nukes dont exist conspiracy

if this isnt in the right place mods please move it.

has anyone seen this video before? www.youtube.com... it trys to convince you that nukes dont exist , personally i think they do exist.

a reply to: theboarman

Three words.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki

a reply to: theboarman

let me guess, the proof they have of this has something to do with the world being flat.

there's so much 'stupid' in the world today, I think I'm developing an allergy.

3 hours long and you're not even going to provide a brief synopsis?

a reply to: ExNihiloRed

Stanley Kubrick made the Hiroshima and Nagasaki videos. I was there so trust me.

Everything else is Japanese propaganda, created in an attempt to shame the U S into regret so the Japs can infiltrate our borders.

WW2 never really ended...

Hehehe

I love some of these conspiracy theories. You know, the moon is a human-created hollow satellite filled with Nazis. The Earth, actually, is flat, and hollow, and inside it has a little sun of his own, and the people there, they are giants, and they are green! Canning machines are actually for to secret make ammunition. The USA is the Fourth Reich. Tupac alive in Serbia!

And now, nukes do not exist?

Everybody in Hiroshima was only pretending, duh.

You can make everything into a conspiracy. You know they use heavy bottles in some restaurant for the sauce? Because it is free, they use heavy bottles so your arm quickly becomes tired from lifting it, you do not much use the sauce, so the restaurant does not have to spend so much money. No lie. hehe

a reply to: theboarman



Yes they do!

Tsar Bomba from Russia: The Very Large Bomb

I watched a few mins whoever made this did a good job of it...

In the first few mins a good point is made on footage from early nuclear tests...The cameras placement and location in respect to buildings being ripped apart is indeed suspect as the cameras survive just fine...
Then they show footage of soldiers stacking massive amounts of crates of dynamite to create the supposed nuclear blasts...
But the best part was a scientist handling radioactive material with his bare hands then licking the waste off his hands.. lol
Too long to watch all of it on my phone I'll watch it a little later on...
Like I said though it does seem to be well put together, I'm sure it will prove entertaining at the very least....

a reply to: theboarman

If nukes don't really exist, why do the UFOs keep disarming them?

If nukes don't exist, then there's a whole bunch of power plants in the world that shouldn't be working.

a reply to: theboarman

OK, have not seen the video but I have worked in a reactor doing neutron bombardment experiments.

I have also done all the maths and know the physics quite well.

I have seen armed cruise missiles at very close quarters. They don't build tens of millions of dollars worth of delivery system to deliver just conventional explosive.

Just saying.

Nuclear weapons obviously exist, there's historical evidence to prove it, but perhaps, Russia and the USA, don't have as many as they make out that they have. I've often wondered why build so many when we all know what they are capable of, that's why I think the numbers are bogus, I believe that each country who has them only has a fraction of the weapons they claim to have, why spend all that effort and all that money on something that would end life on the planet?

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: theboarman



Yes they do!

Tsar Bomba from Russia: The Very Large Bomb

That is actually US Test Castle Bravo in the picture, not Big Ivan.

Those YouTube fools!

So now Nukes dont exist?
Whats next?

yeah this is almost even dumber than the flat earth theory. what are people thinking when they come up with this BS?

originally posted by: Shminkee Pinkee
Nuclear weapons obviously exist, there's historical evidence to prove it, but perhaps, Russia and the USA, don't have as many as they make out that they have. I've often wondered why build so many when we all know what they are capable of, that's why I think the numbers are bogus, I believe that each country who has them only has a fraction of the weapons they claim to have, why spend all that effort and all that money on something that would end life on the planet?

That's a true statement in 2016. But from the 1940's until the mid 1990's, the U.S. had an ungodly number of nuclear missiles in all shapes and sizes. i can't speak to what the USSR had at the time, but we once had enough to destroy the world many times over.

I don't know how many we have now, but it's considerably less than he historical numbers.

originally posted by: Shminkee Pinkee
Nuclear weapons obviously exist, there's historical evidence to prove it, but perhaps, Russia and the USA, don't have as many as they make out that they have. I've often wondered why build so many when we all know what they are capable of, that's why I think the numbers are bogus, I believe that each country who has them only has a fraction of the weapons they claim to have, why spend all that effort and all that money on something that would end life on the planet?

MAD requires having a lot of them. The doctrine has evolved a little bit from what it was originally, such that it's now world wide annihilation in a nuclear exchange rather than just taking out the two countries that are at war. This effectively makes everyone come together to find alternative solutions, which in theory makes the world more stable.

Historically, the US and USSR had large stockpiles and kept building more because the above doctrine was still evolving. Both sides believed they were behind in an arms race, and that if they fell too far behind their influence wouldn't remain sufficient around the world. For example if the USSR could threaten to nuke 80% of the worlds countries but the US could only threaten 50%, the USSR would have far more global influence and an advantage in spreading their ideology.

Nukes these days are still very real, but they're not the real threat. Cyber weapons are every bit as devastating, cheaper to develop, easier to deploy, and more impossible to defend against. Nukes have first/second/third strike capability with the right hardware backing them but cyber weapons have infinitely more, don't require space/naval infrastructure to deploy, and do just as much damage.

Nuclear weapons today are big, scary, and still somewhat relevant but they're not the real threat.

a reply to: theboarman

Mustn't be very compelling evidence in the video if you still think nukes exist after watching it..

Obviously a

Nukeist!!!

a reply to: Helicopter

The USA is the Fourth Reich

That one's not a conspiracy, it's a fact.