It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In 1942, as part of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. government acquired 70,000 acres of land in Eastern Tennessee and established a secret town called Oak Ridge. The name chosen to keep outside speculation to a minimum, because Oak Ridge served a vital role for the development of the atomic bomb. The massive complex of massive factories, administrative buildings and every other place a normal town needs to function, was developed for the sole purpose of separating uranium for the Manhattan Project. The completely planned community was designed by the architecture firm of Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, and had a population of more than 70,000 people. Due to the sensitive nature of the work at Oak Ridge, the entire town was fenced in with armed guards and the entire place — much like the Manhattan Project in general — was a secret of the highest concern. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge office recently started to digitize its collection of archival photos and share them through Flickr; and this group of images from the 1940s are part of those recently released.
reply to post by BourneConspiracy
This is something I've always thought about and seen in many threads, the argument that not everyone can keep the secret. But who's to say they knew the secret to begin with?
I would love to hear from members that believe that they may be involved in projects, and do not know the real intent, but have wondered.
reply to post by FelixFelicis
My soon to be Grandmother-in-law (age 90) as well as her late husband both worked their for the Manhattan Project.
Originally posted by Submarines
There is a HUGE difference with the people the and the people of today.
Back then, people cared about their country before themselves. They were honorable. Back then a promise meant something, no matter who it was given to.
Today, people care for themselves only. Most don't look to the big picture of what goes on around them. The mind set is almost always "Whats in it for me." People are alos interested in getting the 15 minutes of fame.
Unfortunatly most today are selfish A holes. In my opinion.
That is why 70,000 can back then can keep a secret, and today it seems no one can.
Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
Quite often, I hear the argument that those who do not believe in government conspiracies use, namely using the phrase "That is impossible, since so many people had to keep this secret."
Well, today I came across an interesting item on another website, yielding a real time example of how it is possible.
reply to post by SavedOne
Total thread fail. You've proven the opposite of what you were attempting to prove. This secret enclave of 70k people worked on the Manhattan project- one of the worst-kept secrets ever. Everyone knew we were working on nukes, so were Germany and Japan. It was a race to see who would get one finished first.
Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
You miss the point of the entire thread.
Compartmentalization is the key.
You fail to understand that those 70,000 ONLY KNEW that they were working on a project. I guarantee that if at the time, someone went in and asked those 70,000 people what they were working on, they would honestly answer that they were working on an effort for the war. They would have had NO IDEA what they were working on. You are looking at this in retrospect, and fail to understand that most people didn't even know that there was such a thing as an "atom bomb".
Project scientists, such as Leo Szilard, held that over-compartmentalization was a primary cause of extended delays in achievement of scientific and technical objectives of the program. Testifying before a committee of Congress after the war, he asserted, for example, that "compartmentalization of information was the cause for failure to realize that light uranium U235 might be produced in quantities sufficient to make atomic bombs.… We could have had it eighteen months earlier. We did not put two and two together because the two two's were in a different compartment.…" On another occasion he contended also that compartmentalization was not really "too successful" because "significant matters gradually leak through anyway."