Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?

page: 27
6
<< 24  25  26   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Alright, I'm going to give my two cents on this post.


First for the OP the video is removed (I didn't go through all of the posts to see if it had been noted or not).

Lets use deductive reasoning to prove the existence and detonation of the Nuclear weapons in question

Radiation Poisoning
en.wikipedia.org...

Basic Understanding of Nuclear Detonation and other facts
en.wikipedia.org...

Nuclear Fallout
en.wikipedia.org...

Critical Mass (in case you need it)
en.wikipedia.org...

Present Day Hiroshima
www.rerf.jp...

The B-29 Bomber
en.wikipedia.org...

You can and probably have googled images of Hiroshima after the events of the nuclear detonation. Here are the facts I can give you that ultimately prove that the nuclear weapons were detonated. BUT FIRST let's do point-counter point.

You have stated and I won't directly quote
"I think its possible for nuclear weapons to be built"

OK

"Let me talk to someone who has seen the detonation"
with the other arguments i have seen flying around I feel this doesn't help you at all. Even if you talked to someone you would still ask them "are you sure it was a nuclear bomb?. How would they know unless they built it. Unless they had seen one before?

"The videos and pictures from hiroshima and nagasaki are fake."
I'll even tease you a bit. Let's say that it would have been impossible to take photos or video of a nuclear explosion. How can we tell what really happened? There are facts to back it.

The biggest issue I am seeing with your argument is that you are asking us if we can believe in the non-existence of nuclear detonation, but are refusing to accept the fact that there may have been. If you are going to put up a topic and ask people to be open you need to be open yourself.

Alright lets grind out those big questions.

The bombs on nagasaki and hiroshima weren't nuclear.
The effective blast power of the Hiroshima bomb was 16 Kilotons or 35,273,961.9 pounds of TNT. Yes that number is 35 MILLION POUNDS OF TNT. The effective carrying capacity of the B-25 that was only 20,000LBS. If the detonation was TNT, it would have required 2 fully loaded cargo ships filled only with TNT as the DWT(dead weight). So in "reality" 3 near-fully loaded cargo ships. Would have had to pass import inspection in Japan with over 80% of their cargo US-Military TNT to be transported to the site where the Hiroshima bomb was detonated and stored in preparation. That's just one bomb. It would not have been possible to move such a large amount of explosive into a single building in the middle of a city.

The where is the fallout?
The fallout is there, in fact I sited a source where it has been documented the effects of the Nevada test site. Technically parts of America are still affected, just with very minuscule or non-threatening amounts of radiation. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both had increased rates of cancer, and horrendous loss of life after. You mentioned mutations being human evolution...this is not the case. Birth defects, much like down-syndrome, became common in the suburb areas of the two affected cities. We know this to be an effect of radiation poisoning because of medical record events taking place after japan.

Ok it was radiation, doesn't mean nuclear...
Yes it does, in the 1952-92's the DoE (Department of Energy which nuclear substance falls under to answer another part in the thread) was undertaking the job of creating fusion without nuclear substance. The idea was scrapped since no such formula/test was successful. The idea behind fusion was that it would create less radiation (like TNT) but the burst of neurons would be more deadly than the initial blast (think invisible shrapnel). The effects of detonating TNT have been recorded. TNT detonates and blows stuff apart with its large amount of heat and expanding gas, with enough TNT you could create x-ray radiation but not the radiation caused by nuclear explosions.

I've covered a lot and I'll await a response. This post goes out to all of the non-believers.
If you feel so inclined to comment I will back everything I've said.

1. Don't use "your statistics are from the elitists." You can't prove they are and I can't prove they aren't, we would have to agree to disagree.
2. Bring me the evidence- I did, to the best of my ability, with the tools infront of me, I brought you evidence that the bombs were nuclear in nature and detonated.
3. It's all a conspiracy- I'm sorry but this I can't defend against, just like a hard-core catholic it is impossible to fight through this kind of attack. The United States would have had no personal gain in manufacturing what would be the biggest lie in the powerhouse struggle this world has ever seen. The amount of money and resources required to pull off this feat would be larger than WWII itself.

(breathes)
Phew




posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by violenttorrent
There was another post on ATS a year or two ago which asked the same question. It received the same barrage of "what about hiroshima" responses. Watch my video: www.youtube.com... - there is no footage of Hiroshima which is definitely identifiable as Hiroshima - just bomb footage ascribed as such.

What is it with people that they can't even consider for one second that something they have only seen movies of on a screen might not be real?


I see. What you're saying is that if you, yourself don't personally witness something, then it couldn't possibly have happened.

On the other hand. Since your world is just a speck of dirt under my fingernail, and I just scrubbed my fingernails, I guess your world is no longer.

edit on 28-3-2013 by 2ndthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2013 @ 04:20 AM
link   
I'm pretty certain nuclear bombs exist. There is enough supporting evidence from multiple countries. Even North Korea. LOL





new topics
 
6
<< 24  25  26   >>

log in

join