Last Fear on Anyone's Minds are No Nuke Attacks

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   
For the last 25? years, there has been such wasted rhetoric and fear of nuclear strikes.That is how long I have been a medium for them.
I promise there will not be any nuclear attacks, but much dis-abling and melting of nukes going on that our space brethren will not allow this planet to EVER be nuked.
They are correcting our failed promise at disarmament, as we have failed miserably.Please do not think they are not working for this solar system, as they say that if we used nukes, it would disrupt our solar system, and that they cannot allow..
Be aware of earth changes, etc. but waste none of your time in worry about any nuclear threat.
SC.




[edit on 18-1-2006 by siriuslyone]




posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 02:31 PM
link   
If "they" won't allow a nuclear strike to happen now, why was this allowed to happen back in 1945?




posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   
That was not a nuke, but this is when they got involved.
Notice it has not happened since, as many subs have tried firing nukes, and the 'button' does not work.
Is this is a test, or is it Japan?
Underground nukes do not destroy the planet.
Imagine how terrified the soldiers at Minot ARB in 1983 when a 20 megaton nuke and it's silo was melted by a beam from a scout ship..??
This was why reagan started star wars, he was so freaked out..
I have a few more years to live, and so far they have been 100% correct, and am secure that if I am killed, it will NOT be by a nuke.
IOW, I do not do public trance because most they speak of is in a chastizing way to the cruelty of humanity and us to each other, and most 'channelers teach? love and light which just gives seekers impossible teachings?
For eons Sirius has been called the chastizing star.
Interesting link here.

exodus2006.com...


See also Secret Teachings of all age--M. Hall



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by siriuslyone
That was not a nuke, but this is when they got involved.


Um... So what was it then? A large fireworks display? And what about the hundreds of nuclear tests done by nations around the globe. Were those large fireworks displays too?



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   
I once heard on the history channel on a UFO File show that a "UFO" shut down a nuclear reactor in Nevada. I believe it.

I think what Einstein theororized about the Atom bomb may still hold true. He thought that there would be no containment to the Atom bomb explosion when it went off and that it would just keep going and create a black hole in the Universe. I think the only thing that may be able to contain an Atom explosion is gravity. That means that if one were to be shot down in space that if the Atom exploded, since there is no gravity, the explosion would not stop and still create a black hole. I think this may be a possibility and if it is true, it would explain why other space travelors are so worried about our Atom bombs.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Coolaid]



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Stars are basically continuously exploding thermo-nuclear devices. What keeps them from exploding and destroying the universe? Hydrostatic equilibrium. That's basically a balance between the outward pressure of the explosion and the inward pressure of gravity. So in a way, you're right that only gravity can contain a nuclear explosion.

There is a key difference though... Stars are REALLY big, nuclear weapons/breeder reactors (which are essentially a contained nuclear explosion) are not.

The amount of material used in a nuclear weapon is miniscule in comparison to a star. It's like saying a mud hut is the Empire State Building, for example.



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   


Um... So what was it then? A large fireworks display? And what about the hundreds of nuclear tests done by nations around the globe. Were those large fireworks displays too?


Since I do not know it's origin, I would say atomic bomb.
There have not been ANY bombs dropped on any cities since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, discount the benign 500 pounders. They cause only limited damage.
This is not my theory, or idea.This comes from way above me, just watch and see is all I can say, as all the information I have taped for all these years have been totally accurate..Foretold that the dumping of garbage will cause dead spots in the oceans, and this has happened..



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 08:09 PM
link   
An interesting theory that I somewhat believe in is that the only thing that kept us (the US and Soviet Union) from blowing each other off the map was extra terrestrials operating inside our government to keep us from using these destructive devices. On the other side of the spectrum, some beleive that it was secret rouge terrestrial organisations who planted themselves inside these governments to keep us under control.

I'm not sure what to believe, but nice theory anyway.



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainIraq
An interesting theory that I somewhat believe in is that the only thing that kept us (the US and Soviet Union) from blowing each other off the map was extra terrestrials operating inside our government to keep us from using these destructive devices. On the other side of the spectrum, some beleive that it was secret rouge terrestrial organisations who planted themselves inside these governments to keep us under control.



Very interesting theory, and closer than you may believe.
The benevolent grays are the ones into whose purview this situation falls.
IOW, the treaty signed? by our government may have left out that they were/are going to dis-arm us.I know they are on this planet, but our government FEARS they may not dis-able all the nukes in all countries, but they shall.I fear Rottweilers more than nuke attacks,,



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by siriuslyone
Since I do not know it's origin, I would say atomic bomb.


So first you say it isn't, then you say it is...



There have not been ANY bombs dropped on any cities since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, discount the benign 500 pounders. They cause only limited damage.


Uh... What "500 pounders" would you be talking about?



This is not my theory, or idea.This comes from way above me, just watch and see is all I can say, as all the information I have taped for all these years have been totally accurate..Foretold that the dumping of garbage will cause dead spots in the oceans, and this has happened..


And where did you tape this information from? News channels? The Sci-Fi channel? A mash-up of your favorite B-movies?

And what "dumping of garbage" into the oceans and the subsequent "dead spots" are you talking about? Do you have a source for that tidbit of knowledge?



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 03:49 PM
link   


And where did you tape this information from? News channels? The Sci-Fi channel? A mash-up of your favorite B-movies?


From the grays I have been a medium for for many years..
A 500 pounder is the ones dropped on Iraq-none nuke.
An atomic bomb is NOT a nuclear threat as a nuclear bomb is, as the blast in Japan killed more than the fallout did.
The dead oceans were NOT happening when this came through in trance.


www.commondreams.org...



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by siriuslyone
From the grays I have been a medium for for many years..


Oh, okay...




A 500 pounder is the ones dropped on Iraq-none nuke.


What? So first it was a nuclear bomb and now it's not? What do you mean by "Iraq-none nuke?" That makes no sense



An atomic bomb is NOT a nuclear threat as a nuclear bomb is, as the blast in Japan killed more than the fallout did.


Umm... An "atomic bomb" is the same thing as a "nuclear bomb." It's simply two names for the same thing.



The dead oceans were NOT happening when this came through in trance.


What? You said that it "has happened." Look, I even have the quote righty here again for you:


the dumping of garbage will cause dead spots in the oceans, and this has happened


Make up your mind, will you?



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 04:10 PM
link   
If all you are going to do is make fun of me, then there is no reason to go any further..



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by siriuslyone
If all you are going to do is make fun of me, then there is no reason to go any further..


I'm not making fun of you, I'm pointing out the inconsistencies of your statements. I'm sorry if I've offended you, but it is odd how you say one thing and then the other, don't you think?



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by siriuslyone
discount the benign 500 pounders.


You realize that a five hundred pound bomb is like nothing right? It can be carried by a small fighter. I was just wondering why you brought these up into a conversation about nukes
. Bring the firebombs in instead.



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Yes, I know those are bunker busters that tunnel inside bunkers and do not do radioactivity.
I was just trying to explain that a big bomb is not a nuke..make sense?


[edit on 19-1-2006 by siriuslyone]



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Yes I see. But SWEET JESUS are they getting close. Look at this video of a daisy cutter bomb. Man.


MOAB

And thats a small one
.

MOD EDIT: Yahoo links don't work, so I found something else of a similar nature.

[edit on 1/19/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   
I was looking at that one too, so its ok.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   
...A conventional bomb is just that, no matter its size. The whole MOAB controversy, concern that it was going to be so big as to go nuclear, was coming from uneducated people who don't understand the principle of a nuke. The MOAB, while extraordinarily destructive, is completely a conventional bomb and, no matter how large it could be made, would never go nuclear. Well, if it were the size of the sun it might, but I don't think we're going to find enough steel on earth to make the casing for that.

The MOAB released a cloud of highly explosive gas, then moments later ignites it when it lands. This causes a massive explosion, but does not split any atoms.

The two bombs dropped on Japan did split atoms. Hence the term "atom" bomb, and the term "nuclear" (the center of of an atom is called its nucleus). Those two guys were smaller than some of the cluster bombs and bombs like the MOAB, yet had far greater detonations.

As to the belief that there was no radioactive fallout in Japan...Do you believe the Holocaust is a myth, too? There are many, many, many medical cases documented out of Japan. A ton of research was developed as a result of those bombs because, for the first time ever, the medical field got to examine the effects of a massive dose of radiation on a large population.

Also, on the fallout issue, those first two bombs were extremely dirty compared to the nukes we have now. The radiation fallout is far lower than it had been, and the US had been looking into a "clean" nuke. At the same time, Britain was looking into a "dirty" nuke laced with barium to provide maximum fallout. Essentially, a dirty bomb with a nuclear delivery system.

All of the specs, science, etc. is available for anyone to look at. You can even build yourself a nuclear bomb. The only catch is getting the actual nuclear material, namely plutonium or Uranium-235.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Oh, and by the way, I agree with the subject, but not the first post. Most definately the last fear on my mind is no nuke attacks. If anything, I would fear a nuke attack; I wouldn't fear no nuke attack.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join