Is there more to nuclear bombs than we know?

[sarmaticus]

10/10 did not address's the questions I asked regard your assertion of the specific things I was incorrect about.

Again, tons of projection here. You're acting like a redditor. Accusing others of unhinged hate when you're telling people they lack the IQ depth to understand your arguments is pretty rich.

You're free to PM me if you're worried about the ban hammer...

You're the typical boring poster that is proud of machinegunning tons of posts usually long wall of texts but lack of substance or truth can be often (not always) found in the content.

I found out today only that there's a thread that touches the subject, hop on there.

If there's something that it's not covered there and sparks your curiosity, feel free to dm me and I'll try to clarify that point.

 

[Get2choppaaa]

You're the typical boring poster that is proud of machinegunning tons of posts usually long wall of texts but lack of substance or truth can be often (not always) found in the content.

My reaction score and community acceptance corroborates otherwise good sir.

In your 34 posts, most of which are one or two sentence quips, you've said very little sir.

I found out today only that there's a thread that touches the subject, hop on there.

If there's something that it's not covered there and sparks your curiosity, feel free to dm me and I'll try to clarify that point.

You made a claim, the onus is on you to convince or clarify. Otherwise you're just being an argumentative cad. Hardly posting in good faith here.

 

[sarmaticus]

My reaction score and community acceptance corroborates otherwise good sir.

In your 34 posts, most of which are one or two sentence quips, you've said very little sir.







You made a claim, the onus is on you to convince or clarify. Otherwise you're just being an argumentative cad. Hardly posting in good faith here.

/yawn

With every sentence you're confirming me you're a normie with a vindicative behavior. Prove otherwise or strive for better.

Hop on there and try to educate yourself on the subject, that's not my duty. Best education is self education (and personal research) not the one that you're regurgitating on these subjects, without even suspecting.

 

[RedLagoon]

/yawn

With every sentence you're confirming me you're a normie with a vindicative behavior. Prove otherwise or strive for better.

Hop on there and try to educate yourself on the subject, that's not my duty. Best education is self education (and personal research) not the one that you're regurgitating on these subjects, without even suspecting.

If we are so blessed to have you here then why don't you enlighten us on the subject of (what was it again?) nuclear weapons instead of arguing for arguments sake.

 

[sarmaticus]

If we are so blessed to have you here then why don't you enlighten us on the subject of (what was it again?) nuclear weapons instead of arguing for arguments sake.

You guys working in pack like hyenas when harassing a person. The aggression comes from very deep and is very persistent when the programming is attacked..

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fire bombed like Tokyo (no visual difference).

Again, sufficient material was presented in this thread to at least give it a serious thought, but no, you guys are always back at a clean new drawing board like nothing was discussed or presented here. This is sophistry (or you're something else). You both just argue in bad faith, is my conclusion and losing everyone's time here.

 

[RedLagoon]

You guys working in pack like hyenas when harassing a person. The aggression comes from very deep and is very persistent when the programming is attacked..

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fire bombed like Tokyo (no visual difference).

Again, sufficient material was presented in this thread to at least give it a serious thought, but no, you guys are always back at a clean new drawing board like nothing was discussed or presented here. This is sophistry (or you're something else). You both just argue in bad faith, is my conclusion and losing everyone's time here.



View attachment 6173

Let's say I'm enticed by your argument, why be so aggressive about it? Can't we have a normal or fair discourse about this? Who are you trying to convince, it seems to me you're only trying to stir the pot and we've had quite a few of them here lately.

(Iknow you judge people on their edits) but how am I or 'us' harassing you? You should've worn pink today.

 

[sarmaticus]

Let's say I'm enticed by your argument, why be so aggressive about it? Can't we have a normal or fair discourse about this? Who are you trying to convince, it seems to me you're only trying to stir the pot and we've had quite a few of them here lately.

(Iknow you judge people on their edits) but how am I or 'us' harassing you? You should've worn pink today.

Are you reading/going through the posts and presented evidence so far in the thread? I have replied to you with some evidence, like others did before me.. Are you reading it or you're just a glowie stirring the waters and accusing the others of doing it?

 

[KomnenAl]

View attachment 6173

Wow, pics with words underneeth them. I'm convinced.

 

[RedLagoon]

Are you reading/going through the posts and presented evidence so far in the thread? I have replied to you with some evidence, like others did before me.. Are you reading it or you're just a glowie stirring the waters and accusing the others of doing it?

You obviously are on this forum to troll. You're like the chubby girl wearing the nicest dress. She's cute but doesn't bring anything else but her weight to the party.

 

[sarmaticus]

You obviously are on this forum to troll. You're like the chubby girl wearing the nicest dress. She's cute but doesn't bring anything else but her weight to the party.

You're glowing buddy and you're not the only one it seems...

Edit:

@ban requestors...

If modding here is something worthy to take it seriously, we all should be warned for having a hostile dialog in this thread.

Calling me to be here only for trolling while some posters might remember me posting (not that frequently) decent stuff on RVF for a couple of years, is trolling at best and possibly glowie at worst.

@RedLagoon and @Get2choppaaa Present hard evidence nukes exist, I am all eyes.

 

[Get2choppaaa]

You're glowing buddy and you're not the only one it seems...

Edit:

@ban requestors...

If modding here is something worthy to take it seriously, we all should be warned for having a hostile dialog in this thread.

Calling me to be here only for trolling while some posters might remember me posting (not that frequently) decent stuff on RVF for a couple of years, is trolling at best and possibly glowie at worst.

@RedLagoon and @Get2choppaaa Present hard evidence nukes exist, I am all eyes.

Thats not how the argument works.

Simply calling me a boring normie for not accepting your posts does not an argument make good sir.

If someone is making an assumption, you are stating it to be false, its YOU whom has to disprove the accepted hypothesis.

My background in the military as an artillery officer in the Marine Corps, and my understanding of nuclear artillery, which was absolutely a thing... leaves me more assured of their existence than some posts on the internet that implies everything is fake.

There are tatical/operational/strategic planning levels that include nuclear arsenal planning. Effectively you suggesting that all of those military officers and that planning is based on something totally not in existance?

Lets accept the premise for 1 second and say its all fire-bombing? If the atom is split or not, but the end result is a catsrophic bomb that causes radiation of children, destruction of large areas of an area ect.... does the mechanism of destruction matter? Net net, at that point its a distiction with out a difference.

Regarding your HG wells post:

 

[sarmaticus]

Thats not how the argument works.

Simply calling me a boring normie for not accepting your posts does not an argument make good sir.

If someone is making an assumption, you are stating it to be false, its YOU whom has to disprove the accepted hypothesis.

My background in the military as an artillery officer in the Marine Corps, and my understanding of nuclear artillery, which was absolutely a thing... leaves me more assured of their existence than some posts on the internet that implies everything is fake.

There are tatical/operational/strategic planning levels that include nuclear arsenal planning. Effectively you suggesting that all of those military officers and that planning is based on something totally not in existance?

Lets accept the premise for 1 second and say its all fire-bombing? If the atom is split or not, but the end result is a catsrophic bomb that causes radiation of children, destruction of large areas of an area ect.... does the mechanism of destruction matter? Net net, at that point its a distiction with out a difference.

Regarding your HG wells post:

View attachment 6194

I get you but the information in this world even in power structures is very compartmentalized when it comes to secret stuff. You'll have access only to slices of information, the critical one will be scrubbed from you, most of it.
It's like you're in the same long limo with some partying dudes and pretending to be with them at the party. No you're just the driver of that limo.

You were taught about nuclear artillery on paper, have you also fired a nuclear round?

I was raised with this stuff but I grew to question it more and more. The most important teachings of my father were techniques of entering and exiting the orbit of the earth, nuclear fission and fusion and relativity theory. I have doubts for most of this now, this is how I am, I research and doubt stuff despite being exposed to it for years even by my beloved father (he was an officer too like both of my grand fathers of which one was AA artillery officer - my father's father).

I was geographically close to Chernobyl when the 'nuclear disaster' happened. All I was hearing was how ill we all will fall (and should take iodine tablets) only to have one colleague from school die of leukemia in 1991 after (5 ?) years of the alleged disaster which of course was immediately attributed to the Chernobyl radiation, but no one else. I simply refuse to accept he died from that cause after years, that's bs.
With Chernobyl accident in mind, living and surviving it, I think of the Fukushima 'accident'. I also take that with a grain of salt. Shaky stuff, at least for me.

 

[scorpion]

If modding here is something worthy to take it seriously, we all should be warned for having a hostile dialog in this thread.

Consider this your warning.

Let's all try to limit the snark and condescension and discuss the topic at hand in good faith.

 

[Rational1]

What is the reason any of you are engaging with any of these trolls? Clearly if they believe these ideas about no nukes, flat earth, space nonsense they are deficient. Don’t engage them at all, and ignore them completely. Don’t try to convince them or bring them to your side, as they will never be convinced. You are being played and they are using your egos against you. They are misinformation agent frauds.

It amazes me that even the moderator above talks about ‘discussing the topic in good faith’

No just ignore every single one who is spouting gibberish. If all the members did that they’d be gone in a few months. Again they are misinformation psyop trolls. After this post I will never engage with any one who spouts this flat earth / nuke nonsense again on this forum.

 

[scorpion]

What is the reason any of you are engaging with any of these trolls? Clearly if they believe these ideas about no nukes, flat earth, space nonsense they are deficient. Don’t engage them at all, and ignore them completely. Don’t try to convince them or bring them to your side, as they will never be convinced. You are being played and they are using your egos against you. They are misinformation agent frauds.

It amazes me that even the moderator above talks about ‘discussing the topic in good faith’

No just ignore every single one who is spouting gibberish. If all the members did that they’d be gone in a few months. Again they are misinformation psyop trolls. After this post I will never engage with any one who spouts this flat earth / nuke nonsense again on this forum.

I personally agree with you. But I also believe in open and polite debate, and that sunlight is the best disinfectant. When we started this forum, I made it very clear that my moderation policy tends toward laissez-faire. That means that we will inevitably have some threads discussing topics that most members regard as kooky. But I think that is preferable to stifling debate by declaring certain topics verboten. And as you point out, participation in these threads is entirely voluntary. No one has to engage with the poster.

 

[GuitarVH]

What is the reason any of you are engaging with any of these trolls? Clearly if they believe these ideas about no nukes, flat earth, space nonsense they are deficient. Don’t engage them at all, and ignore them completely. Don’t try to convince them or bring them to your side, as they will never be convinced. You are being played and they are using your egos against you. They are misinformation agent frauds.

It amazes me that even the moderator above talks about ‘discussing the topic in good faith’

No just ignore every single one who is spouting gibberish. If all the members did that they’d be gone in a few months. Again they are misinformation psyop trolls. After this post I will never engage with any one who spouts this flat earth / nuke nonsense again on this forum.

According to this 4 day old new account with a total of 4 posts, this thread shouldn't exist and there should be no discussion of it at all. Yet in his 4th post, he went out of his way to post here.

He's also an expert in psyops, trolling, psychology and egos according to his above post.

Thanks for your advice in guiding us how we should think. What would we do without you?

Moderator - please institute the policy of a minimum number of posts such as 50 before a newbie can comment in the Deep Forum. This is absolutely ludicrous and annoying.

 

[staddlelateen]

I personally agree with you. But I also believe in open and polite debate, and that sunlight is the best disinfectant. When we started this forum, I made it very clear that my moderation policy tends toward laissez-faire. That means that we will inevitably have some threads discussing topics that most members regard as kooky. But I think that is preferable to stifling debate by declaring certain topics verboten. And as you point out, participation in these threads is entirely voluntary. No one has to engage with the poster.

This is the right approach. Men need to be able to engage with topics, even controversial ones, in a dispassionate and rational manner. The feminization of our society has taught everyone, including men, that if they feel personally offended, that’s enough to shut a discussion down. No, I’m sorry, but if you cannot control your emotions, then you can just leave. The rest of us will continue to discuss these topics with a level head.

 

[RedLagoon]

This is the right approach. Men need to be able to engage with topics, even controversial ones, in a dispassionate and rational manner. The feminization of our society has taught everyone, including men, that if they feel personally offended, that’s enough to shut a discussion down. No, I’m sorry, but if you cannot control your emotions, then you can just leave. The rest of us will continue to discuss these topics with a level head.

And that's when a moderator comes in, arguing someone on a forum who's in bad faith is useless. This has nothing to do with ego but all to do with trying to keep this tiny patch of the internet semi-clean. People (still) complain about the ban hammer that Roosh used but we didn't have the amount of trolls that we now have here. This is also a thread that is now going off topic which I guess was the tended idea.

 

[sarmaticus]

This is also a thread that is now going off topic which I guess was the tended idea.

Sure but meanwhile, myself, a 'troll', posted twice on topic to communicate my thoughts. @Get2choppaaa also posted something meaningful.
Yourself?

I am genuinely trying to get convinced otherwise, but based on this thread's evidence, my own research so far, plus me living though some related situations, I have to empirically 'Occam's Razer' this to a - No, they don't exist. But again, I'm still open to discuss this and be convinced otherwise.

 

[staddlelateen]

And that's when a moderator comes in, arguing someone on a forum who's in bad faith is useless. This has nothing to do with ego but all to do with trying to keep this tiny patch of the internet semi-clean. People (still) complain about the ban hammer that Roosh used but we didn't have the amount of trolls that we now have here. This is also a thread that is now going off topic which I guess was the tended idea.

It's a fine line for sure, but the mods here do an amazing job. Let's give a round of applause for our mods.

Back on topic, I encountered the idea that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were firebombed decades ago. I remember that the evidence that the two cities were firebombed much like Dresden and Tokyo was very convincing. It's entirely possible that the atomic bomb had not been fully developed at that point in the war, and it was staged much like the moon landing. It would be a good way to project power and hegemony at the end of the second world war and to dissuade countries from starting another world war in the immediate years to follow.

Now, it does not follow that atomic weapons don't exist at all. I don't believe that. It's likely that sometime after WW2 some form of functional atomic weapons were produced. The science behind atomic weapons is actually fairly straight forward, is well understood, and is taught in many University level physics courses. I actually think nuclear weapons are more widespread than we are lead to believe. It's very likely that the Mexican cartels currently have one.

Additionally, if nuclear weapons didn't exist at all, it wouldn't make sense that countries like Iran and North Korea would be so dedicated in developing a nuclear weapons program. Additionally, if nuclear weapons were just a big psy-op, then the US would have already invaded Iran and North Korea, as there would be no concern about nuclear retaliation from Russia or China.