The Atomic Bomb Hoax(?)

by Anders Björkman, M.Sc.

"This is just my opinion, based on personal research, critical thinking and common sense since 1994.

Welcome to my long and popular web page about the scandals of fake atomic bombs, fake nuclear, deadly radiation, bad sciences and similar bullshit.

I assume you are afraid of nuclear wars and
nuclear weapons of mass destruction and atomic bombs exploding in a FLASH spreading death and radiation. You should be. It is a #1 priority of any US Presidents and Japanese prime ministers since 1945 to scare you. All fake since August 1945, though! The secret is that nuclear weapons cannot explode! It was very easy to fool the world 1945 that two atomic bombs had exploded. And it was quite easy to continue the hoax during the cold war until 1990. But not any longer.

Nuclear weapons are 100% US/USSR (Russia)/Japanese collusion, infringements, infractions, stupid propaganda, lies, pseudoscience or bad science and history fiction. It upsets many American and Japan State Boards of Education (or Indoctrination), SBOEs, that force teachers to tell pupils that US scientists and engineers top secretly (hm!) developed atomic bombs 1942/5 at enormous costs using the best brains in the world. It is a scandal that nobody wants to talk about today."

Read all the very long article on:

http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm
 
Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wimington, NJ. Among his positions of expertise he was in charge of measuring and controlling the nuclear fuel inventory and storage. Galen Winsor has traveled and lectured all over America, spoken on national talk radio, and made several videos exposing the misunderstood issues of nuclear radiation. He shows that fear of radiation has been exaggerated to scare people ... so a few powerful people can maintain total control of the world's most valuable power resource. Filmed by Ben Williams in 1986.

 
Articles linked by Galen Winsor video.

Links to informative news articles and essays on nuclear power and the "energy crisis":

Myths About Nuclear Energy http://tinyurl.com/6r7yczn

Fukushima: Just How Dangerous is Radiation? The situation in Japan is tragic: an earthquake, a tsunami, death, homelessness, and carnage. The grimness is exacerbated by worries about radiation. But should it be? http://tinyurl.com/c7zodtq

The Effects of Low-dose Radiation The Japanese are not alone in being exposed to low-dose radiation; everyone is exposed to radiation daily, emanating from our food, buildings, etc. And that's good news! http://tinyurl.com/d7uz84h

Rethinking Nuclear Power With blackouts, power shortages, and rate hikes becoming more common, now is the time for America to reexamine the promise of nuclear energy. http://tinyurl.com/7ux344e

Nuclear Waste: Not a Problem Unbeknownst to most people, the bulk of nuclear waste is recyclable, and the remainder can be safely stored and presents little danger to anyone. http://tinyurl.com/7px6d29

More articles if you open the description page of the video.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Emma,

I think it would be a great thing if nuclear weapons were a hoax. But I seriously doubt it.

One reason is my scientific & engineering training, and experience as a working engineer. From the success of nuclear power plants, and from the mass-energy equivalence E=MC2, it's obvious that there's also a possibility to build enormously powerful, lightweight bombs based on nuclear technology.

I see absolutely no basis for Anders Bjorkman's argument that the original design of the "Little Boy" bomb wouldn't work. His argument is pure incredulity, and nothing else.

But if I was privy to some information that the first bomb design didn't work: as an engineer, I wouldn't give up. It would be back to the drawing board, and I would keep my team working on it until I achieved success. There's no question in my mind, that funding for such a quest would be easy to obtain.

I feel exactly the same way about the cold fusion technology that I discuss in the articles here at the site. There's so much good progress that's been made towards cold fusion, that it seems highly dubious to me that our scientific & engineering establishment would simply drop the ball.

Miles Mathis has been saying that nuclear weapons are fake, based on his analysis of some old film clips and photographs from the 1940's and '50's. The arguments are based on lighting oddities, strange cloud movements, and general incredulity. I don't find any of Mathis's arguments fully convincing. It's possible that the footage might be fake as Mathis claims. Then again it might just be touched-up using old-fashioned darkroom technology. I'm not so sure that any of us really know what such footage ought to look like, anyhow. And furthermore, even if some of the old footage was made in a studio, it might only mean that actual footage wasn't available or couldn't be released for some reason.

With so much "fake news" coming from mainstream media, I understand the need to "question everything". And it would be great news indeed, if nuclear weapons don't actually exist. But I ran across these two videos which seem pretty conclusive to me, indicating that they are for real.

From CBS Sunday Morning, 3/3/2019:


From The Atlantic, 5/27/2019:

https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/590299/atomic-soldiers/


I suppose that reasonable people might claim that the above are simply evidence that the MSM has gotten better at making CGI footage than they were in the 1950's, and also that they hire better actors. Such deep skepticism is difficult to overcome (and not totally unjustified).

But before giving up, I'd also like to offer this page from a humble alt-media 911 truth blogger, who has posted some text from his uncle's postwar journal. I found this linked from a Let's Roll Forum thread in which someone was trying to use this as evidence that the weapons were faked. Say what?? This seems like genuine, sincere eyewitness testimony to me.

https://911crashtest.org/?p=5550

Being There – A slice of history from Hydrogen Bomb Testing in 1958
The countdown went to zero, and immediately we were in the midst of a blistering hot and bright event that, in my case, was made even more forceful by the fact that while my butt was duly facing the blast, my other end was facing a galvanized metal building which reflected back the heat and the luminance, so I was getting toasted on both ends. To make matters worse, in the first two or three seconds the island started bouncing around as if was suffering a major earthquake. It was utterly unnerving and I began to suspect that there might have been some sort of mistake! However, within 10 to 15 seconds, the heat subsided and the shaking quit, we received the all-clear signal, and then stood up to take a look at “Oak” doing its thing.
My first impression was that it was way too big; it was not just an event, it was everything—a monster red-orange kaleidoscope. From 21.4 miles it appeared to fill the whole horizon, and it was expanding and rising with incomprehensible energy. It was a stupendous roiling tumult, appalling and magnificently threatening, even from that distance. Like an apocalypse let loose, I wondered how the hell we could ever be angry or frightened enough to use something as enormously terrible, a force of anti-nature beyond our control.* It grew, rising higher into the atmosphere: by comparison, the earlier tests’ clouds were mere toys. At 8.9 Megatons, “Oak” was 445 times as forceful as “Little Boy.” We stood gaping, as the mushroom rose and spread until it was stupendous and eventually, at an extremely high altitude, the edge of the mushroom cap reached over the island and we could look directly up at it. For those of us who said “ahem,” the word came that there was no cause for alarm as the cloud and all its particulates were being shoved downrange by a brisk high altitude wind and air mass, and that no fallout from that thing would be landing on us. It would be okay then to change back into our scantys, and have a nice day.
Also, Rick personally knows a nuclear test eyewitness:

https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/nuclear-blasts-preserved-on-film-eyewitnesses.2513/post-11961

I worked on a project back in the 80's for a company whose owner was once an Army eyewitness to one of those tests. He supposedly died of cancer from this experience.
In the 70's, I used to ride in a boat once a week past the sunken German cruiser Prince Eugen. It had supposedly been at the Bikini Atoll test, and only sank afterwards while being towed back to where I was working.
 
Last edited:
Technically I am not an engineer, so about the internal working of fission I can only believe one or the other.

However, how do you explain, Jerry, that only two nuclear bombs were supposedly exploded in war, in populated areas? Then nothing more since 1945.

Only test blasts on faraway, isolated sites that can easily be made up?

How long do these bombs need to be tested, if they already worked on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Also, why no accident whatsoever, no bomb accidentaly dropped or exploded, in transporting these enourmous quantities of atomic bombs, in all these years, as Anders Bjorkman's noticed? While atomic power plants suffered various "accidental" disasters, tankers spill oil very often creating environmental disasters, and so on... Even a space shuttle sent to the Moon had an accident and fell back on Earth, and some shuttles are said to contain nukes.

Suddenly, human beings become extra perfect and don't commit mistakes.

Also, suddenly, human beings respect treaties and fairplay and avoid exploding more atomic bombs on cities because too much devastating, while at the same time replenishing their arsenals and threatening all the time to explode them. Not much sense.

If you had a bomb that worked wouldn't you use it ?!?

Do you know that (fake) extraterrestrials through their "contactees" have been saying since 1945 that they have been preventing more atomic bombs to explode on populated areas? If no more bombs have been exploded since then it's because the good extraterrestrial fleet supervising our sector of space have defused all of them when earthlings were planning to use them. That's why spaceships are usually seen around military bases cointaining nuclear bombs. Militaries working there have repeatedly admitted the presence of spaceships.

Fake extraterrestrials have "bombarded" us since then with verbal warnings to stop using atomic bombs. They have admonished us that we do not realize the danger we are in, to the point that we can make the whole planet blast with the amount of bombs accumulated (which is numerically impossible).

They are not going to allow it, and when the first atomic bombs will be exploded again during WWIII they will intervene defusing all bombs, this way stopping the war (after that the "alien Jesus" will appear in the sky with his spaceships and will be acclaimed as our saviour, only to reveal himself later as a deadly dictator).

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the atomic bomb appeared when fake extraterrestrials appeared?

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the delay in exploding more bombs perfectly fit the fake story told by the fake extraterrestrials?

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the explosion of more atomic bombs will allow the elite to stage the coming of the Antichrist and provide the pretext for him to be accepted as our saviour?

Do we need real atomic bombs for the plan and the use designed for these bombs?

If they are real, will their creators be happy about the extremely limited use that has been and will be made of them?

Will all the public money poured in the research and fabrication of these arsenal have been intelligently spent?

If these bombs have such enourmous power to destroy human lives, wouldn't have it been wiser to devise another plan and use them in war, to kill as many people they wanted, since they want to reduce us in numbers? A saviour could have come later, like the Americans went to Europe after Hitler had done enough casualties in war.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Technically I am not an engineer, so about the internal working of fission I can only believe one or the other.
Hi Emma, I appreciate that not everyone has the background necessary to read materials on this topic skeptically. Please don't be offended by what I have to say.

Maybe I'd be more effective as a "people person" if I spent more time praising, agreeing and amplifying on some of your other threads, rather than debating with you about this question. All in good fun, right?

I myself was an electronics engineer & cognitive psychologist, so my exposure to nuclear engineering was limited. I had one undergraduate class on nuclear particle physics, and I toured the lab where my school had an experimental nuclear reactor. It's hard for me to believe that all my professors and fellow students were completely faking all that science and technology, experimentally demonstrated right on campus.

Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wimington, NJ.
Here's a line-by-line rebuttal of Winsor's "Nuclear Scare Scam" video. But, I do agree that lay people often have an exaggerated fear of nuclear radiation. The effects are actually fairly well known, though there's some controversy about the effects of very low doses.

https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/nuclear-news-spectrum-galen-winsor-nuclear-scare-scam/

However, how do you explain, Jerry, that only two nuclear bombs were supposedly exploded in war, in populated areas? Then nothing more since 1945.
In the years after 1945, the world recovered slowly from the war, and nuclear stockpiles were built slowly. By the time the US had enough bombs to credibly destroy Russia (the primary cold war enemy), they also had the ability to retaliate.

No sane person would want to invite a nuclear retaliation against their own country. Up until now, we have had the good fortune that the US and Russia and other major nuclear powers, have been ruled by individuals with a basic grip on reality.

Also, why no accident whatsoever, no bomb accidentaly dropped or exploded, in transporting these enourmous quantities of atomic bombs, in all these years, as Anders Bjorkman's noticed?
This is a very good point. There have been accidental bomb drops and other incidents in transportation, but no nuclear detonations. Daniel Ellsberg in "The Doomsday Machine" said the situation is downright miraculous. But I don't believe in miracles.

I can only say that any responsible engineering team would work harder on safety devices, and put in more layers of redundant protection against accidental detonation, than any other technological artifact on the planet. And that persons working with these devices would similarly be more motivated to prevent accidents, than any other technology.

And for all that, maybe we've been extraordinarily lucky. It seems conceivable to me, that we've been that careful, and that lucky.

Only test blasts on faraway, isolated sites that can easily be made up?
Where else would you test?

How long do these bombs need to be tested, if they already worked on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Modern designs are very different from Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Much smaller, much lighter, more versatile, more powerful. Engineers are not miracle workers, they seldom get things perfectly right the first time. Also, as bombs get to be 10 to 50 years old, they need to be tested to identify everything that might have deteriorated over time.

Tests are still going on underground all the time. Anybody with a seismometer can verify.

If you had a bomb that worked wouldn't you use it ?!?
No, I am not an insane psychopath. But then again, I am not a world leader.

Trump reportedly asked this question. Hopefully somebody has explained the answer.

Do you know that (fake) extraterrestrials through their "contactees" have been saying since 1945 that they have been preventing more atomic bombs to explode on populated areas? If no more bombs have been exploded since then it's because the good extraterrestrial fleet supervising our sector of space have defused all of them when earthlings were planning to use them. That's why spaceships are usually seen around military bases cointaining nuclear bombs. Militaries working there have repeatedly admitted the presence of spaceships.
I hadn't heard that, but it sounds like a great cover story. Maybe some alleged nuclear facilities don't actually have any weapons. It would be a good way to keep the accident rate down.

They are not going to allow it, and when the first atomic bombs will be exploded again during WWIII they will intervene defusing all bombs, this way stopping the war (after that the "alien Jesus" will appear in the sky with his spaceships and will be acclaimed as our saviour, only to reveal himself later as a deadly dictator).
If indeed nuclear weapons are exploded during WWIII, I certainly hope that this story of Space Jesus puts a stop to the exchange. I personally would say a prayer of thanks to Space Jesus for this, before I get started exposing him as a deadly dictator.

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the atomic bomb appeared when fake extraterrestrials appeared?

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the delay in exploding more bombs perfectly fit the fake story told by the fake extraterrestrials?
Even if not a coincidence, you haven't established which is the cause, and which is the effect. Maybe fake extraterrestrials were invented as a response to real bombs.

Isn't it quite a coincidence that the explosion of more atomic bombs will allow the elite to stage the coming of the Antichrist and provide the pretext for him to be accepted as our saviour?
Wait a minute. How can you make the "no coincidence" argument about something that hasn't even happened yet?

Do we need real atomic bombs for the plan and the use designed for these bombs?
You might be right about this. People are so gullible, they will believe almost anything. Will it be sufficient for propaganda effect, to post some pictures of fake bombs, or maybe even carpet bomb a real city? That's the claim for Hiroshima, but I don't think the Japanese were so gullible back then.

If they are real, will their creators be happy about the extremely limited use that has been and will be made of them?
True confession. My dad actually worked on the Minuteman ICBM missile for nuclear warhead delivery. He's very happy that it was never used.

Will all the public money poured in the research and fabrication of these arsenal have been intelligently spent?
If you ask me, it's been a gigantic, tragic waste. But there was a method to the madness, in that aerospace corporations and their owners and executives have feasted greatly at the public trough.

And let me ask you: if all those scientists and engineers and technicians and manufacturing facilities have not been making nuclear weapons, what have they been doing instead with all that time and treasure??

If these bombs have such enourmous power to destroy human lives, wouldn't have it been wiser to devise another plan and use them in war, to kill as many people they wanted, since they want to reduce us in numbers? A saviour could have come later, like the Americans went to Europe after Hitler had done enough casualties in war.
I think there may be a faction of the elite that want population reduction, but IMO there's also a faction that enjoys the opportunity to enrich themselves by skimming from the output of such a huge number of people.

If there is a population reduction plan, I would think "they" would prefer to use a method that didn't cause so much radiation poisoning, and without such danger of "nuclear winter" climate change.
 

Suchender

Member
..... how do you explain, Jerry, that only two nuclear bombs were supposedly exploded in war, in populated areas? Then nothing more since 1945.
Because it's a STUPiD weapon !

It's practically useless on a battle field !
The number of killed soldiers is WAY toooo little ! PLUS it destroys infrastructure. It just does not make sense in an aggressiv war.

PLUS it's WAY toooo expencive !

Subversion is much cheaper and does not damage any infrastructure !
 
Other anomalies about the atomic bomb:

"The original newspaper release was that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were fire bombed like Tokyo and it was only later that the story of the Abomb surfaced. All brick buildings were left standing, including the Bank of Japan which is still in use today. No residue “radiation”..

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/qa/Bo/LogicalFallacies/LDl6U5fe/Atom_bombs_do_not_work

"Major Alexander P. de Seversky, who 1945 inspected the bombed towns of Japan, testified:

In Hiroshima I was prepared for radically different sights.
But, to my surprise,
Hiroshima looked exactly like all the other burned-out cities in Japan.

There was a familiar pink blot, about two miles in diameter.
It was dotted with charred trees and telephone poles. Only one of the cities twenty bridges was down.
Hiroshima's clusters of modern buildings in the downtown section stood upright.

It was obvious that
the blast could NOT have been so powerful as we had been led to believe.
It was extensive blast rather than intensive.

I had heard of buildings instantly consumed by unprecedented heat. Yet here I saw the buildings structurally intact, and what is more, topped by undamaged flag poles, lightning rods, painted railings, air raid precaution signs and other comparatively fragile objects.

At the T-bridge, the aiming point for the atomic bomb, I looked for the "bald spot" where everything presumably had been vaporized in the twinkling of an eye. It wasn't there or anywhere else. I could find no traces of unusual phenomena."

https://www.flashnewsgroups.com/hoax/nuclear-hoax/index.htm


"PS there was no reason to drop the two bombs on Hirshima and Nagasaki because Japan was ready to surrender. But the military industrial establishment that is now controlling the US wanted to see what the effect an atomic bomb have on humans!Nice people!"

https://my.wealthyaffiliate.com/scorpio15/blog/the-atomic-bomb-hoax
 
"No Atom bombs have ever been used even during the Vietnam war where every other despicable weapon was used including chemicals. The USA lost this war.

No dictator or mad leader has ever used nuclear weapons.


All photos and film of atomic explosions are easily proven fake http://mileswmathis.com/trinity.pdf "

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/qa/Bo/LogicalFallacies/LDl6U5fe/Atom_bombs_do_not_work

Emma: Fear of retaliation is not a workable reason anywhere a war was engaged with countries who did not have atomic bombs, like Vietnam.
And the most strange thing about Vietnam is that the USA lost the war. Why did they not use the atomic bomb to win the war?

The made up story that extraterrestrials have been blocking further explosion in inhabited areas explain these anomalies, instead.

ETs will only put a final end to this threat, though, when man gets to the point of burning his ships, the point of no return, when the planet would literally blow up in a mad war if ETs did not intervene.

That is when the ETs will be allowed to take over the planet by the galactic law of non intervention, the story goes. In the Sixties a group in Denmark was supposedly directed by Space Jesus to build an atomic shelter which was to be given preferencially to pregnant women in case of atomic war, a gesture from earthlings to demonstrate their willingness to protect life, and thus deserve to be helped from outside.

In reality, this made up story of man being able to blow up the planet because of his madness is just one more propaganda to convince us that the further development of technology must be strictly watched, a strategy that the elite needs to ensure nothing is developed that will erode their power over people, a strategy that has its roots when the industrial revolution began to occur:
https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/how-is-our-world-going-to-be-re-shaped-and-why-the-industrial-revolution.2521

By believing that the planet avoided global extinction only because we were helped by more intelligent beings (ETs first and Jesus later), we will be keen to accept such control on technological and scientifical research, and we will have an instinctual rejection and suspicion against everything that is modern technology, which is exactly what the elite wants.

Messages from supposed ETs since the first atomic bombs dropped, stress the unbalance in modern earth man, who has progressed technologically in great measure but not as much spiritually, thus setting the conditions for not realizing or not caring for the damage he can cause.

Even though ETs will be later exposed as demons, this principle will most probably be supported also by the "good" Jesus coming to reign on earth for 1000 years:
https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/invest-now-in-space-jesus.2364/#post-12287
https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/drugs-and-counter-culture.1162/#post-12289

Our going backward to agricultural medieval times will be presented to us then as the necessary lesson we need to learn after the apocalipse, before we are able to handle more advanced technology.

We must become more spiritual, that is first we must learn to live in peace all together and also abandon greed, as greed will be the major scapesgoat for what happened.


Sheeps who live in peace and accept poverty (that is sheeps that are not greedy) are the perfect Sheeps for the Shephers (that is the elite).

Only the elite has the right to be greedy, which is the reason why all this plan has been set up. But they will pretend not to be greedy at all.
 
Another couple of anomalies:

"Atomic bombs were and are just propaganda. There is no evidence that they worked 1945 or later. The atomic bomb was invented pseudoscientific style by an American - Robert O Lyssenko - a cousin of Trofim - but assisted by A. Einstein and encouraged by Roosevelt!

The "atomic bombs" were actually invented by science fiction writer H.G Wells already 1913 nearly 30 years before US president Roosevelt started the Manhattan Project. Wells' The World Set Free describes cities around the world being devastated by what he called "atomic bombs". Wells predicted not only the mushroom cloud we associate with atomic bombs, but their lasting radiation as well."

https://www.flashnewsgroups.com/hoax/nuclear-hoax/index.htm

One anomaly is that A.Einstein assisted in the creation of the myth. Maybe few know that Einstein was one of the prominent people who supported pacifism and the creation of a one world government to ensure peace.

Anybody working for a one world government look always part of the plan to create a worlwide dictatorship, the plan of the "Antichrist".

The second anomaly is obviously the "forecast" in fiction of a scenario that is going to be reproduced. The atomic bomb had not yet been invented but somebody knew how its explosion would appear, together with its lasting radiation effects...
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Emma,

I've copied a couple of earlier posts for context, and added a (?) to the thread title, because I don't want anyone to be confused about this website's editorial position.

Alexander P. deSeversky said:
It was obvious that the blast could NOT have been so powerful as we had been led to believe.
It was extensive blast rather than intensive.
According to the official story: the reason that there was no crater or region of extraordinarily intensive blast effect at Hiroshima or Nagasaki, is that the cities were destroyed by air bursts. The Hiroshima explosion was at about 1900 feet altitude, while Nagasaki was about 1650 feet.

The "atomic bombs" were actually invented by science fiction writer H.G Wells already 1913 nearly 30 years before US president Roosevelt started the Manhattan Project. Wells' The World Set Free describes cities around the world being devastated by what he called "atomic bombs". Wells predicted not only the mushroom cloud we associate with atomic bombs, but their lasting radiation as well."
Since Isaac Newton, scientists had been speculating that energy and matter were interconvertible. The formula E=kMC2, k>0.5 was first written down in 1873. When radioactivity was discovered in 1897, it was immediately clear that it was associated with enormous energy, latent within matter. Einstein's Theory of Relativity in 1905 provided a proof of the universal equivalence of mass & energy.

Therefore: Wells' description of the atomic bomb was an extrapolation based on well-known science of the time.

Emma: Fear of retaliation is not a workable reason anywhere a war was engaged with countries who did not have atomic bombs, like Vietnam.
And the most strange thing about Vietnam is that the USA lost the war. Why did they not use the atomic bomb to win the war?
I agree with Suchender, that the USA had accomplished its objectives in Vietnam, and had no real need to win, or even to continue. Also: I believe that there was a perception that the North Vietnamese were proxies of the Soviets. As such, there was some concern that a nuclear attack might indeed draw nuclear retaliation.

In reality, this made up story of man being able to blow up the planet because of his madness is just one more propaganda to convince us that the further development of technology must be strictly watched,
As I said earlier, I would be delighted if it turns out that nuclear weapons are a hoax.

But, I still don't see anything here except pages upon pages of incredulity, logical fallacies, and dubious arguments. I am willing to admit that some of the photographic record might be fake, but that seems perfectly reasonable if actual photographs were either: (a) unavailable for technical reasons, (b) withheld because they would have revealed classified information, or (c) not sufficiently impressive-looking.

If you look into it, Emma, you'll find that there is a tremendous amount of documentary & eyewitness evidence that establishes that nuclear weapons are real. I've only begun to scratch the surface with the posts now appearing at the top of this thread.

Given the situation with 9/11 and other fake news, and the desperately pathetic state of our mass media today, I can certainly understand why people are inclined to be skeptical about literally everything. But the mass media are not miracle workers, and I don't see how they could sustain such a massive hoax involving multiple national governments, multiple test sites, multiple manufacturing facilities, and scientists, engineers and eyewitnesses that must number in the tens of thousands by now.

And furthermore, the development of technology over the centuries since the industrial revolution, has truthfully led to massive problems. Resource depletion, toxic ecocide, and global climate change are leading inexorably to a massive population crash, whether the elites want it or not. And, whether we have a nuclear war, or not.

I don't even see how the elite are going to escape the fate of extinction that awaits the rest of the human race, if we don't make some massive changes, and soon.

And last but not least, I worry that people are too complacent about the possibilities for nuclear war. If people were more properly concerned about this, they wouldn't vote for nut cases like Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.
 
I've copied a couple of earlier posts for context, and added a (?) to the thread title, because I don't want anyone to be confused about this website's editorial position.
I don't find it correct. This is a forum and not your blog. Everybody is entitled to start a thread, which might differ from your point of view. Your editorial position is well known through your blog and through your answers in the forum.

If you want to add a (?) it's fine, but by putting your earlier posts first you twist the meaning of my thread. First posts are obviously read first and one might not read the rest. You just seem to wanting to bury the rest.

If you feel the need for context I am the one supposed to write it, since I started this thread. And I will be happy to state that my view differs from the blog's authors one, so nobody gets confused. In other cases I've seen editors just stating that the views expressed in comments do not necessarily correspond to the editors'ones. So, to solve the problem, you could just make a clear statement that everybody can read before accessing the forum.
 
I myself was an electronics engineer & cognitive psychologist, so my exposure to nuclear engineering was limited. I had one undergraduate class on nuclear particle physics, and I toured the lab where my school had an experimental nuclear reactor. It's hard for me to believe that all my professors and fellow students were completely faking all that science and technology, experimentally demonstrated right on campus.
In fact you are talking about nuclear reactor, not about atomic bombs factory.

All your professors and fellow students were not faking anything. The reactor was working properly I guess. The only thing wrong, they might believe, as most have been induced to think, that nuclear reactors can explode.

Myths About Nuclear Energy

# 2: A nuclear reactor can explode like a nuclear bomb.

Truth:
It is impossible for a reactor to explode like a nuclear weapon; these weapons contain very special materials in very particular configurations, neither of which are present in a nuclear reactor.

http://nuclearconnect.org/know-nuclear/talking-nuclear/top-10-myths-about-nuclear-energy

So you see, it's not only Anders Björkman who is saying that a nuclear reactor cannot explode, but the whole ANS (American Nuclear Society):

The American Nuclear Society (ANS) is a not-for-profit, international, scientific and educational organization. It was established by a group of individuals who recognized the need to unify the professional activities within the various fields of nuclear science and technology. December 11, 1954, marks the Society's historic beginning at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C. ANS has since developed a diverse membership composed of approximately 11,000 engineers, scientists, administrators, and educators representing 1,600 plus corporations, educational institutions, and government agencies. It is governed by four officers and a board of directors elected by the membership.

http://www.ans.org/about/
 
Since Isaac Newton, scientists had been speculating that energy and matter were interconvertible. The formula E=kMC2, k>0.5 was first written down in 1873. When radioactivity was discovered in 1897, it was immediately clear that it was associated with enormous energy, latent within matter. Einstein's Theory of Relativity in 1905 provided a proof of the universal equivalence of mass & energy.

Therefore: Wells' description of the atomic bomb was an extrapolation based on well-known science of the time.
About Einstein, for the moment just let me show you this, then I'll say something.



https://masonichallsthelens.co.uk/albert-einstein?jjj=1562369794568436
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I don't find it correct. This is a forum and not your blog. Everybody is entitled to start a thread, which might differ from your point of view. Your editorial position is well known through your blog and through your answers in the forum.

If you want to add a (?) it's fine, but by putting your earlier posts first you twist the meaning of my thread. First posts are obviously read first and one might not read the rest. You just seem to wanting to bury the rest.
That's fair. I want to be an honest and trustworthy moderator. So I've moved my comments back to the 6th post in the thread, where they had been linked to an older thread before.

Thanks for accepting the (?) in the title. I do feel that it's a discussion forum attached to my blog. The title of a thread sets the theme for the thread more than anything else, and tends to be the first thing that shows up on search engine summaries.

All your professors and fellow students were not faking anything. The reactor was working properly I guess. The only thing wrong, they might believe, as most have been induced to think, that nuclear reactors can explode.
No, none of us were the least bit worried that the experimental reactor was going to explode. Nuclear reactors don't explode. Nuclear bombs explode.

If you want to make a bomb, you need highly enriched uranium-235 or plutonium-239, and lots of it. And highly specialized trigger devices. But, the basic principle of the atomic bomb is the release of energy by fission of U-235 or PU-239, initiated by a neutron impact. Each fissioning atom releases more neutrons. And this entire process is exactly the same, whether it happens in a reactor or a bomb.

The bomb is designed with a higher density of fissile material, and a greater flux of neutrons, so as to produce a much greater rate of reactions than in the reactor. But it's exactly the same nuclear reaction.

Why would anyone presume that's impossible?

Lots of great scientists were Freemasons. Giles Gaffney was in here trying to tell us that the earth is flat, because some of the scientists who said it's spherical were Freemasons. But this is an ad hominem fallacy, attacking the man rather than the scientific argument.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, the mass-energy equivalence was already well known among physicists when Einstein wrote about it.
 
Last edited:
Greetings Emma. Thank you so much for digging up the info on Big Al Einstein, head honcho of the Prohibition Era (i.e. the prohibition that nothing can travel faster than light) - while I'd like to believe his Masonic connection, I also have to remain cautious since Einstein is often falsely attributed the claim that compound interest was the greatest of all inventions! Einstein is cunning and manipulative - a true and nefarious genius at philosophy - so I would not think him stupid enough to make such a claim about compound interest, given its obvious connection to Jews and banking.
Lots of great scientists were Freemasons. Giles Gaffney was in here trying to tell us that the earth is flat, because some of the scientists who said it's spherical were Freemasons. But this is an ad hominem fallacy, attacking the man rather than the scientific argument.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, the mass-energy equivalence was already well known among physicists when Einstein wrote about it.
All very true Jerry - and not appreciated by most scientists.

Another well known Freemason scientist was of course Isaac Newton (https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Isaac-Newtons-Freemasonry/Alain-Bauer/9781594771729 ) as opposed to Galileo whom one could only label a Mason merely because his opposed the obtuse early teachings of the Catholic Church, most Catholics otherwise overtly anti-Freemason.

Aaah! You are making it so easy for me, Jerry and Emma!:)

Yours faithfully
Claude, not too badly this time as I near leaving Australia for the 6th time!
 
Top