Is there more to nuclear bombs than we know?
- Thread starter paternos
- Start date
I watched the first 20 min or so, and then skipped here and there through the rest of the video. It seems like a bit of a compilation stitched together.
So, given that video: to answer my own question whether the claim is that the old footage is fake or just a big nonnuclear explosion.. ...it looks like the claim is a little bit of both.
Some of the videos presented did look fake - like the trees within the blast being in a perfectly straight line. But most the other videos look real enough to me still. I see another claim that they were just filming the rising sun in some cases, which I suppose could be possible. It could also be possible some of these are big explosions with dynamite.
There was discussion on the effects of radiation and that it doesn't seem to impact Hiroshima or Nagasaki now. Also a lengthy section with Galen Winsor talking about radiation dangers being overblown.
On the points I agree:
-I'm sure they wasted (laundered) vast amounts of money doing whatever they were doing developing it.
-They do use it to prop up their humanistic and enlightened science saints like Oppenheimer or Einstein
-They use it to show how powerful they (and we) are. It's an appeal to human pride.
Waste of money, glorification of the weapon and the advancement of an agenda do not mean that the underlying product is necessarily fake, obviously. The reason they need to have you captive for 3 hours is because they can drive down that sales pitch repeatedly, it is well known among salespeople that the longer you can pin down a customer, the more likely he is to buy your product...
As well some of the footage being fake doesn't mean that the whole thing isn't real. It's easier to shoot a documentary in a studio anytime you want than to have to wait for the next explosion and lug a crew and equipment to some island in the Pacific to film it. As well in later years it became known that there were risks associated with being close enough to film a nuclear blast.
As well some of the footage being fake doesn't mean that the whole thing isn't real. It's easier to shoot a documentary in a studio anytime you want than to have to wait for the next explosion and lug a crew and equipment to some island in the Pacific to film it. As well in later years it became known that there were risks associated with being close enough to film a nuclear blast.
Most explosions were real but augmented with special effects, or in the videos are clearly composites and laden with nothings but special effects, courtesy of Hollyweird and Lookout Mountain Studios. Note, real does not denote "atomic." Look earlier in the thread to see the pictures I posted of the alleged Vegas "nukes" compared with their artist renditions. The real explosions had smoke columns and were pretty uneventful, but the postcards all had the fire-breathing appearance with rings around the mushroom clouds. People were basically paying to go see a bunch of dynamite get blown up. The entire premise behind the fearmongering of nuclear weapons is Antichrist, which is interesting because you pointed out in an earlier post it doesn't matter how one dies. No, it does not. Of course different theological persuasions will always differ on the state of grace of the dead, but the notion that these weapons have the capability to destroy the earth and wipeout mankind, and all life for that matter is a superstition. Some claims if enough of them "go off" that the entire "atmosphere will be ignited and everything will die," thus rendering the fate of mankind some insignificant cosmic whoopsy-daisy. I see Christians commonly mistaking this for a tie-in with Revelations and the end of the world but what they fail to see is the lies that surround all of these.
The entire concept of believing in the effect nuclear weapons to the degree that is accepted in the mainstream is the same death-cult lunacy that surrounds asteroids, meteors, lethal solar flares, and every other fictitious extinction-level-event propagandized by atheists, secularists, and those who know not God.
There is no proof that they can fit an atom-smashing plutonium or uranium chemically-enhanced bomb inside of a suitcase and destroy an entire city, there is only "classified information," which I'm sure some shill on here or another forum will gladly tell you to accept at face value for your own good.
Ah, I think I see the center of the objection to the nuclear fear-mongering now. Yes, I'd agree that these apocalyptic claims for nuclear weapons are overblown and most likely stressed for the very purpose of maneuvering in an antichrist spirit and situation.
Is there space here to debate? Could nuclear weapons be essentially real but not to the extent of being able to level a city with a suitcase?
Amen.
There is this faith that the American president has a red button and if he presses it the atomic bombs go off all across the world destroying everything - the atmosphere ignited.
A power which makes him like God. "Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
I'm a sure none have this power, the president is a sack of bones like all of us, also a son of God, not more powerful, not less. The same.
The cult of this time is that we believe some men have godly powers; This is stimulated with sports, propaganda, politics, elonmuskanity.
What if man is just man? A sinner? Weak? Getting older? Broken?
When i was young a car felt magical, and when I grew older, i could understand all parts, it's wondrous how it works together, but it's also very simple. But nothing beats the wonder of God, how a seed grow to a tree, a child is born.
They want us to look up to man or fear man, that's a sin, it's stealing from God.
It is very similar to many other liberal attempts at besmirching man with a sense of Lovecraftian dread and cosmic negligence, except without all the riveting storytelling. The essence of destroying ourselves utterly, down to the last "atom," is the most anti-Creationist belief one could hold, and completely based in abstract notions without a single shred of evidence. It too requires faith, just of the opposite kind. Instead of faith for love it is faith for fear and nothingness. It is similar with modern day technological abominations like genetic engineering (cloning, live forever, transfer "consciousness" into computer and other anti-God fairytales) as well as CERN (that doesn't really do anything for all we know). The trajectory of a society that is allegedly so advanced it can destroy itself in a second but is really some kind of sadomasochistic glutton that enjoys the slow generational self-destruction cannot be taken seriously in its claims of advanced science.
The amorality of our contemporary progressives reveals their hands to be empty of fruit that has never truly been labored for, nor can it be because it is a toil of death.
Yes, by all means please, let us explore this. There are all kinds of chemical reactions that create intense blasts of heat and shockwaves. I also posted a bunch of different types of explosives if you want to know more about demolitions on page 7 in one of my longer than usual posts at the bottom when describing their chemical reactions. I'm sure these have only naturally enhanced with ordinance over the last 300 years of rapidly changing history. However, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Explosions work now just as their counterparts did in antiquity with some minor differences. What is different in today's world is the element of vicious propaganda used for negative reasons, often inclined against nature, and therefore against God.
To get a good handle on the historical background of this whole debacle, a concise forensic work is Dr. Michael Palmer's "Hiroshima Revisited," which I posted earlier in this thread on page 5. I would look into it to learn more about the alleged tells and marks for what to look for in a perceived blast versus what was actually recorded among the ruins of Japanese cities. They certainly did not have the projected capabilities and required amounts of hardware to achieve these alleged blasts. The report goes into all aspects of these events.
Next, I would look into the background of the Manhattan Project plus Operation Paperclip and what the German scientists were doing in this field while working under the Third Reich (they were not working on a bomb):
-We are led to believe that one sleuthy anti-White communist Robert J. Oppenheimer, who, together along with a team of other hook-nosed anti-White communists, is said to have invented "the atomic bomb." They also allege that this group invented the "hydrogen bomb," in an alleged competition with National Socialist Germany. The Germans are said to have failed at this, but the jews, who have not invented anything to this day, were somehow of course superior to one of the most intelligent and inventive of all of God's peoples in the world.
-Oppenheimer was never at home in physics. He only studied for roughly two years, and that allegedly made him a leading physicist. Oppenheimer, like all the other pseudo-intellectual jews of the time, have always been at home in usury or speculation. With the propaganda film "Oppenheimer," many people now believe that communist jews invented something gigantic. He comes from a people who have never done anything useful for society and only harm to Christendom.
-Many of the German, as well as Austrian scientists were part of state-sponsored research initiatives into energy outside of the industrialist control-grids. Viktor Schauberger was given over 100,000 Reich marks by Hitler himself to set up a system using only the natural momentum of water in a vortex engine to transport raw materials, for one such example. With their country and their coalition allies being denied raw materials from the British Empire and its proxies and facing annihilation at the looming threat of the Bolsheviks, it was imperative for them to discover ways of creating energy and not relying solely on fuel and oil, which was one of the leading logistical chains in the causes of their wartime defeat. Hence much of their research went beyond mainstream industries at the time. The foundation for most of nuclear science did not emerge until after many of these Germanic scientists were shanghaied to the USA after the war. Stalin got the scraps in this one. Werner Heisenberg even admitted that "there was nothing atomic about it" when asked about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The crux of these arguments is not in "new world order fearmongering," nor in critique and analysis of edited video footages (all of the test footages are edited and are not original, there are so many special effects tells in all of them), nor is it even a cursory study of explosives themselves, it lies in decoding quantum physics in conjunction with applicable demolition devices. I would love to get into the nitty-gritty mathematical side of this debate, because that is one of the only ways to truly decipher if these alleged wonder-bombs are really capable of what we are told. I know that they are not, based on a corollary of inconsistencies, but I am open to the idea that refined plutonium and enriched uranium would have some different chemical effect on a blast than phosphorus and unstable nitrogens, just not something worth keeping a unilateral esoteric sanction of explosives information from the general public when people have been blowing things up for centuries without a government telling them what's good for them and what isn't.
Many of our "esteemed" scientists and physicists are like the Epicureans of the middle ages, and their phony creations are representative and manifestations of bodies without souls. Fallen fruit at the base of a rotten tree. Much of our existing tech is not new anyways, and it gets weirder the deeper one looks into it.
Great post.
Amen.
100% agree, just plain normal chemistry, which should be reproducable easily. Also in a small lab setting with the right substances.
Not this esoteric magic using tempratures of a million degrees, igniting the atmosphere, waves felt 500 miles away, just "eye witnesses", little suitcases.
Why hasn't NATO, or whoever you want to claim is a geopolitical adversary, invaded or directly bombed Russia then?
That's a point I've also made, the Russians are fairly vulnerable on their eastern flank, and their Pacific fleet is no match to the US Navy. That's how Russia's ((enemies)) brought the Russian Empire, dealing a hard blow in 1905 by arming the Japanese, who inflicted a severe defeat on the Russians in Port Arthur because the Russians were unable to bring reinforcements in time.
Kaliningrad as well could be easily cut off without the nuclear deterrent.
India would also roll in into Pakistan without that deterrent.
Kaliningrad as well could be easily cut off without the nuclear deterrent.
India would also roll in into Pakistan without that deterrent.
Because they would have been defeated in short order, like French, German, etc. armies. If Russians are good at anything other than literature, they are good at war and everyone knows that.
Come on man, US lost in Vietnam...
War is not what you see at TV, made in USA Rambos. You can see how hard is for IDF to handle Hamas! through rubble and tunnels.
If India invades Pakistan it would very likely get overextended and get wrecked. It is almost impossible to invade a country determined to win and not get beaten up hard.
Last edited:
The Russians were crushed by the Japanese in 1905, precisely for the reasons I have mentioned, they are vulnerable on their their eastern front. The Russians are the best at land wars, but they would easily lose straight up vs the USAF in a battle over the Bering Strait.
Cherry pick time. Losing on air and sea is not a decisive loss. But right know, I believe Russian Navy + hypersonics >> Jewmarican Navy, for the very reason Russians would do economy of force and engage in limited advantageous key perimeters. Your entire fleet of carriers magically transformed into submarines.
This seems like a lot to look into. Personally, I believe that nuclear power (and hence bombs) exist. If 3 Mile Island, Chernoybl, Fukushima, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Trinity were all staged, fake events done with TNT and special effects then there's a lot of people involved with these "operations" keeping secrets. The problem for me with this theory is that I've never known a human being capable of indefinitely keeping a simple secret, much less a complex one. They all spill the beans eventually. Except for OJ.
El Dorado
Other Christian
Right-o...as they say: "Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead."
You can power whole cities with a few uranium rods.
No need for carriers, the USAF has dozens of air bases all around the Russian Pacific coast, from Alaska down to Okinawa. Russia would not be able to sustain a 2-front conventional war with NATO using its combined air power, which outnumber Russia's jet fleet by nearly 5 to 1.
No need for carriers, the USAF has dozens of air bases all around the Russian Pacific coast, from Alaska down to Okinawa. Russia would not be able to sustain a 2-front conventional war with NATO using its combined air power, which outnumber Russia's jet fleet by nearly 5 to 1.
And that would achieve exactly what, capture salmon rich waters? Have you seen the size of Russia, they would have to kite a bit off the shores and wait for the magnificent NAFO air power and navy sit there and do nothing and eventually wait for them to land... But I am sure they'd be able to still inflict a heavy toll on the 'invincible' air power and navy of NATO in the Pacific while fighting in Ukraine because they will most likely get assistance from N. Korea, China and Iran there too.
This entire thread and Concept belong in the same topic categories as "Flat Earth", "There Was no Moon Landing", "Jets did not fly into the World Trade Center" and Fission and Fusion do not work in Nuclear or Thermo-Nuclear Weapons - Oh and Nuclear Submarines do not operate on Steam Turbines powered by Sealed High Pressure Nuclear Reactors.
Literally all Science Denying Topics that iirc are prohibited on this forum.
Literally all Science Denying Topics that iirc are prohibited on this forum.
^Rofl