Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?

reply to post by violenttorrent


It's incredibly simple. Yeah, atoms split all of the time, and the energy released is actually negligible.

However, the very concept of critical mass dictates that an inconceivably large number of atoms are involved in the fission.

The weight of U-235 divided by the mass of one mol of U-235 (not gonna bother looking that up right now) times Avogadro's Number (also not gonna look that up right now) is how many atoms you are splitting. It will have at least 23 zeros behind it. Multiply that by the excess energy of U235 and that's the output of the bomb, not accounting for efficiency problems etc.

There's a big honkin difference between standing next to a small sample of natural uranium and experiencing a few atoms splitting, and having well over one hundred sextillion (that's 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) atoms split almost simultaneously a few hundred feet above your head.


Here's a really simple way to think about it: it's like having every man woman and child on earth throw several fistfulls of dirt at you at once. Fun and games on a practical scale, but with large enough numbers and the best efforts of some of the greatest engineers in history, it can get out of hand quick.

I have to prove it now? Pardon me but the OP is the one who made the charge. I can understand LTRU, it isn't your's to prove but he made this OP so why can't he prove it?

And while we are at it...you talki about us and yet first thing I saw about me is liar and operative well before I insulted this 'perfect' video

-Kyo

Originally posted by KyoZero
I have to prove it now? Pardon me but the OP is the one who made the charge. I can understand LTRU, it isn't your's to prove but he made this OP so why can't he prove it?

And while we are at it...you talki about us and yet first thing I saw about me is liar and operative well before I insulted this 'perfect' video

-Kyo

This is the point. What is he trying to prove other then that the footage of his video comp. of Government Documented detonations does not look real?

I will have to review. I didn't call anyone a liar to my recollection other then telling jfj123 that I would not be able to accept his word, because I believe judgment with out solid evidence is not proper judgment, again my opinion.

If I insulted you or anyone, I apologize sincerely.

Peace

well the video footage thing is one thing...but I thought he was trying to flat say they aren't real...the nukes I mean

isn't that what this is all about?

-Kyo

Originally posted by neformore

The Toyko Fire bombing took 279 B-29's dropping over 1,000 tones worth of bombs.

Hiroshima took a single plane, and a single bomb.

Nagasaki took a single plane, and a single bomb.

Think about it.

Hey, Don't forget the One photographer let in to give proof to the world of such awesome destructive force.

You guys thought Hitler was good at controlling the media...one guy....ONE.

Think about it

Originally posted by KyoZero
well the video footage thing is one thing...but I thought he was trying to flat say they aren't real...the nukes I mean

isn't that what this is all about?

-Kyo

The op made a video. He posted it asking people to review and give their opinion. He makes many claims though out the video, which are up to the viewer to agree with or not agree with.

I can't speak for him directly, but I believe we share similar thoughts. (please forgive me if I've spoken inappropriately).

I believe, as with myself, he is saying that the footage, pictures, basically (second hand knowledge) does not supply him with enough evidence to prove that they are indeed used or have been used. Quite possible that they don't exist. Not saying military persons haven't seen what they've seen and indeed handled what they have handled. No one is calling anyone a liar.

My cousins, as I said before, are all navy. They have worked on subs, aircraft carriers and destroyers and have handled "Nukes" before, so I'm not questioning what they handled or worked on.

But you must agree, handling a stick of dynamite for example and standing their for the explosion are completely separate experiences. Neither validates the other then hear say. I could handle dynamite being told many times, "be careful, that's dynamite", but until I saw the blast, how much bearing would it have on me?

Regardless of what stories I'm told or what injuries i've encountered of others dynamite "accidents", all I would have in my mind is a picture of what dynamite actually does and until that first witness to it's power how could I in anyway be spreading only a half truth at best. For me to walk around telling people what dynamite is with out having witnessed its power, would be me lying to people, having only a portion (others accounts) of the true reality of it's power.

It's like Micky Mouse and the Sorcerer, before you know it, you got brooms sweeping you left and right.

Peace
T

Ya know I think we all missed the point.

I think the argument was that Hiroshima was not wiped about by an atomic bomb but rather...by a SEX BOMB!!!

Here's a little something different, not to take it in a crazy direction, but maybe some will find it interesting.

Every time you say Nuke, you are phonetically saying Noach. Noach is what we derive Noah from and means "Rest".

Nuke's Arc or Nuclear Arsenal

Peace

Thanks to Vagabond for his legitimate and civil input.

Everyone keeps asking LTRU and I to "prove it." It's your job to prove that nukes exist, because the only evidence I've seen is falsified evidence. You can produce all the "nuclear warheads" in the world, and this will still not be proof.

Judging by the outright hatred the current regime has for Iraq and its people, I can see no reason for their withholding blasting Baghdad to Kingdom Come - can you? If one nulcear bomb can do what they say - blow up an entire city - and costs one million dollars or whatever - then why have they spent trillions over five years engaging in what is essentially guerrilla warfare when they could have had it over and done with in one pop?

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
Here's a little something different, not to take it in a crazy direction, but maybe some will find it interesting.

Every time you say Nuke, you are phonetically saying Noach. Noach is what we derive Noah from and means "Rest".

Nuke's Arc or Nuclear Arsenal

Peace

What?

Nuke as Noach?

where are you from? Australia?!

Yeah uhm VT...you made the charge not us

In these courts it's burden of proof on the plaintiff. You brought the topic up

-Kyo

I think the OP feels he already proved it with that YouTube video.

The sad thing is that he is the type of person who calls non believers sheeple, yet he is easily convinced to accept something and follow it just because it isn't the norm. Funny how non believers get labeled as sheeple because we won't follow him and think the way he does.



[edit on 2-1-2009 by jd140]

Well that's how it is. Like I said, I must have worked on pretty empty sticks for 7 years. I guess geiger counters are meaningless. I guess photos and other videos are meaningless. I guess the testimonies of the victims aren't pliable unless personally interviewed by them.

Besides the whole Occam's Razor and Murphy's Law thing, well nice sounding just don't hold water in my opinion but because they agreed with him they get a sweet thank you and the rest of us are bad.

Oh well

-Kyo

reply to post by jd140


I never even mentioned the word sheeple. And to be frank, I don't think you are sheeple - I think you are CoIntelPro.

Furthermore, I haven't made any claim whatsoever to have proven a single solitary thing. It's on you to do the proving.

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

You don't try a case without witnesses. NO WITNESSES, NO CASE.

Well since there have been thousands of witnesses, that invalidates this point.

Either way, If you want to proclaim something that you have not personally witnessed, as true, then I know that I could never trust your word, because you do not judge properly.

Ok what you're saying is original eyewitness testimony is the only thing you will trust and even written testimony is not enough. So what you're also saying is that anything you cannot see with your own eyes, you won't believe in. That's very interesting since you are typing on a computer that is powered by electrons which you cannot see with your own eyes. So if you're right, your own computer does not work and you are not reading or responding to any other posts.

Remember this one thing, I believed as you did my whole life. I believed and was scared.

My belief is based on science and evidence and I'm not scared.

I'm not scared anymore.

If you need to NOT believe in something to alay your fears, I guess that is what you need to do to cope with reality. My only problem with that is, you're spreading false information to others who are here to learn and grow.

Choking on a chicken wing could kill me just as easy as a Nuclear Weapon, so honestly, why fight for something you can't verify with your own senses? Literally, Makes no sense....

Bless us all, each and every one...

Tah!!!

There is a mountain of data which verifies the position that nuclear weapons are real. This is an unfortunate FACT which nobody has been able to disprove.

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
reply to post by jfj123

 

"Convictions are more dangerous to truth then lies"

Yes this applies to you.

It's amazing how you are willing to dismiss truth.

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
The only question I have is "Why isn't this thread in Skunk works?"

Probably because it's a bit sketchy for even skunkworks

Originally posted by violenttorrent
Thanks to Vagabond for his legitimate and civil input.

Everyone keeps asking LTRU and I to "prove it." It's your job to prove that nukes exist, because the only evidence I've seen is falsified evidence. You can produce all the "nuclear warheads" in the world, and this will still not be proof.

That's not how it works.
The OP makes they claim, the OP is responsible for proving it. Anyone wishing to support the OP's claim has the same responsibility.

Judging by the outright hatred the current regime has for Iraq and its people, I can see no reason for their withholding blasting Baghdad to Kingdom Come - can you?

We are currently working with the Iraqi government and have THOUSANDS of US troops in Iraq. Not to mention the fact of fallout drifting throughout the region and contaminating everything including oil supplies.

If one nulcear bomb can do what they say - blow up an entire city - and costs one million dollars or whatever - then why have they spent trillions over five years engaging in what is essentially guerrilla warfare when they could have had it over and done with in one pop?

1. World condemnation
2. Nuclear fallout
3. Radiation sickness
4. massive structural destruction
5. EMP effects
etc...

The medical effects of a nuclear blast upon humans can be put into four categories: the initial stage, the first 1-2 weeks, the greatest amount of deaths are in this period with 90% due to thermal injury and or blast effects and 10% due to supralethal radiation exposure, the intermediate stage from 3-8 weeks the deaths in this period are from ionization radiation in the median lethal range, and the late period lasting from 8-20 weeks, this period has some improvement in survivors condition and the delayed period from 20+ weeks. The last section is characterized by “numerous complications, mostly related to healing of thermal and mechanical injuries coupled with infertility, subfretility and blood disorders caused by radiation.” Also, ionizing radiation from fallout can cause genetic effects, birth defects, cancer cataracts and other effects in organs and tissue.

The main causes of death and disablement are thermal burns and the failure of structures resulting from the blast effect. Injury from the pressure wave is minimal in contrast because the human body can survive up to 30 psi while most buildings can only withstand a 12 psi blast. Therefore, the fate of humans is closely related to the survival of the buildings around them..[1]

Infectious diseases resulting from nuclear attack

The main long term effects of a nuclear blast are infectious diseases caused by contaminated water, sewage, crowded living conditions, poor standard of living, lack of vaccines. These diseases include:[1]

* Dysentery
* Infectious hepatitis
* Salmonellosis
* Cholera
* Meningococcal meningitis
* Tuberculosis
* Diphtheria
* Whooping cough
* Polio
* Pneumonia

There's a lot more information. Go here to read more about the effects of a nuclear bomb explosion
en.wikipedia.org...

This is why we don't nuke everyone we go to war with.

As a side note, this reminds me of the same type of debates I would get into with people about Criss Angel. Some thought he is a real magical being and no matter how much evidence I presented to disprove their points, including a video from Criss Angel himself stating he is not a magical being, they refused to believe anything other then their fixed, non-supported beliefs.

The idea behind a fruitful debate is that both sides can learn something from the other and I just don't see it happening here at all.

Anybody who suggests that this topic is fit for a thread in skunk works is really only revealing that they have no ability to consider alternative views. Actually they do us a favor by making it obvious that they are operatives.

The possibility that nuclear bombs might not exist is a real one. It is a crucial topic which is rarely - almost never - covered by anyone in the 'truth movement.' I found out about AboveTopSecret two years ago by doing a google search for "nuclear bombs don't exist." I was led to a thread here which asked the same question. The guy was attacked even harder in that thread.

Far from being a subject worthy of being cast aside into skunk works, this subject seems to be important enough to garner the attention of ATS' biggest CoIntelPro guns.

If this topic is so unbelievable, then why do you care so much about it?

Originally posted by violenttorrent
Anybody who suggests that this topic is fit for a thread in skunk works is really only revealing that they have no ability to consider alternative views. Actually they do us a favor by making it obvious that they are operatives.

Well since you can't support your position in any way, that's pretty much what skunkworks is for as opposed to closing the thread.
You refuse to support your argument so what do you expect?

The possibility that nuclear bombs might not exist is a real one.

Not until you can prove your statement. Please do so.

It is a crucial topic which is rarely - almost never - covered by anyone in the 'truth movement.'

Because nobody has provided any evidence to suggest this topic needs to be covered. If you so strongly believe in it, provide evidence to support it.

I found out about AboveTopSecret two years ago by doing a google search for "nuclear bombs don't exist." I was led to a thread here which asked the same question. The guy was attacked even harder in that thread.

Well let me guess...he had no evidence either?

Far from being a subject worthy of being cast aside into skunk works, this subject seems to be important enough to garner the attention of ATS' biggest CoIntelPro guns.

Prove the statement. Oh wait, you're making more baseless claims

If this topic is so unbelievable, then why do you care so much about it?

Because passing along false information does a disservice to everyone here. People come to ATS to learn new things and when someone posts false information, some may actually believe it, which reduces the institute of learning as a whole.

Unless you can actually provide any legit evidence that what you are saying is real,

I VOTE THIS BE MOVED TO SKUNKWORKS. Anyone else agree?