.