What?! Nuclear Hoax

a reply to: turbonium1

137-Cs marker layer.

Still waiting for your explanation.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

137-Cs marker layer.

Still waiting for your explanation.

You haven't explained your own argument yet, that's the real problem.

You're claiming this 'marker layer' is proof of nukes existing, I suppose?

Nobody has seen a nuke blast in person, how a 'marker layer' would prove anything is beyond absurd.

Saying you're still waiting for an 'explanation' isn't helping your case, either.

a reply to: turbonium1

Yes I am, and I have explained it, because it's a product of atomic explosions. It's used by soil scientists world wide as a dating layer. Just because you're good at it doesn't mean you have to play dumb- stop pretending you haven't been told this already.

You now need to account for its presence. We're waiting.

Oh, and thousands of people have witnessed them, just ask the army veterans of the Christmas Island tests that sued the UK government.

a reply to: patrononice

Oh boy are you going to open up a pandoras box of googlymoogly.

I would not take Edgy Brava mah to serious, even though he may be right in some things, lets just say that this whole world and existence is chock full of shenanigans that people believe are real, are only real simply because they have been told so since they were little kids.

Not to sure on the nuke thing. But then again, if its on TV and in the textbooks, must be true, after all, they got video proof, but then again and now a days, you can also get video proof of the flying spaghetti monster, something you could not do in the 1940s as believe it or not video was more of a mystique back then.

But even if those events did not play out quite like people were told, does not mean that they have not figured out how to make a nuke by now. I mean, you would have to be really goofing around to not make a few by now, especially considering the money involved. And if they are real, then there real.

Either way, does not matter.

You know at one time in the 1940s they thought that nuclear weapons would be a deterrent to war. And here some many years latter, and many many wars latter, some televised and some not so much. I would say, has not really been much of a deterrent in stopping wars. Maybe big ones, like world wars.

But then again they do say war is about deception.

If I had to comment on what is one thing that the human race is best at. I would say, the art of creating illusion's, from hollywood and the global TV networks with there wizards, to everyday things, after all the human mind operates on such things, especially in the 1940s, at those times humans were more then just straight getting out of the ending stages of the tribal age, and tribal mind and species work on mass imagery and a collective mindset. Even much more so then today.

Imageshifting is not that hard to do in all, and its the easiest of the arts to learn, matter shifting of which manipulating matter which Atom bomb's would be in that category, however is on a whole nother level, its day and night different. Or so I have been thought.

So I suppose its like the whole moon landing thing. We will see when we go to the moon...You know again. But those waiting to go to mars and the moon, may be waiting a long time to come yet. We shall see I suppose.

And same thing with this atom bomb thing, we will see next time we nuke stuff and film it life. Till then, lets just say that some will be clamoring about the moon landings and this stuff till they see it with there own eyes, or if they dont, then they will do it forever.

As to which is right and wrong? Well...Ever hear of a little story called platos cave? Even back some 3 thousand years ago, some know that reality as a whole is more subjective then objective, especially in mass groups. As such reality can be skewed in many ways.

So basically, nothing is true, everything is permitted. There is no right or wrong, there is only pictures and imagery on the wall. And then there is what you see with your own eyes. Which of those two do you find most people to live there life's in?

Find that, and theres your answer right there. If you have eyes use them to see, and if you have ears use them to hear. Or! If not, you can always wait for others to tell you what to see, and what to hear.

Besides people are to concerned about what is real or what is fake, or who lied about when and were. The truth is in either case you all find yourselfs here and now either way and regardless.

All these people rocking the boat. Whats up with them? There getting kind of annoying, like the dude that always has something to say during a movie about how its not how it would be in real life. Ya we all know its a movie, its why we watch movies, because there not real.

Oh ya, I guess people can rock the boat once in a while, as long as they dont tip the boat over.

They tell us rockets fly into 'orbit', but have never once proved this, and we've never seen it, and they've never once mentioned where we could see it, fly up towards 'orbit'.


That's bad enough.


Now, they've shown us a side-by-side composite video, with one taken from the ground, and one taken from the 'rocket'.

The rocket shown from the ground is three separate clips, put together as 'one' video, which don't even match up in any way, and they cut it out, too... for obvious reasons.


To show us a rocket flying down towards Earth at such an obvious degree, that nobody can doubt it, beside another clip supposedly taken from the rocket itself, flying almost straight upward, into 'space', with the Earth ball shown below it....


I think that they are deliberately showing us that it is all faked, and by showing it to us, would be they want to see our reaction(s) to it.


Why else would they show us it's faked, I have no idea. I'm sure they know it's a dead giveaway.


They showed it's fake, yet people saw it as 'proof' of rockets flying into 'orbit', which proves how convinced people are that rockets really do fly up into 'orbit, and into 'space'. These people hold up this video as 'proof'.

To see both rockets fly in totally opposite directions wasn't important to these folks, obviously.

They were very impressed by the boosters separating in both rockets at the same time, which was solid proof....how sweet to hold it up, and so they did hold it up...

Great work, indeed.

Nukes are believed the same way as rockets are.

Nobody ever sees one in person, but they all still believe it's true.


If nukes exist, they'd have shown us absolute proof that they really DO exist.

a reply to: turbonium1

why isnt getting to orbit real?

also there is a little know international law that prohibits imaging of the earth from civilian rockets with out the right permits(crazy as that sounds), and thats why the video is cut of the earth and not to mention they/we want to watch the payload


i assume you think the earth is flat, what exactly is holding us up? and where is earth? on some table? or on some pillar, what are those attached to ? where do asteroids come from? if the moon and sun are so close there are amature rocket builders that could easily get to it, why haven't they if they are only a handful of miles away?


can YOU prove any of the things you claim? i admit ive never been to space but ive looked through my own telescope and seen the other planets, why are they round? why are the sun and moon round but only the earth is flat?

a reply to: penroc3

also there is a little know international law that prohibits imaging of the earth from civilian rockets with out the right permits(crazy as that sounds)

Citation required. Because it sounds crazy.

go to answer 1a reply to: Phage


faa link


notice the caveat of national security concerns on what the payloads are(cameras included) and with out the permit from the FAA you dont get to launchh

a reply to: penroc3

You said:

international law that prohibits imaging of the earth from civilian rockets

Your source says nothing about international law or imaging.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: penroc3

also there is a little know international law that prohibits imaging of the earth from civilian rockets with out the right permits(crazy as that sounds)

Citation required. Because it sounds crazy.

Sausages are probably here : P

gizmodo.com...

The National and Commercial Space Program Act requires a commercial remote sensing license for companies having the capacity to take an image of Earth while on orbit.

a reply to: Phage

more clear link adressing exactly what i was talking about with spaceX

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Malisa
Hello?

Please answer me, i thought you were in the known about all this stuff and you had a perfect explanation for all these things

Why are you ignoring me turbonium1?

Are you looking on the web for reasons to tell me i'm wrong?

I can see you...

: P

Creepy introduction, but thanks anyway. I don't even know you, so I couldn't have ignored you. Any point here, or just trolling around?

Lmao don’t get triggered that’s how I look at people most times

You posted lots or irrelevant videos of different events but decided not to be specific about the one I posted, what part is fake and why? You also decided to ignore other people on this thread

Why?

This is dumb, do you feel like the US would ask or send good cameras to the ground so they would capture the best footage ever? “Hey guys we are about to bomb you to oblivion, would you mind to film it in color and HD?”

Also you were indeed looking on YouTube/web for videos to dismiss my post... jiji (giggles in spanish) Xaxa (laughs in russian)

The dumb thing is suggesting America needed to get permission from Japan to film any obscene destruction of their cities in color!!

They would certainly have filmed it in color, filmed it from dozens of different angles, filmed the entire event, from start to finish.....

If you really don't understand why they'd film these two events in color, or even film the entire event, twice, then you are delusional.

Dude they went into another country while war was going on, think fast think smart, do you think they would be able to take all the time in the world to go flight some planes there as if it was nothing? Planes get taken down when you are bombing other countries, i thought we both lived on the same world...

What angles and stuff, they went as fast as they could and then ran out as fast as they could

It was not an experiment, they knew what the bomb could do and there are tons of videos of tests, that one wasn't a test anymore, they knew what was going to happen

You think they needed to send 20 planes to make nice movies for you, risking getting tracked and taken down?


DO you even understand how war works?

a reply to: Malisa

Not international and it seems to have more to do with broadcasting such imagery.

a reply to: penroc3

Not international and nothing to do with imagery, in and of itself.

Keep trying though, you've got my attention.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Malisa

Not international and it seems to have more to do with broadcasting such imagery.

Yeah i understand that but what i was trying to point out is that this is probably what he was referencing

Should have been more clear, anyways

a reply to: Malisa

Yeah i understand that but what i was trying to point out is that this is probably what he was referencing

Attempting to support an erroneous claim is not often a fruitful exercise.

a reply to: Phage

but the law still exists and the US in arguably the only real space power on earth so the law is pretty relevant

but looks like it is getting worked out regardless, i was just giving the poster the reason SpaceX(specifically) had to cut the feed), he wasn't talking about RosCosmos

a reply to: penroc3

but the law still exists

And it has nothing to do with this:

also there is a little know international law that prohibits imaging of the earth from civilian rockets with out the right permits(crazy as that sounds)

You can take all pictures you want. You just can't broadcast them. Which make a lot of sense, if you think about it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Malisa

Yeah i understand that but what i was trying to point out is that this is probably what he was referencing

Attempting to support an erroneous claim is not often a fruitful exercise.

Don't get me started here Phage, i wasn't attempting to do anything, don't act robotic please. I merely gave you a link so that you could see if it was or not what he was talking about

It's up to you to decide, i never gave any opinion of my own, or did i?