I don't believe they are intentionally manipulating the block chain. Here's my theory...

They are marketing this as a decentralized currency when it is in fact a federalized currency controlled by a few master nodes that no one is ever supposed to find out about.

However, the foundation address are being held in a wallet that is not directly connected to the internet (arguably for security reasons) which also happen to be the master nodes in federalized system.

As these nodes stake, on their private internal network, their communications are relay (probably through some slow ass java/php appliance) through an internal network proxy which first captures the transactions and analyzes them to show their shareholders how much money they have made. That database which is storing the transactions is performing slowly and instead of the relay happening milliseconds or seconds later it is taking dozens of seconds or minutes (and in the case of today's almost 4 hours worth of disappear blocks even longer) for the proxy to receive, analyze and relay the transaction to the public nodes.

For some reason the client's are accepting these transactions, even when received hours later, as the authoritative version of the block chain even though the block chain with the most blocks is supposed to be the true version. Several examples I have posted showed it occurring in less than an hour, with the exception of the nearly 4 hour long erasure of the block chain.

It does not make sense for a block to be received hours later and be chosen to replace an entire sequence of blocks and transactions.

In some cases, but the late arriving time-stamps are earlier than mined blocks, but even those should not be accepted on a decentralized block chain because the said late arriving block with the supposed earlier time-stamp because that time it could have been maliciously manipulated. For example, I could go back 20 blocks set a static time stamp and brute force it until I find a suitable hash and broadcast it an essentially rewrite the block chain.

However, I have also pointed out instances where the mined block that was orphaned was replaced by a block with a time stamp that was two minutes older with the same exact transaction and credited to another miner.. (which could be an internal foundation miner because I only know of one pubic mining pool).

It would be nice to hear from some non-biased knowledge people on what is happening hear.

Again, my suspicion is the foundation wallets are mining on a network that is segregated from the internet and there is a delay in the relay of their transactions and those nodes have been configured somehow be authoritative nodes in deciding consensus.