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.

 

Swedish man caught trying to split atoms at home

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by EartOccupant
Atoms belong to us all,

Splitted or not.


THIS!!!......

This made me smile like hell......hahahaha.....holy....




posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Observer99
 


And im sure if you did any research into nuclear power you would realise building a nuclear power station on a fault line in a heavy populated area with 40 year old technology was probably a bad idea?

Look man you clearly have some mad axe to grind, thats cool, but personaly nuclear energy is not the most stupid thing imagineable, it is infact one of the finest achievements a civilization could develop. However the cost of implementing it safely is simply a cost that energy firms do not concern themselves with. But to say the technology itself is stupid, simply because of short sighted greed by a few, is, well its kinda stupid.

I would take nuclear power over the Oil, Gas and Coal Industry any day of the week.

Also if you really want to do your homework stack up the estimated death rates, and they will be very much vague estimates, of how many people are killed as a result of radiation from nuclear power stations vs global non localised cancer rates and see how much of an impact it really makes on humanity. Im betting its not a lot.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Jeezoo! I have to wonder whats going on in other kitchens where people are not telling on them selves. Rule #1: never tell on your self. (: shaking my head in wonder



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 

Nuclear power = stack fissionables up till they get hot and then cool them with recirculating water to drive a generator. Sorry it is jumped up steam tech from the 1800's, and no more, except the waste products are basically unmanageable in the long term and create toxins which are of such long life they are far more permanent than any thing man will build besides them. So maybe SO FAR the numbers are good for the nukes but wanna bet Fukushima and the other few hundred aging plants leaking all over the world will change all that in the next few yrs?
seed



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Ok got to ask , how the he'll did he get the radioactive material to work with ?



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by mustard seed
 


Sorry man to say a state of the art nuke facility is nothing more than jumpd up steam power from the 1800's is madness.

Its kinda like saying modern Formula One cars are nothing more than jumpd up Model T Fords on account of the combustion engine. Your completely ignoring decades, upon decades of advanced engineering, research and hyper technologies that actualy go into the construction and operation of these facilities. Oh yes, nuclear fission, thats very old hat indeed.

Im still a bit unclear about your claims with regards to people health you made earlier though?



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 



Ok got to ask , how the he'll did he get the radioactive material to work with ?


..and I have to ask, "What did this guy do that was illegal?"



Most of the radioactive elements came from common items like smoke detectors and old clock hands, which were bought on eBay. He also purchased a Geiger counter from the U.S. by mail order.






posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


alot of things it takes to make explosives is legal but when you combine them into a bomb then it aint legal

thats how.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnze
reply to post by mustard seed
 


Sorry man to say a state of the art nuke facility is nothing more than jumpd up steam power from the 1800's is madness.

Its kinda like saying modern Formula One cars are nothing more than jumpd up Model T Fords on account of the combustion engine. Your completely ignoring decades, upon decades of advanced engineering, research and hyper technologies that actualy go into the construction and operation of these facilities. Oh yes, nuclear fission, thats very old hat indeed.

Im still a bit unclear about your claims with regards to people health you made earlier though?


So yeah a formula 1 car is an advanced model T with all parts easily recognized as congruent and no real design change beyond sophisticating the technology and materials. A nuke is a high tech tea pot making steam to turn a turbine generator. When the tech comes out for direct conversion of radiation to electricity it will be a new thing but all we have now is as I said an idea from the 1800's gussied up like lipstick on a pig.At it's heart nukes are steam technology, 1800's tek.
seed



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this question...
Just how easily could Al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization, make a dirty bomb with smoke detectors or other such devices? (rhetorical question) I kind of hope someone is watching smoke detector sales to other countries, but knowing how things usually work...I doubt it.

In other words, how long until the next false flag where they use dirty bombs that Al-CIAduh created with smoke detectors from Iran?



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by soficrow
 


alot of things it takes to make explosives is legal but when you combine them into a bomb then it aint legal

thats how.
He was trying to build a mini-reactor from what I can tell, that isn't a bomb. It seems he was charged for actually being in possession of reasonable quantities of nuclear material without the proper licenses.

reply to post by Ghost375
 




Just how easily could Al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization, make a dirty bomb with smoke detectors or other such devices? (rhetorical question) I kind of hope someone is watching smoke detector sales to other countries, but knowing how things usually work...I doubt it.
I assume it would take a stupid amount of smoke detectors to actually produce even one reasonably dangerous dirty bomb.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by Johnze
reply to post by Observer99
 


Well man if you want to build your very own micro reactor on a fault line using 40 year old technology, then thats something you can do, seems pretty stupid, but you know, up to you!


If you did any research at all into nuclear power, you would know that even nuke plants in "normal operation" are constantly releasing quantities of radioactive material. People living in the downwind plumes of nuke plants have measurably higher cancer and death rates. Our DNA can't deal with isotype decay, we don't have the biological mechanisms to repair that kind of continuous cell damage. Until someone redesigns the human genome to be cancer-free and regenerative, nuclear power is one of the stupidest things imaginable.



I guess you did not do much research either, as COAL ASH gives off much more radiation than a nuclear power plant.


Over the past few decades, however, a series of studies has called these stereotypes into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.


Scientific American



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
How to make a nuclear reactor at home




posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Are radioactive materials that easy to procure? Where exactly did he get his radioactive materials?



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Some of the comments here are disgusting. As soon as the term nuclear enters into the conversation, everyone flies into a frenzy. He did nothing wrong and he had nothing to hide-- there's no monopoly on atoms and there's no monopoly on splitting atoms.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   
I can't provide proof, but I swear about 14 years ago I saw in a Sharper Image catalog these shoes that claimed to make you levitate.

The shoes were $300 and the ad said that fans in the shoes spin at something like a million rpm and are powered by nuclear batteries that never needed to be replaced.

I cut out the ad and saved it for awhile but I never heard or seen anything more about those shoes.

Besides the nuclear batteries and super speeds I also thought it strange that the ad said the shoes were one size fits all.

I total forgot about those shoes until I saw mention of AA nuclear batteries.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 08:53 PM
link   
He want to become Oppenheimer, but things changed a lot from world war2



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I live in a council house in UK.
they have put a smoke detectores in ever room!
I wounder if they are bugs to? video?

any one know the link to his blog?
I could try it my self.

how much potassium iodine should I take for normal use?
not for radiation poisoning.


Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Aren't we all in possession of radioactive materials?

A lot of us are forced by mandates and regs to have them.

Some safety equipment like smoke detectors and CO detectors have radioactive materials in them.

How many smoke detectors do I need to run afoul of the law?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 




posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Smoke detectors = Americium
Old Clock hands = Radium
Souvenir of gulf war = Uranium
Mineral specimen source = Raw ore for many other heavy isotopes
And that does not consider what one can find in medical scrap and military surplus which is sometimes some bad stuff. To the "dirty bomb" question it does not need to be radioactive to be "dirty" a load of C-4 on the right chemical car as it goes thru a town is much more likely and I am sure higher on the IED possibility list as doable and possible
seed




top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join