It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

(Historical cover up!) Earths 1st Nuclear War Will Be Her 2nd.

page: 6
114
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Mastronaut

Yes many of the Skeletons have been found with contemporary Aryan arrow head's so it is believed they actually destroyed these city's as they migrated into India through the Indus valley.




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Wow interesting read! I remember reading about glass deserts in another book, cannot remember the name. That nuts they have found radio active bones, is there any type of natural process that could produce that?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I think there are more than you would think familiar with Hinduism and Krishna. All the Indian Gods with fantastic powers, stories of flying machines and great powers to make war with. Ultimately leading to claims of nuclear power in the form of weapons.

I would look for activity which might exhibit some sort of proof, like mines or quarries for uranium or the mining of metals for these crafts and sophisticated culture. Locations these 'flying crafts' might have been kept, toxic dumps. Surely if 'they' knew of such advancements, they would also be dealing with byproducts from the nuclear 'Genie in a Bottle'.

As always, 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof'.
Robert Openheimer did quote the Bhagavad Gita, ironic.
My take on this.....? Pseudo-scientific evidence, a romantic setting of an Ancient Glorious time. A time of 'Gods' and man.

And then we have all heard of 'desert glass' either through Trinity testing or the remains in the middle east deserts, Libya and Syria I believe. The greenish yellowish melted sand/glass thought created by a nuclear blast is another example of 'proof'. These stories are not new... they span from then to now.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: dismanrc

Some magical weapon that leaves ZERO evidence of its use? I find that highly unlikely.


Not Zero evidence, just evidence we don't know how to detect right now.

And if you look at the pictures from India there is evidence. The glass I have seen look very similar to what I have seen from White Sands. Massive heat was very evident.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: dismanrc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: dismanrc

Some magical weapon that leaves ZERO evidence of its use? I find that highly unlikely.


Not Zero evidence, just evidence we don't know how to detect right now.


Yeah, the last guy I was talking to in this thread tried this same argument. If it is a particle that appears on the table of elements or is made up of elements from the table then we can detect. Plain and simple. Explosions leave evidence of violent destruction. Even the lack of evidence of these things could point us to something happening.


And if you look at the pictures from India there is evidence. The glass I have seen look very similar to what I have seen from White Sands. Massive heat was very evident.


That is indirect evidence. It is most likely just vitrication.

One common claim is that the sand around the city had vitrified similar to the trinity site in New Mexico. However, what was actually found was the dumping ground for broken pots that were often made by vitrifying sand in a kiln. For, as everybody knows, glass recycling wasn't discovered until the Greens came to power.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: HD3DSURROUNDSOUND

Ha ha I think this is badass. SnF OP.

You know why history that validates a bizarre world previous to
the only one we're alliowed to know? Why it is scoffed at and hidden away
citationless? Because nobody but God wrote the Bible and certain
ruling bloodlines will not tolerate it being validated. That's why I say
over and over, if the river makes noise, there must be something
in it. Truth will forever raise it's head thru the lies. That's what we
see constantly happening here. And I myself love it. Because I LOVE
truth.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Plotus

How about ancient depleted Uranium with evidence of Plutonium enrichment? Do some research on the Oklo mine.

Seems the French went looking for Uranium in 1972 and found spent Uranium instead. (Not only spent, but spent just like it was used in a weapon breeder reactor.)
Some say it was a natural reactor, but Plutonium is not a naturally occurring substance so...?


Also found this:
www.s8int.com...



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: dismanrc
...
but Plutonium is not a naturally occurring substance so...?


Er, no:


Plutonium is the heaviest primordial element by virtue of its most stable isotope, plutonium-244, whose half-life of about 80 million years is just long enough for the element to be found in trace quantities in nature. Source



edit on 19-3-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
OK, this video is very compelling.

S&F




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Most layers of radioactive material in our rock strata are Iridium which is usually deposited by space rocks impacting or exploding in the atmosphere, the K2 boundary is one such layer.

In rare and I do mean rare circumstance it may be possible for such an isotope as Plutonium to occur naturally, how well there are several natural nuclear reactors around the world, one was found in the Austrian alps and one well known one in Africa, in these area's deposit's of uranium built up into a concentrated mass and then once enough had gathered they began to self fission, now usually this mean's breaking down into lower elements on the periodic table but given enough saturation it may be conceivable that some small amount of the element may have become enriched to a higher level, after all breeder reactors are how we used to produce Plutonium.
gizmodo.com...
large.stanford.edu...
www.damninteresting.com...
apod.nasa.gov...

The reason we needed Plutonium was only for the extra fissionability of the material and it's much greater atomic instability that when in sufficient mass can be triggered to undergo extremely rapid chain reaction fission or as we call it an atomic explosion, this occurs because the atomic nuclei are extremely unstable and as each atom in the tightly packed macromolecular matrix of tightly packed atom's fissions it emits several extremely high energy neutron's, these neutron's then collide with the nuclei of the surrounding plutonium atom's and thus cause the chain reaction.

Most modern isotopes used in weapons are relatively stable and need an initiator to start the process but some early test isotopes only needed a set or synchronously timed shaped charge's to compress the plutonium matric and cause auto fission thus self activating the explosion, these earlier devices though needed more of there component isotope as well as the much larger conventional explosive surrounding the spheroid of plutonium and were eminently less practical than today's more scientifically refined killing devices.

Personally I am more scared of neutron bomb's.



edit on 19-3-2015 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-3-2015 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


Except that is just made up nonsense...
www.digit.in...


I've been on ATS for more than 7 years years now, and the B.S. is getting so routine. newbie's need to do some actual research...what does that mean??? after finding some incredible information, check around and see if that information has been debunked or has held up under scrutiny.....check government sites, scholars sites, historical documents (and more than just one), scientific journals and periodicals...even opinion pieces can be helpful...IF...they reference some other source that seems logical, and has some reasoned-critical-thought to it......phrases to say to yourself on ATS.....one...if it's sounds too good to be true, it usually isn't...two...incredible claims require incredible proof.
edit on 19-3-2015 by jimmyx because: additions



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I'm not phased and I'm the one with the over reactive imagination. Egypt got hit with famine...Was it Moses with the ten plagues or just Egypt having a bad dry season like usual. A lot of place get hit with famine, there was one incident supposedly 1500 years ago where a part of Haleys comet crashed and caused famine because of the dust. A white horsemen of pestilence falling from heaven, signifying, and bringing the apocalypse, then war, famine, and death?

A sea of glass, well maybe a meteorite exploded over the desert like one did in Russia, even though the odds are still high of it happening.

There are only two mythological scenarios that would have probably even involved the idea of a nuclear attack, one was "Sodom".

Which was said to have been destroyed by God for it lack of sexual dignity, and was the story where an angel guided a man I think it was "Lot" whose wife turned to stoned when the angel warned them not to look behind. God was being nice by giving them a quick end, put it that it way.

The other possibly being involved with the the legend of the Mahabharata where it been presented in AA and in the thread, but the thing is, the Mahabharata has never been explained to me at all. I know it involved a war with mythological being having a god fight, judging by the pretty pictures that catch my attention, but over what?



edit on 19-3-2015 by Specimen because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-3-2015 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
The one thing that is common in the places mentioned is they are all dry and can't grow simple things like grass very well. This was an awesome read.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: EA006




The u.s does have spaceships


No, it doesn't.




we've got better # than you and we're not sharing


Rather we've no # to share, no matter how hard you want to think otherwise.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Morg234
a reply to: EA006




The u.s does have spaceships


No, it doesn't.





we've got better # than you and we're not sharing


Rather we've no # to share, no matter how hard you want to think otherwise.


Well - the US has spaceships through third party contractors :-D



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

Fleabit, perhaps it wasn't "magic" but rather a different type of technology altogether? Again, we're just going down this particular path as a sort-of thought experiment, but just because technology has developed in one particular direction using a certain methodology or engineering is not "proof" that said methodology or engineering is necessarily the ONLY way it could have been done. Not remotely.

Both history and fiction are full of might-have-beens and gee-why-didnt-I-think-of-thats. Sometimes a given technology is chosen for reasons that have very little to do with how well it actually works. Governments, finance, interpersonal relationships and political connections, the list goes on. So, I wouldn't be so quick to conclude that the supposed ancient nuclear weapons "must have" used this or that idea or machine or technology. Maybe, maybe not.
edit on 19-3-2015 by williamjpellas because: changed redundant wording



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: dismanrc
a reply to: Plotus

How about ancient depleted Uranium with evidence of Plutonium enrichment? Do some research on the Oklo mine.

Seems the French went looking for Uranium in 1972 and found spent Uranium instead. (Not only spent, but spent just like it was used in a weapon breeder reactor.)
Some say it was a natural reactor, but Plutonium is not a naturally occurring substance so...?


Also found this:
www.s8int.com...


You jogged my mind, I do remember in the recesses of my mind, I remember this story, in fact it was likely an ATS topic.....



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I did some searching, about natural nuclear explosions. Because i was surprised to hear you say we had not fission particels before on our planet.

How do you explain this?



A natural nuclear fission reactor is a uranium deposit where self-sustaining nuclear chain reactions have occurred. This can be examined by analysis of isotope ratios. The existence of this phenomenon was discovered in 1972 at Oklo in Gabon, Africa, by French physicist Francis Perrin. The conditions under which a natural nuclear reactor could exist had been predicted in 1956 by Paul Kazuo Kuroda.[1] The conditions found were very similar to what was predicted.
Oklo is the only known location for this in the world and consists of 16 sites at which self-sustaining nuclear fission reactions took place approximately 1.7 billion years ago, and ran for a few hundred thousand years, averaging 100 kW of thermal power during that time.[2][3]



These naturally moderated reactors were slowly fissioning, and we're not outputting the large flux of high energy neutrons required to produce elements like Plutonium, or the Cesium 137 isotope. The reactions occurring there were basically Uranium isotopes slowly turning into other Uranium isotopes.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Morg234
a reply to: EA006




The u.s does have spaceships


No, it doesn't.




we've got better # than you and we're not sharing


Rather we've no # to share, no matter how hard you want to think otherwise.


Is that coming from your 5* Generals viewpoint?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: EartOccupant

First, you forgot to post a link to your source. Luckily I see the bibliography tags, so I can deduce it is from wikipedia, but now I have to go find your article on wiki.

So if you notice from the text you quoted me, these explosions happened 1.7 billion years ago and there is only one known location for this having occurred. But as you can see, even then there are still residual radioactive deposits leftover from those explosions (Uranium).

These incidents were not explosions. They were basically extremely slow reacting nuclear piles. There is no evidence of critical mass events which would indicate explosions. Current theories state that the reactions were possibly moderated by, among other things, bacterial colonies. So the energy levels were clearly no where close to those needed to cause a nuclear explosion.



new topics

top topics



 
114
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join