The Atomic Bomb Hoax(?)

[Jerry Russell]

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.

If we are going to rely on the ANS (a trade association) as an authority: isn't it curious that they are implicitly endorsing the fact that nuclear weapons do explode, owing to their very special materials and very particular configurations?

while I'd like to believe his Masonic connection, I also have to remain cautious

Thanks for the skepticism! Although Masonic Hall of St. Helens states that Einstein was a Freemason, they don't present any evidence. With a quick Google search, the closest thing I could find to a source for this rumor is here:

http://www.james-c-spencer.com/einstein-goes-bananas.html

In January 1933, Albert Einstein and his wife Eloise travelled through the Panama Canal and made a secret stop in Puerto Armuelles. There is speculation that Einstein was setting up an "underground railway" for Jews escaping the coming horror in Europe.... Hank Blair, was reportedly a mason and speculation abounds that he was working with Einstein to help refugees escape the coming holocaust in Europe, using the Great White Fleet of banana boats owned by the United Fruit Company. Despite the belief held by many, Einstein, it appears was NOT a freemason. However, he may have had contacts in the craft that enabled him to help Jewish musicians and intellectuals to escape to America.​

 

[Emma Robertson]

If we are going to rely on the ANS (a trade association) as an authority: isn't it curious that they are implicitly endorsing the fact that nuclear weapons do explode, owing to their very special materials and very particular configurations?

No, I don't find it curious. If they know that atomic bombs don't explode they cannot affirm it publicly or they will incurr censorship.
And it is also possible that they honestly believe, like many, that it's true that atomic bombs explode. If they haven't done personal tests themselves it's quite possible. The Swedish believed it worked and made their own experimentation to develop the bomb. They then decided not to go on, probably because they found out it didn't work.

Anders Björkman, the person who is affirming that they cannot explode, lived in Japan and noticed that there were no signs of atomic explosions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that's why he became suspicious and reasoned about the functioning of the bomb.

 

[Emma Robertson]

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.

Thank you, I truly appreciate that.

 

[Tyrone McCloskey]

This topic/debate has always exhausted me. I have family going back to the war involved in military/nuclear stuff and they lived on a need to know basis, whatever their specialty. And they followed orders. Like me, a civilian, they were told things they must accept as fact, and they have studied theories, tested components and the gone home and watched the news (just like me). I have never had them shake me of my atheism regarding this vengeful, bloodthirsty, technocratic replacement for Yahweh and all the other archetypal desert gods that have flavored the literary tropes that make up official history.
The argument isn't, at root, about military strategy, or very wealthy people annihilating masses of little people over ideological differences (which they have created and promoted as part of their divide and conquer strategy), or even controlling resources (which their banks have a firm grip on). The argument has come down to attempting to scale two emotionally challenging firewalls: Scientists who believe the weapons can destroy on a large scale who then use their acumen to convince lay people that the science is sound, if largely incomprehensible, like bishops of old trying to convince the ignorant that their souls are forever in the balance and that compliance with authority will assure salvation (once they are mercifully dead, of course) and the stray eyewitness/victims of "tests" claiming their health has been severely compromised by what the doctors who treat them get them to accept regarding the cause and nature of their condition. (Visionaries who have born witness to the Almighty ablaze in His justifiable wrath).
Herman Kahn, Fritz Kraemer, Heinz Alfred Kissinger, Dr. Strangelove- I just can't exist in a paradigm where these clowns dictate reality. The billiard balls rolling around on the cosmic green felt of our solar system have more say in what civilizations come and go by natural means than these homunculi shekeleering for the financial ogres that presume to control us.
I guess what I'm bellyaching about is that there will never be enough proof from my vantage point to buy into the concept of nukes so I'm just not going to lose sleep over it.
No help here.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Hi Tyrone, welcome back.

Scientists who believe the weapons can destroy on a large scale who then use their acumen to convince lay people that the science is sound, if largely incomprehensible

I guess I'm one of those scientists, though I don't think there's anything incomprehensible about it. On the contrary, I see a huge difference between science and old-time religion: the science is all based on reproducible experiments & straightforward thinking.

and the stray eyewitness/victims of "tests" claiming their health has been severely compromised by what the doctors who treat them get them to accept regarding the cause and nature of their condition.

This is the part that really ought to be convincing. There aren't just a few stray eyewitnesses, there should be thousands or tens of thousands of witnesses to the many above-ground tests. And they're easy to find. There are many posts to the Internet. Some of them are interviewed in the video above in this thread. If you cared to, you could call some up to verify that they tell the same story. This is still oral history of living eyewitnesses, although this time will end due to the above-ground test ban treaty.

They say they've seen and experienced these gigantic nuclear fireballs, which can't possibly be mistaken for anything else. Even if they're told to look the other way, they see the light so bright that it burns through the back of their head to their eyeballs.

And they know about their health conditions, which are also very real. How else would you explain their strange diseases, if not caused by radioactive fallout from the tests they witnessed?

It's an entirely different situation with witnesses to Yahweh. They are generally testifying to some vague internal spiritual feeling, not to anything real that anyone could touch.

I guess what I'm bellyaching about is that there will never be enough proof from my vantage point to buy into the concept of nukes so I'm just not going to lose sleep over it.

I think that anybody who really wanted to know, could directly confirm the existence of nuclear weapons by getting a seismograph, and locating it near a test site. The earth movements associated with nuclear blasts are very distinctive, with rapid onset of intense vibrations. Easily distinguished from earthquakes, and too powerful to be anything else.

If there never could be enough proof, aren't you expressing a sort of religious conviction that nukes don't exist? Perhaps based on a dislike of the Kahn, Kissinger & Strangelove types who have created them?

Not trying to make you lose sleep, though....

 

[Tyrone McCloskey]

“When the flash hit you, you could see the x-rays of your hands through your closed eyes,” he said. “Then the heat hit you, and that was as if someone my size had caught fire and walked through me. It was an experience that was unearthing. It was so strange. There were guys with bruises and broken legs. We couldn’t believe it. To say it was frightening is an understatement. I think it all shocked us into silence.”
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/wjk3wb/what-does-a-nuclear-bomb-blast-feel-like
(That sounds like it would be fatal)

“And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone; and the heads of the horses were like the heads of lions, and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.
“By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.”
Rev. 9:17-18

The refitting from religion to scientism is so exact at times it makes my head hurt. Too pat.
https://endtimestruth.com/world-war-iii/nuclear-war-great-tribulation/

My gripe about eyewitness testimony is that these guys were military. Are they still? The concept of the lifetime actor is not unfamiliar here.

Somewhere in the pile of topics on this subject at Clues Forum, there is testimony of a Japanese woman who claimed that Hiroshima was evacuated days before the bomb was dropped. She told this to a Clues member, not to a media source. Doesn't mean that's real, either. The forum members also look at the hinky photos and I remind everyone that our sole source for nuclear blast films is the military.

Not an ironclad argument, granted, and I think an atheist can be just as stubborn as a zealot. I should label myself an agnostic with some prejudice.

 

[Jerry Russell]

My gripe about eyewitness testimony is that these guys were military. Are they still?

No, you would need more than an entire city full of lifetime actors. The last of the above ground tests at Nevada Test Site were in 1962. The mushroom clouds were easily visible from Las Vegas and St. George, Utah. The kids who saw those explosions would be about my age.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/atomic-tourism-nevada/

...The mushroom cloud associated with the bomb became an icon for Las Vegas, adorning postcards, candy, toys, showgirls' headdresses and more. Las Vegas establishments like the Flamingo and the Sands hawked the Atomic Cocktail, the Atomic Hairdo and Miss Atomic Bomb beauty contests.​

​

Atomic Tourism​

​

The Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce issued a calendar for tourists, listing the scheduled times of the bomb detonations and the best places to view them. The Sky Room at the Desert Inn, offering a panoramic view of the Nevada horizon, was a favorite watch spot of tourists, as was nearby Mount Charleston. Many tourists packed "atomic box lunches" and had picnics as close to ground zero as the government restrictions would allow. On the eve of detonations, many Las Vegas businesses held "Dawn Bomb Parties." Beginning at midnight, guests would drink and sing until the flash of the bomb lit up the night sky.​

​

One Bomb Every Three Weeks for 12 Years​

​

In addition to generating tourism, the Nevada Test Site also brought thousands of military personnel, thousands of jobs and more than $176 million in federal funds to the region, two-thirds of which went back into Las Vegas' economy. For twelve years, an average of one bomb every three weeks was detonated, at a total of 235 bombs. Flashes from the explosions were so powerful that they could reportedly be seen from as far away as Montana.​

http://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,948447,00.html

During the early 1950s, parents in the little town of St. George in southwestern Utah often woke their children up at 6 a.m., hustled them to the top of Black Hill on the western edge of the community, and let them watch the mushroom clouds rising into the dawn sky over the atomic-bomb testing site in neighboring Nevada. ... A generation later, the awe has turned into fear. Studies now show that an unusually high number of those Utah youngsters exposed to nuclear fallout eventually died of leukemia.​

​

Can you imagine what a propaganda disaster it would be, if the major mass media were all promoting or reporting on nuclear tourism in Las Vegas, and yet the explosions weren't really happening as advertised? How many outraged tourists would complain to all their friends? An unprecedented number of people would wind up red-pilled in the aftermath, and would never believe anything that the government or the media told them, not ever again. In this case, the reports in the mass media are self-verifying.

 

[Richard Stanley]

It's too bad the Russians don't expose all this as a hoax. Bastard sukin sins (sons of bitches)

Oh ... right!!! I said they're all in on IT. Western Bastards of the eastern variety.

 

[Emma Robertson]

No, you would need more than an entire city full of lifetime actors. The last of the above ground tests at Nevada Test Site were in 1962. The mushroom clouds were easily visible from Las Vegas and St. George, Utah.

Can you imagine what a propaganda disaster it would be, if the major mass media were all promoting or reporting on nuclear tourism in Las Vegas, and yet the explosions weren't really happening as advertised?

Definitely the explosions occured. But what actually exploded? We don't know. We are being told it was atomic bombs, but it could be anything.
Actually the very fact that such tourism was created convince me even more that the bombs were fake, because with such tourism they were gathering enough eyewitnesses to prove that the bombs were real. Not only that: in this way they could also gather enough people to expose to radiations to claim later that atomic radiations are deadly. It could then be easy to fake medical studies proving that leucemia affected eyewitnesses.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Definitely the explosions occured. But what actually exploded? We don't know.

If the tourists were not watching atomic bombs, then what? Something bright enough, loud enough, and creating a big enough mushroom cloud, that no one had any doubt these were atomic bombs?

The largest conventional bomb ever used is the MOAB bomb, which contains 18,700 pounds of explosives. That's 9 tons. The nuclear weapons exploded in these tests were anywhere from 10 to 100 kilotons -- that's 1,000 to 10,000 times bigger. The difference between nuclear vs. conventional weapons is huge.

How would it be easy to cause the eyewitnesses to get leukemia afterwards? Slip radium in all their cocktails? How are you going to convince someone that they are dying of leukemia, if that's not what's going on? Do you believe that a geiger counter would have detected radiation falling from the sky after one of these explosions?

Do you realize that before nuclear bombs were invented, already people were getting sick and dying from radiation? For example, Marie Curie, who coined the term "radioactive"? And, the "Radium Girls", who painted watch dials with radioactive luminous paint between 1917 and 1926?

Emma, I can only repeat what I said earlier to Tyrone. You seem to have a faith-based religious conviction, that nuclear weapons do not exist. There is no evidence that could ever convince you otherwise.

 

[Emma Robertson]

If the tourists were not watching atomic bombs, then what? Something bright enough, loud enough, and creating a big enough mushroom cloud, that no one had any doubt these were atomic bombs?

Between the visual mushroom and the sound several seconds elapsed. They said it was because of distance. Yet when I see fireworks in the sky that are just few kilometers from me (in Nevada tourists were about 5 km from the explosions) there is no relevant delay in the sound of the explosions (might be 1 or 2 seconds at most).

This detail makes me think that the visual effect was produced by something that did not make any sound, like a lot of dust, which was followed by actual bombs exploding (normal bombs). If the sound was different from normal bombs, then it could be anything that militaries had developed that had to be a secret. In fireworks we see many gadgets that make different sounds, so there is no limit to the sounds that can be developed. The same for the mushroom cloud.

How would it be easy to cause the eyewitnesses to get leukemia afterwards? Slip radium in all their cocktails? How are you going to convince someone that they are dying of leukemia, if that's not what's going on?

By fake medical studies I meant that we do not really know if eyewitnesses died from leukemia. For example we have fake medical studies to prove that chemotherapy works, so anything is possible.

You seem to have a faith-based religious conviction, that nuclear weapons do not exist. There is no evidence that could ever convince you otherwise.

I could say the same of you. But it's fine.

The point is that the elite wants to live in this world on the surface after the apocalypse. And wants to cause an apocalypse, which means a lot of destruction. So how do you envision this destruction will take place? If they are going to use atomic bombs to perform that, then what about the deadly radiations that will afflict the surface for eons?

 

[Jerry Russell]

Between the visual mushroom and the sound several seconds elapsed. They said it was because of distance. Yet when I see fireworks in the sky that are just few kilometers from me (in Nevada tourists were about 5 km from the explosions) there is no relevant delay in the sound of the explosions (might be 1 or 2 seconds at most).

The speed of sound is 343 meters per second. If indeed you experience only 2 seconds of delay at your fireworks display, your location must be only 700 meters from the fireworks.

Here's a map of the Nevada Test Site: http://www.otherhand.org/home-page/area-51-and-other-strange-places/nevada-test-site-map-1992/

This shows that the town of Mercury, NV is located near the southeast corner of the test range. It's a distance of 90km from downtown Las Vegas. The tests were further away than that. The sonic delay should be over 4 minutes.

Where does this information come from, that the Nevada tourists were only 5km from the explosions? I can imagine that some intrepid hikers might have gotten that close, perhaps hopping military fences to do so. But not these tourists, at their hotel:

And don't go telling me the image is fake. If that were the case, everybody in Las Vegas at the time would've been wise to the deception.

By fake medical studies I meant that we do not really know if eyewitnesses died from leukemia. For example we have fake medical studies to prove that chemotherapy works, so anything is possible.

If I show you a study that says eyewitnesses died from leukemia, that's a sort of evidence. If I show you a video of an eyewitness who says he saw a nuclear explosion, and who says he's dying of leukemia, that's another piece of evidence.

And there certainly are medical studies that show that chemotherapy works. People in my own family have survived for decades after having chemotherapy for cancer. Cancer mortality rates for some types of cancers, especially childhood cancers, are down dramatically.

Chemotherapy might not work as well as we'd like it to. But it does work, and the evidence is readily available.

Now, if you believe that the studies are fake, you need to show some evidence of that. How was the fraud accomplished, and why?

You don't get to just express blanket skepticism. That's not how evidence works.

The point is that the elite wants to live in this world on the surface after the apocalipse. And wants to cause an apocalipse, which means a lot of destruction. So how do you envision this destruction will take place? If they are going to use atomic bombs to perform that, then what about the deadly radiations for eons that will afflict the surface?

Richard would say they aren't going to use the nuclear bombs. I would say that climate change, economic & agricultural failure, and disease could do the job just as effectively.

Or maybe the nuclear arsenals will get used, in spite of the elite's best laid plans to the contrary. In that case, and in spite of their hopes to live in this world, they won't be able to.

 

[Emma Robertson]

If the tourists were not watching atomic bombs, then what? Something bright enough, loud enough, and creating a big enough mushroom cloud, that no one had any doubt these were atomic bombs?

"We often associate nuclear explosions with terrifying mushroom clouds but actually both chemical and nuclear reactions can produce these kinds of clouds. Even naturally occurring volcanic eruptions can produce them. These clouds can form at any altitude from the sudden release and expansion of gases that are less dense than the air around them. The cloud is buoyant so it rises rapidly. Instability inside the cloud creates turbulent vortices that curl downward around the edges forming a vortex ring that draws up a central column or stem. "
http://sciexplorer.blogspot.com/2015/01/chemical-explosions-versus-nuclear.html

"A mushroom cloud is a distinctive pyrocumulus mushroom-shaped cloud of debris/smoke and usually condensed water vapor resulting from a large explosion. The effect is most commonly associated with a nuclear explosion, but any sufficiently energetic detonation or deflagration will produce the same effect. They can be caused by powerful conventional weapons, like thermobaric weapons, including the ATBIP and GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast. Some volcanic eruptions and impact events can produce natural mushroom clouds."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_cloud

 

[Jerry Russell]

We often associate nuclear explosions with terrifying mushroom clouds but actually both chemical and nuclear reactions can produce these kinds of clouds.

Yes, but the nuclear weapons tests were up to 100,000 tons yield (the Sedan test was the biggest) while the MOAB bomb is 11 tons yield. The nuclear weapons were up to 10,000 times bigger. The difference would be completely obvious, in the size of the fireball and the mushroom cloud. To complete the proof, we'd have to calculate the predicted sizes for the two types of weapon, and then compare to the pictures.