The dumbest Hoax-Conspiracy I’ve seen Yet! (Nuclear weapons not real?)

December 27th, 2009
submit to reddit Share

Okay, so we’ve seen a lot of really stupid and downright crazy conspiracy theories in the past. Many have claimed the moon landings were a big hoax and others claim that the entire Cold War was staged by a secret underground group that actually ran both the US and Soviet Union. Given the huge amount of evidence to prove those events independently, it seems a bit far fetched.

But it looks like they’ve been beaten. There are at least a couple wackos out there who claim that nuclear weapons are a hoax. Yes, they say nuclear weapons just plain don’t exist and beyond that, nuclear fission is not real. Yes, that’s right. There no nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki, the Manhattan project never created a viable weapon and all the thousands of tests conducted by the US, Soviet Union, China, France, the UK and others were just elaborate fakes – at least that’s what some actually believe.

Sure, nuclear weapons development involved thousands and people and their power has destroyed two Japanese cities and been witnessed by millions during testing. Indeed, some atmospheric tests have created a flash visible many miles away or sent mushroom clouds into the stratosphere, where they could be seen by anyone in Las Vegas. Tests in the Marshall islands, Nevada and the Soviet Union lit up Geiger counters all over the world, caused power failures in Hawaii, broken windows in Finland and could be felt as shaking miles from the event. Thousands of troops and technicians saw the events with their own eyes and hundreds of thousands more saw the distant clouds or a flash on the horizon.

The Nevada Test Site is full of craters, which you can even tour, if you want to. Bikini Atoll has massive holes where large weapons were tested and although most of the fallout has long since decayed away, you can still pick up a slight increase in radioactivity in the areas where weapons were tested, if you use the proper instruments.

Nuclear weapons work on very well understood physics. Their exstance sparked the development of ICBM’s and eventually lead to space flight. Their threat caused national governments to institute complex continuity of government plans, to hallow out mountains and to keep aircraft in flight and ready to assume command for decades on end. Facilities to produce plutonium, enrich uranium and fabricate components were constructed worldwide.

All of this a hoax? Well, some people actually think so. Since this provides a good opportunity to provide some information on the topic, lets see how their claims break down.




And another YouTube User with several videos claiming to be evidence of fakery of nuclear tests. (It’s like Deja Vu of the Apollo hoax theorists). Just search his account for “nuclear” to find the videos, which are too numerous to embed here.

And another uploader of similar videos.

And they even have some antisemitism thrown in!

Some Links:
Thread on the topic from (I kid you not) the Flat Earth Society Forums.
The topic on SciForums
Do Nuclear Weapon’s Exist? – Facebook Group
Do Nuclear Weapons Exist?” On AboveTopSeceret

Here are some of the questions from the Facebook group:

[1] Were Hiroshima and Nagasaki in fact bombed by Atom bombs; or were they simply fire- or carpet-bombed, perhaps by new explosives?

No. Other cities experienced similar levels of destruction due to fire bombing, but it could never be acomplished in one bombing mission with one aircraft. Tokyo experienced destruction comparable to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but only after many nights of raids in which hundreds of B-29′s droped many thousands of tons of high explosive and incendiary bombs.

Much of the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki occurred in less than a second. However, a signifficant amount of the damage to the cities was caused by fires that raged after the initial explosion. The nuclear explosion reduced wooden structures to piles of tinder, the heat dried and scourched material and touched off fires.

[2] How come there are so few films of tests? If you’d spent $1000000000 on a ‘device’, you’d be sure the film didn’t jam!

Actually, there are a HUGE number of films of the tests. Most atmospheric tests had hundreds of cameras trained on them. These included color and black and white cameras, cameras mounted close to the blast, in armored housing, located far away with telephoto lenses, cameras in aircraft flying about the blasts and everywhere else you can think of. There were time-lapse cameras, high speed cameras and standard speed cameras. The United States alone has a massive collection of nuclear test films.

The images showing close-ups of the damage from the blast wave and which recorded the iconic images of houses being blown apart and jeeps being knocked over were located within the blast area, or close to it. They were mounted in heavily armored housings. Some of these cameras were placed on reinforced metal towers. This gave them a clear view above the dust and debris at ground level.

Despite the extreme efforts made to anchor the cameras to sturdy mounts and to provide for extremely durable armored housing, it was not uncommon for some movement to occur due to the blast wave. On occasion cameras were lost during the tests and their film could not be recovered. Each test cost many millions of dollars and therefore hundreds of cameras were used to assure that at least a few would survive and produce good quality footage. Of course, there were also many other sensors and scientific instruments used besides cameras.

Many hours are not avaliable for viewing on the internet. The most commonly seen footage is from the final versions of information documentary films on the projects. These films generally contain the best shots of a given nuclear experiment, but many hours of film exist that are not commonly seen because the footage is not especially noteworthy. Most is now declassified and copies can be obtained from the Department of Energy.

[3] In view of the supposed flash given by such weapons, how come ordinary cine cameras seem to have been used? An intense flash would burn the film

A variety of cameras and film types were used to film the tests. Some were modified commercially avaliable film cameras and others were purpose-built for the task. The extreme intensity of the flash posed a unique problem for the movie film of the day. The film had to be able to record both the period of time before and after the detonation, as well as the extremely bright portion of the detonation. To this end, several specialized films were developed that had multiple emulsion layers of varying sensitivity.

Another method used was to use multiple cameras to film each test. In the published version of films, the actual footage may be edited between several cameras. Some had high speed film and relatively large diaphragms to capture the aftermath of the blast, but because of this, most of the actual blast frames are overexposed by the flash. Other cameras were setup to record the brightest portion of the blast.

Even using these methods, it’s not uncommon for many historical films to contain several frames at the time of the blast which are over-exposed and show the flash as nothing but a completely white frame.

[4] Many or all of the films of supposed nuclear weapons show effects typcial of large explosions – for example large amounts of smoke, and continual fires. A nuclear explosion should be one flash (or two if you accept H bombs) – there should not be a prolonged red fireball

Not exactly. A nuclear explosion produces what is known as a “fireball” which is actually a massive ball of plasma. Nuclear explosions produce such intense heat that the gases around the explosion incandescent. This results in a visible glow that dissipates as the cloud expands and cools. The mushroom cloud is formed due to a combination of debris, dust and (often) water vapor. The nature of the mushroom cloud depends on the place of detonation. A bomb set off at sea will vaporize enormous amounts of water, but if set off in the desert, there will be very little. Air bursts don’t produce the same kind of debris cloud as ground bursts and may only leave a faint ring of nitrous oxides, ozone and material from the bomb itself.

Nuclear bombs also do produce a lot of fire. Depending on the size of the weapon, the flash of heat that accompanies the blast may be capable of igniting material even miles away from ground zero. Some of the fires may be extinguished by the blast wave, but generally the area is left well scorched. The area nearest the bomb is vaporized completely, but the process is not as simple as materials being converted to a gas. A more accurate description of the effects on organic matter might be to say that they are flash incinerated, with the heat burning them up almost instantaneously.

[5] Some of the films show the sun or clear evidence of fakery – for example cloud montages, filming from increasing altitudes to give the impression a fireball is rising, semicircular montages to suggest a mushroom cloud

It can be very difficult to get a good film sequence of a nuclear explosion in a single shot. The explosion starts off as a bright flash and then rapidly expands into a fireball and then a rising mushroom cloud. As the cloud rises, the motion begins to slow, with the cloud continuing to spread out, sometimes for hours. At ground level, the area around the blast begins to burn and a pressure wave spreads out from the center, kicking up dust and debris as it propagates outward. It may blow out fires that had burned in the area around the explosion, but will often leave embers that reignite as the pressure equalizes.

Exactly how the blast plays out depends on the altitude of the explosion, the type and size of the weapon, the terrain and other conditions. Some explosions produce a precursor wave. High altitude blasts generally produce one powerful wave, while near-ground blasts may produce a more complex pattern of pressure. In some cases, an initial blast wave moves out from the explosion, but is followed by a drop in pressure, caused by the updrafts of the mushroom cloud.

Because of this, most films of a nuclear test are actually from several cameras, cut together to show the various phases. If you want to get the raw camera footage from US tests, you can do so from the Department of Energy. Depending on the circumstances, you may end up paying a nominal fee for the archival service. If the film is not well known, it is possible it has not been digitized. If that is the case, be prepared to pay a bit more to have the original film located and scanned for you. The DOE has done a very good job of keeping nearly all the film preserved in climate-controlled vaults, so almost none of it is lost, unlike some other agencies (cough cough.. NASA).

If you are looking for test footage from British, French, Chinese or Soviet Tests, I really have no idea where you would go for that.

[6] Granted that U235 or other elements generate heat, is it possible in fact for the heat to be harnessed more or less instantly, as required by a weapon? Wouldn’t it be impossible to enclose the superheated metal or other material?

No. Absolutely not. Radioactive materials do generate heat from decay, but U-235 heat is negligible. If you held uranium-235 in your hand, it would not even feel slightly warm. It does not produce even enough heat to make it signifficantly warmer than its surroundings.

Some materials, like plutonium-238 produce enough decay heat to be a viable source of power for radio-thermal generators. However, decay heat is nowhere near enough to produce any kind of explosive.

It’s impossible to cause the material to suddenly become super-hot without fissioning it. If it were insulated enough, it would eventually build up some heat, but this would not be an effective way of making a weapon.

7] During WW2, it was found that explosives could be ‘enhanced’ by adding powdered aluminum. Incendiary bombs were invented. No doubt other discoveries were made – but remember that even polythene wasn’t produced then. There’s no doubt that TNT, dynamite and so on may have been rather obsolete, but it’s hard to know the state of explosives technology at the time, because, obviously, it was unpublished.

There were some developments made in chemical explosives, but there’s really only so much energy that you can pack into a chemical explosive. Dynamite is largely obsolete, these days, but TNT remains an important explosive for both military and a few civilian applications.

The explosives of today are largely the same as those of the Second World War and even before. There have been refinements in the design of ordinance and their delivery methods, but the basic compounds used to make explosives are over one hundred years old. Most military ordnance do not contain a single explosive compound, but rather are a mixture of high explosives, stabilizing and binding agents. The type of explosive compounds and the ratio will determine the total power as well as the explosive velocity, heat and other aspects of the explosion.

Current military explosives include TNT (still a major explosive the benchmark to which other explosives are measured) as well as very high power explosives like RDX, PETN and HMX. Military-grade explosive compositions such as C4 and Comp-B use these materials and other minor components in various radios. Another explosive, which existed during World War II, but has since gained greater use is ANFO. ANFO, which is ammonium nitrate and fuel oil is widely used in mining and civil engineering because it is inexpensive and is safe to transport and store, as the two components are not explosive until mixed. It is used in some military applications, such as blowing up ammunition dumps or other demolition applications, but is not a major combat explosive.

Even the highest energy military-grade chemical explosives are orders of magnitude less powerful than a small nuclear weapon. A one kilot0n nuclear weapon produces an explosive force roughly equivalent to one thousand tons of TNT. Even the most powerful, energy dense compositions of chemical explosives are only 1.5 times as powerful as an equivalent amount of TNT and the most powerful chemical reactions known to exist (such as reacting lithium with fluoride) are only a few times as powerful as TNT.

The most powerful chemical explosive known to exist is octanitrocubane. It has thus far, only been synthesized in tiny amounts. It has an energy density slightly less than twice that of TNT.

Therefore, simulating the blast of a five kiloton bomb would require five thousand tons of TNT. If the highest energy explosives known were used, it would still require around three thousand tons.

[8] Because of wartime censorship, the effects of firestorms weren’t widely known. David Irving’s book on Dresden wasn’t published until about twenty years after then end of the war. (To this day many Americans dn’t seem to understand that bombing causes damage). Because of this, it would be relatively easy to pretend an atom bomb existed.

The damage from firestorms was well known. Both man made incendiary bombing and disastrous city-wide fires had been well documented. It was not difficult to realize that cities that were largely built of wood would be leveled by fire. The firebombing campaigns in Europe and Japan could not have been hidden from the thousands of airmen who participated in them or from the hundreds of thousand of foot soldiers who would later occupy these areas, nor could they be from the surviving residents.

Cities had been all but leveled by the Boston Fire of 1872, the Great Chicago Fire of 1871 and the 1906 San Fransisco Earth Quake and Fire.

And you can mock the intellect of Americans all you want, but even the worst of us do know that bombing causes damage. We’re not * THAT* stupid.

[9] Underwater nuclear explosions should have a visible very short flash of light – seawater is murky, but still clear enough to allow intense light through.

They do. It’s certainly not as dramatic as an atmospheric test, but they do produce a flash.

[10] ‘Radiation damage’ could simply be the effect of burns caused by bombing – especially as these would have been almost nknown to medical science at that time.

Burns and other injuries were well known at the time. The thing that was unique about the burns from a nuclear explosion is that many were caused by intense thermal radiation, even leaving behind shadows of items which had blocked the flash of heat. Injuries due to ionizing radiation have generally been overstated. Most of the victims of the bombs were killed by heat, falling debris or overpressure. There were some deaths after the fact, most were due to infection or other problems relating to burns and injury. A few may be attributable to illness caused by ionizing radiation. This was not unknown to medical science at the time, as there had been deaths from radium poisoning or over-exposure to x-rays.

Regardless of the medical care and the situation for the victims, it was immediately clear that this bombing was not the same as previous raids. The weapon caused mass destruction instantaneously.

[11] The ‘experts’ themselves may not have been aware of what was happening. Imagine a technologist trying to tell Stalin he didn’t believe the ‘west’ had atom bombs. And try imagining a technologist trying to tell Oppenheimer an experiment had failed. In each case there must have been powerful motives for deception.

Nobody would have had to tell Oppenheimer that the test at Trinity had failed, because he was there to see it with his own eyes. In fact, there was a real concern that it would fail, and Oppenheimer and others were more worried of this than anything else. The physicists of the time were very confident in the theory behind a fission-based bomb, but the device itself relied on a complex system of multi-point detonators to create a symmetrical implosion. The system had failed before in testing and the researchers knew that the reaction might not occur if there was even a slight imperfection in the implosion system. The first nuclear bomb was developed in haste and was literally held together with masking tape. There was plenty of opportunity for a short or a broken circuit. So fairly was not beyond the realm of possibility.

As for Stalin, he would have been quite pleased to know that the weapon had failed. His network of spies had kept him informed of the progress of the program and that a test was eminent, but he did not receive confirmation of the test until Harry Truman personally informed Stalin that “a new weapon of unusual destructive force.” Stalin was not surprised by this revelation and he already knew far more than Truman could have imagined. For Stalin, the statement was simply a confirmation of the success of the US test, which he had already been expecting.

And more idiocy, apparently from the same person on another site:

Item 1) The historical seismograms of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have mysteriously vanished. If not only for the sake of war-era memorabilia, that information should have been everywhere in the museums and in the press. Hiroshima is located in a highly volcanic zone called the Honshu Arc and those active volcanoes were under constant seismographic surveillance during that period and log before that. The so-called atomic blast at hiroshima was estimated to be the equivalent of 6.2 on the Richter Scale but no seismological outpost in the world appears to have noted it. The Russians said they exploded the biggest atomic bomb ever made (50 megatons) at Novaya Zemlya in northern Russia. That is hundreds of thousands of times more powerful than what they say exploded over Hiroshima yet again, not one seismic needle moved at all. How is that possible I ask?

Except the data didn’t vanish! The blasts over Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fairly small and were at an altitude where little of the energy was coupled to the ground, but they were still powerful enough to be detected by a few seismic stations (although remember, most of Japan was in shambles, so there wouldn’t have been a very good seismic network in Japan).

The seismic wave from the Tsar Bomba moved needles all over the world. It was even detected on it’s third pass around the world! Despite being an air burst, it was detected as one of the strongest single point events ever measured by the US Geological survey.

Item 12) Iraq, why did they not find so-called atom bombs there?

Because Iraq didn’t have any. Saddam’s nuclear program never got very far, as the only nuclear facility of any significance was destroyed by the Israelis in 1981. Iraq focused on the much cheaper production of chemical weapons, although by the time of the 2003 invasion few were left in the country.

tem13) Suicide bombers, since when can’t the underworld aquire atom bombs for suicide missions if they are not bogus?

They’re not exactly easy to come by. Only a handful of countries have them at all and they’re generally guarded and controlled very tightly. Most are pretty large and heavy and although it is possible to build small, man-portable nuclear weapons, those have long been phased out of stockpiles.

Even if a terrorist organization could get it’s hands on a long-forgotten warhead from a source in the former Soviet Union, it’s unlikely that the weapon would even be capable of detonation. Nuclear weapons require a lot of maintenance. Proprietary and specialized batteries need to be replaced, the explosive triggers degrade with time and tritium reservoirs and neutron sources need to be replaced at regular intervals due to radioactive decay.

Building a nuclear weapon requires highly enriched uranium or weapons grade plutonium. Although producing these is not an impossibly difficult task for most nation states, it is something no terrorist group could come even close to doing.

Item 20) The so-called nuclear subs are either fully battery operated and recharged underwater secretly or run with Stirling Cycle engines or more likely both. That would explain the absence of deisel fumes and would explain the very long underwater periods. Stirling cycle engines are perfectly suited to hoax a nuclear navy. Who can deny that?

Sure, you can run a submarine on a stirling engine. It’s been done before. There’s just one problem with this idea: stirling engines, just like steam turbine engines, are thermal engines, meaning that they need a source of heat to operate. This could be done with thermal mass that is preheated before the submarine departs – except this would only last a short period of time before the energy is depleted. It could also be done by burning a conventional fuel, except this would only last as long as the fuel supply lasts, and if under water, as long as the oxygen supply could last. At best, this could last a few days.

There is one source of power that could keep a sterling engine going for months or years on end – a nuclear reactor. Just as nuclear submarines currently use steam turbines, they could also, at least in theory, use any thermal engine, powered by the reactor. In fact, a nuclear-sterling engine submarine design has been proposed but was canceled before ever going to sea.

Regardless of the engine used, the energy to power it needs to come from somewhere!

By the way: I have been asked before if I “like” nuclear weapons. My response to this is complex. I don’t like the idea of anything being used to destroy whole cities and kill their citizens. I don’t like the idea of any device which is primarily used to cause harm, death or destruction.

However, a nuclear explosive is, by far, the most energetic device that mankind can create. The power is nearly limitless and the fact that it is an explosion is simply an inherent effect of what happens when such vast energy is released. Nuclear weapons rival even the most powerful natural forces in impact and can be scaled to produce energy that is significant even on a cosmic level (the RD-220 “Tsar Bomba”) produced 2% of the energy of the sun for a period of a few microseconds.

The effects of a nuclear weapon are vast, and though generally viewed as destructive could potentially accelerate spacecraft to a significant fraction of the speed of light. They could alter the orbits of huge asteroids, create their own weather systems, move mountains or create massive caverns in a fraction of a second. Personally, I find them to be both scientifically and technically magnificent devices.


This entry was posted on Sunday, December 27th, 2009 at 3:46 am and is filed under Bad Science, Conspiracy Theories, History, Just LAME, Not Even Wrong, Obfuscation, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions



117 Responses to “The dumbest Hoax-Conspiracy I’ve seen Yet! (Nuclear weapons not real?)”

Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All

  1. 101
    DV82XL Says:

            Engineering Edgar said:

    I don’t know, DV8. On one hand, yes it is offensive and might attract more idiots. On the other hand, this banter does show who we are working with. I mean, these conspiracy theorists tear themselves down better than anyone else could do for them!

    In this case a delusional paranoid and a particularly stupid one at that. Look Edgar, you and I know that nuclear explosions are real because we know that high-speed nuclear reactions are possible. We know that because we studied the theory as undergrads, and (at least in my case) applied much of it during my professional life. This idiot is incapable of understanding that the basic physics of these devices doesn’t stand alone: the practice of modern science and engineering rests upon, or depends on processes that rest upon fundamental quantum mechanics, either directly or indirectly and across just about every domain.

    To postulate a conspiracy of such a magnitude that it not only encompasses every major government but also includes every sector from high-level scientific research through all engineering right down to every technician, (to say nothing of the life sciences and medicine) where there an alternate set of scientific theories taught to and known only to them where nuclear weapons are impossible and another one available for everyone else where they are is ludicrous on its face.

    To further assert that this has been done by a small ethnic minority for its own benefit and that they have managed to hide their machinations from all except a handful of individuals whose common traits include lack of education, failed lives, and psychiatric disorders beggars credulity.


    Quote Comment
  2. 102
    Jack Says:

    @Engineering Edgar. You do realize you are a victim of the one size fits all way of thinking. Do you believe that any one who questions the main stream narrative are of a certain “ilk”. I don’t identify with many of the people proposing alternative “conspiracy” theories. Its like trying to filter through all the theories on what causes “autism”. There seems to be every possible theory under the sun for what causes this condition of developmental delays. Do you believe these “autism” theorists are all of the same ilk. Just so you know, I have a relative who was diagnosed with “autism” and I had the audacity – meaning I am not afraid to talk with the so called experts (hint to Dr. Buzz) to solicit an interview with the top “autism” researcher in Canada. Do you know what impression I got when I left his office, that he was bat sh*t crazy. First he never studied people with autism i.e. insulated from the process and secondly his theory was so asinine it defied belief, but what I found interesting was how he kept bullying me whenever I introduced knowledge on how the human brain works. He was clearly threatened by this and told me that the average layman would not discuss brain mechanics with him. He turned the conversation around and started getting personal with me, asking me if I got enough sleep the night before. Yes I was tired looking that day but he was deflecting. This is why it is so important to have conversations with the so called experts. One needs to meet these academic professionals and get to the roots of their knowledge lest they be emotional motivations.

    Questions to ask the primary field source experts

    1. Have they ever witnessed a nuclear blast event?
    2. Have they seen the so called military grade nuclear fuel being loaded into a weapon?
    3. If not for 1. and 2. do they know any nuclear specialist who has witnessed the above two scenarios? If so could one have the names of these people?

    If there is no answers to the above. Then ask the following questions

    1. How does a nuclear chain reaction result in an explosion.
    2. Ask for the mechanics on how this chain reaction is started
    3. Ask for what materials are involved in starting the chain reaction

    If they seem deferential to the complicated nature of this, then ask them what books they read to understand this. Get the exact name of the book and its author. Ask them where the book can be found.

    People who go to museums in fantasy land places like Las Vegas can be caught up in the theatrics of secondary sources. I am all to aware of the lengths certain people and organizations go to deceive. To say that a particular field of science is completely transparent in its conclusive evidence, I would object and say that human nature has not changed since the days of Galileo and that private interest groups could very well deceive the public for their own ends. The ultimate motivation you may ask. My theory is that they are on the road to a one world government. As Bush senior, a one time UN ambassador said in his September 11, 1990 “Toward a New World Order” speech. The circumstantial clues are quite evident.


    Quote Comment
  3. 103
    Shafe Says:

            Jack said:

    Its like trying to filter through all the theories on what causes “autism”. There seems to be every possible theory under the sun for what causes this condition of developmental delays.

    Delays? I’m sure millions of autistic people and their families will be relieved to know that their development is simply “delayed.” They’ll get better eventually.


    Quote Comment
  4. 104
    Jack Says:

    In this case a delusional paranoid and a particularly stupid one at that. Look Edgar, you and I know that nuclear explosions are real because we know that high-speed nuclear reactions are possible. We know that because we studied the theory as undergrads, and (at least in my case) applied much of it during my professional life. This idiot is incapable of understanding that the basic physics of these devices doesn’t stand alone: the practice of modern science and engineering rests upon, or depends on processes that rest upon fundamental quantum mechanics, either directly or indirectly and across just about every domain.

    You might try and call me an idiot all you want but the truth remains that your bullying doesn’t make a good impression. Let me use your words with place holders to demonstrate your dogma. You said.
    I know that nuclear explosions are real because we know that high-speed nuclear reactions are possible.
    No different than what experts said a few hundred years ago in the field of Astronomy.
    “I know that the sun revolves around the earth because we know that celestial movements are possible”

    Mr. Quebec who I sense has a strong dislike for WASPs like myself, why don’t you give Lawrence Livermore Lab a call and talk to their nuclear weapons expert and if you do, don’t get distracted with their work on chemical weapons which is the major part of their company. Ask them specifically about nuclear weapons. Otherwise hide under your blanket of dogma and bully someone else.


    Quote Comment
  5. 105
    Jack Says:

    Ok kids its science class. Here is what we have to go on for how the nuclear bomb works. This was the explanation how Little Boy works. This is the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima after the Americans carpet bombed it like Tokyo. And you gotta love the childish imaginations of these SOB’s.

    A sphere of U-235 is made around the neutron generator and a small bullet of U-235 is removed. The bullet is placed at the one end of a long tube with explosives behind it, while the sphere is placed at the other end. A barometric-pressure sensor determines the appropriate altitude for detonation and triggers the following sequence of events:

    1.The explosives fire and propel the bullet down the barrel.
    2.The bullet strikes the sphere and generator, initiating the fission reaction.
    3.The fission reaction begins.
    4.The bomb explodes.

    I tell you if I was making this all up, I would be more elaborate. I would not use the childish example of a bullet hitting a fuel dump and causing an explosion scenario. I’d make it more sexier. My device would utilize a well focused highly charged arc of electricity between two points of a sphere of U235 . How I would focus that arc would be through a conducting beam of UV light contained in a pure oxygen environment. Once the U235 was charged at its centre core to a plasma field strength required for fission would the secondary stage be initiated. The outside core would consist of neutron field held in place by powerful electric magnets separated by a foil membrane. The magnets would be timed to shut off once the core heat of the plasma field reached a critical mass temperature. The neutrons would then be released into the plasma core and a nuclear reaction initiated. Final result, BOOM!!!


    Quote Comment
  6. 106
    drbuzz0 Says:

            Jack said:

    Ok kids its science class. Here is what we have to go on for how the nuclear bomb works. This was the explanation how Little Boy works. This is the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima after the Americans carpet bombed it like Tokyo. And you gotta love the childish imaginations of these SOB’s.

    A sphere of U-235 is made around the neutron generator and a small bullet of U-235 is removed. The bullet is placed at the one end of a long tube with explosives behind it, while the sphere is placed at the other end. A barometric-pressure sensor determines the appropriate altitude for detonation and triggers the following sequence of events:

    1.The explosives fire and propel the bullet down the barrel.
    2.The bullet strikes the sphere and generator, initiating the fission reaction.
    3.The fission reaction begins.
    4.The bomb explodes.

    That’s not quite how it worked. Close. Not quite.

    First, it was not a single sphere. It was a critical mass roughly in the shape of a cylinder and surrounded by lower enrichment uranium. Then this was surrounded by a neutron reflector. A neutron generator was made of polonium and beryllium. Now a key difference is that the “Bullet” was not fired. This design aspect was secret for decades, but the larger cylinder was fired. There is a reason for this. It helped avoid per-iniation by sequestering the large fissionable material from the neutron generator and neutron reflector.

    But the basics you have there are more or less correct. A critical mass was rapidly assembled out of sub-critical masses. That is basically all it takes.

            Jack said:

    I tell you if I was making this all up, I would be more elaborate. I would not use the childish example of a bullet hitting a fuel dump and causing an explosion scenario. I’d make it more sexier. My device would utilize a well focused highly charged arc of electricity between two points of a sphere of U235 . How I would focus that arc would be through a conducting beam of UV light contained in a pure oxygen environment. Once the U235 was charged at its centre core to a plasma field strength required for fission would the secondary stage be initiated. The outside core would consist of neutron field held in place by powerful electric magnets separated by a foil membrane. The magnets would be timed to shut off once the core heat of the plasma field reached a critical mass temperature. The neutrons would then be released into the plasma core and a nuclear reaction initiated. Final result, BOOM!!!

    Um…. well the thing is it was not made up, so it did not need to be elaborate. Reality is not always sexy.

    Also, your method doesn’t even make sense. An electrical arc is not necessary. UV light and pure oxygen environments don’t even make sense in that scenario.

    But modern nuclear weapons are far more complex than the Little Boy device. They have secondary stages, boosting, pulsed neutron generators.

    You can learn the basics. The more detailed technical information is generally classified.


    Quote Comment
  7. 107
    Jack Says:

            drbuzz0 said:

    Now a key difference is that the “Bullet” was not fired. This design aspect was secret for decades, but the larger cylinder was fired. There is a reason for this. It helped avoid per-iniation by sequestering the large fissionable material from the neutron generator and neutron reflector.

    So what you are saying is that the “Bullet” idea was a secret and now the secret is revealed and then you arbitrarily say that the more detailed technical information is “generally” classified.
    So its on the bus, off the bus, and back on the bus. Where are we going Dr. Buzz. To that Las Vegas Nevada museum you mentioned. You are aware of which ethnic group of people founded Las Vegas… “sorry” I had to throw that in but seriously look it up.

    And why doesn’t a UV and pure oxygen environment make sense. You don’t believe that electricity can be focused in that environment? I suppose you think I made this up. How do you know I didn’t just convey to you the mechanical blue print for the fusion bomb? I warn you if you design the fusion bomb Dr. Buzz I will have the same expectations as Leo Szilard. You are aware that he wanted monetary compensation for the nuclear bomb design claiming that it was his patented idea. I kid you not.

    Shall we also address the circumstantial and secondary evidence

    1. Nagasaki and Hiroshima photos (not too dissimilar of bombing photos taken of Tokyo)
    2. Sadako Sasaki, the lone child radiation victim of Hiroshima. Japan’s holocaust version of Anne Frank
    3. The public execution of the Rosenberg couple, only one public witness to this alleged execution. Ethyl Rosenberg’s listed vocation as actress – her big show business breakthrough
    4. Leo Szilard and Einstein – business partners in a failed design for a new type of domestic refrigerator and the authors of the infamous warning letter to globalist Franklin Roosevelt
    5. The Manhatten project – The uranium enrichment project with the race for the bomb side show
    5. Hollywood’s Top Secret Film Studio – allegedly 6500 atomic bomb films made with Stanley Kubrick an occasional adviser

    I know its very difficult to comprehend that this period of history is a staged event. One assumes it must have had such complicated disguises. The only disguises are cleverly crafted photo and film shoots done by one studio, the surrender of Japan, A nuclear enrichment program. Two fall guys i.e. the Rosenbergs. And the globalist power representatives in Russia, England and France following the same script.


    Quote Comment
  8. 108
    drbuzz0 Says:

            Jack said:

    So what you are saying is that the “Bullet” idea was a secret and now the secret is revealed and then you arbitrarily say that the more detailed technical information is “generally” classified.

    Not exactly. The fact that Littleboy was gun-triggered came out pretty early and it was always presumed it was basically a stationary target and a uranium slug. The more detailed information came out more recently.

    There is more information about these very early designs than more recent ones, however, even the earliest bombs have some of the finer details classified, or, at the very least, unofficially confirmed.

            Jack said:

    4. Leo Szilard and Einstein – business partners in a failed design for a new type of domestic refrigerator and the authors of the infamous warning letter to globalist Franklin Roosevelt

    I am not sure if you realize this, but Einstein had very little to do with the invention of the nuclear bomb. Yes, there is the famous letter, but he just lent his name to that and it’s not even certain it made any difference versus someone else.

    Relativity does explain how such massive energy can be held in the binding forces of atoms, but it is actually not necessary in order to measure fission or invent a nuclear weapon.

            Jack said:

    And why doesn’t a UV and pure oxygen environment make sense. You don’t believe that electricity can be focused in that environment? I suppose you think I made this up. How do you know I didn’t just convey to you the mechanical blue print for the fusion bomb? I warn you if you design the fusion bomb Dr. Buzz I will have the same expectations as Leo Szilard. You are aware that he wanted monetary compensation for the nuclear bomb design claiming that it was his patented idea. I kid you not.

    Electricity has nothing to do with fission. Electricity does not cause nuclear reactions (although I suppose a powerful electron beam could). Electrifying uranium won’t do anything to it. And your description of “focusing” an arc does not make sense at all. There’s not much special about the electrical properties of oxygen over other gasses. Light can’t “focus” an arc. That does not even make any sense.


    Quote Comment
  9. 109
    Anon Says:

            drbuzz0 said:

    Electricity has nothing to do with fission. Electricity does not cause nuclear reactions (although I suppose a powerful electron beam could).

    Low decay energy (especially electron capture) low atomic number radioisotopes can be affected by the chemical composition because the valance electrons are so close to the nucleus so if you were trying to use electricity to cause a nuclear reaction you might get it to work with something like ⁷Be.

            drbuzz0 said:

    Electrifying uranium won’t do anything to it.

    If you put enough charge on it you’ll cause it to fly apart before it otherwise would which is the opposite of what you’d want in a prompt super-criticality device.

    But good luck giving 1 C of charge to a lump of Uranium.


    Quote Comment
  10. 110
    Jack Says:

    BUZZ says. I am not sure if you realize this, but Einstein had very little to do with the invention of the nuclear bomb.

    Precisely, he had very little to do with anything other than be a figurehead for the public story, stick out his tongue once and a while to prove to the layman god worshippers of genius mentality that even genius’s act like silly kids and prance around like Freud with a pipe in his mouth as he pondered the secret mechanics of the universe that few if any of his peers seemed to understand. Let me tell you something about theoretical physics. I was room mates with the highest awarded science student in China. He was doing his doctorate in theoretical physics and he confided with me that nearly all his professors were bold faced liars because they couldn’t properly demonstrate the math behind the theories they were teaching. He used to come home extremely upset and I asked him, in his opinion, how many theoretical physics professionals with all the papers they published were actual charlatans. He replied 80 percent. I had to laugh because that is the same figure that came up on a social study experiment on the fraudulent nature of applicants applying for IT positions who were caught falsifying their credentials because the experiment fabricated the credentials that were needed as a prerequisite for the job. My point being that fraud is endemic through nearly all institutions.

    Dr. BUZZ says: Electricity has nothing to do with fission. Electricity does not cause nuclear reactions (although I suppose a powerful electron beam could). Electrifying uranium won’t do anything to it.
    Again on the bus, off the bus. You say you suppose a powerful electron beam could cause nuclear reactions yet electrifying uranium won’t do anything. I love the oxymoron. Look I don’t think you are an idiot as Mr. Frenchie so liberally banters. But I do think you are a process thinker. The problem with a process thinker is that they are not able to associate symbolically outside their field of focus. For instance, you readily gloss over the circumstantial clues to how an event like this (the bomb) might be staged.

    Dr. Buzz says. And your description of “focusing” an arc does not make sense at all. There’s not much special about the electrical properties of oxygen over other gasses. Light can’t “focus” an arc. That does not even make any sense.

    I know, I don’t make sense. Because I am idiot right? It doesn’t occur to you that UV light would ionize the oxygen atoms so that the electrons would be focused along a conductive medium :-)


    Quote Comment
  11. 111
    BMS Says:

            DV82XL said:

    “Jack” is clearly a sock of Alexis1111 from up thread and should be treated as such.

    Whether or not DV82XL is correct about the first point, he’s definitely right on the second. Some nonsense should be left alone to glimmer in the brilliance of its own stupidity.

    Side note: Steve – Thanks for bringing back the preview feature.


    Quote Comment
  12. 112
    Jack Says:

    Dr. Buzz, I would like to commend you for creating this site and giving others the chance to offer their counter view arguments. I might take issue with the context by which you condescendingly title this post. i.e. the dumbest-hoax-I’ve-seen-yet-nuclear-weapons but believe me this is the only site that allows free expression of opinion on this topic. I have been banned from an anti-nuke forum for making remarks that the administrator couldn’t keep the sites relevancy under control, meaning that as soon as I posted my view points on the Nuke Hoax thread, the thread was bombarded with unrelated posts about 9/11 even though weeks before I joined there were no new posts at all.

    Let me be clear that I do not know who this Alexis 1111 is but I have read this person’s threads. He very well could be Russian. The Russians are used to having their histories erased and replaced so their world view would not be as accepting as our world view. I wouldn’t go so far as to say nuclear fission is a myth. That would actually take a very comprehensive conspiracy to pull off. I suppose for arguments sake if large sterling engines were placed inside these ships and nuclear power plants, someone who might know a thing or two about how nuclear reactors work would blow the whistle. The reason why I don’t believe whistle blowing might apply to a nuke hoax is that there is only one place making the so-called military grade fuel. The containment of the Nuke myth is way more compartmentalized. As for my comments that this is a Jewish cabal conspiracy. I am merely connecting the dots. Again the theoretical physicists behind the bomb were mostly Jews if not all Jews. The secret Hollywood film studio that did all the documenting of the bomb footage, again they were all Jewish. The history of directors at Lawrence Livermore lab, not one was not Jewish. The Rosenbergs who were the media puppet scape goats for selling the so called secrets to the Russians were conveniently Jewish. The reason being I believe is that it is more public fodder to build up the idea in the nations mind that these poor innocent Jews are always being killed by the nasty Saxons yet take note that the Judge who sentenced them to their alleged death was a fervent Jew and both the prosecutor and the defense were Jewish. In this regard, It looks as if the stage was set for martyrdom. And if you look at the appeal letter of (vocation actress) Ethyl Rosenberg allegedly sent to Eisenhower and you read it over very carefully you will notice that it doesn’t have the genuine intent of someone pleading for their life i.e. affirmed innocence. Instead it looks politically crafted. It first starts out with a bowing down to the greatness of the president, like she was the slave bowing down to a modern day Pharoah, it then relates to a foreign event and implies that her death and her husbands death would be an act of vengeance no different than what she calls the vengeance of “racists and butchers” who wiped out her people in Europe. You see the political nature of this letter looks like a calling card to victimhood and I have sincere doubts the Rosenbergs were executed. This is how far I believe the conspiracy goes. Now I am not advocating by these implications that the Jewish people on whole are in on this conspiracy. I am merely stating that amongst this cult of Judaism there are agents actively working to deceive the public. Most Jews I imagine are unaware of the cabal amongst their ranks but because of their being raised as world martyrs they would passively be complicit to the operation merely by the their conditioned paranoia in believing emotionally that they are existentially at risk at all times. These emotions would go very far towards insulating this cabal.

    Which brings me to this person who calls himself DV82XL. There is something suspicious about this poster. When he was attacking Alexis 1111, he mentioned that this poster was banned on other forums. The only way someone knows someone is banned is if they either run the sites or know the people who do. He also seemed extremely passionate about denouncing me. I don’t know if his conditioning brought him up to say things like he did but I know French Canadians and the only people they take issue with is the English. They are the last people to go on the defensive for Jews. I have to question why he hovers over this post because what I found more disturbing was his stated viewpoint on the existence of nuclear weapons. Just like a globalist he advocates for the existence of nuclear weapons to create the fear around the world that building up ones armies would be pointless. This hints of knowledge unseen. And why does he guard this hen house that you created Dr. Buzz, constantly whispering in your ear so to speak who should be banned from this site. Do you remember that incident when George Bush was sitting in a school room full of kids just before the twin towers were hit. Do you know what the real story was for why George Bush didn’t move or say anything the whole time. It was because his Jewish press secretary Ari Flescher was standing across the room from him with a sign saying “don’t say anything”. Do you honestly believe that Ari Flescher could read the lips of Andrew Card, the man who whispered into George Bush’s ear about the towers being hit or do you rationally accept that Ari was in on this from the very beginning? You can see the video testimonial on Ari Flescher talking about holding up the sign for George Bush. Here’s my point. There are two types of people in politics, the actors and the stage directors. DV82XL seems very much like your stage director.

    I am signing off and saying best of luck with guarding your dogma fort. This is my last post. And maybe one day if you behave someone in the know will be kind enough to grant you a genuine doctoral credential. I know this is what you are hoping for in life.


    Quote Comment
  13. 113
    Shafe Says:

            Jack said:

    I wouldn’t go so far as to say nuclear fission is a myth. That would actually take a very comprehensive conspiracy to pull off. I suppose for arguments sake if large sterling engines were placed inside these ships and nuclear power plants, someone who might know a thing or two about how nuclear reactors work would blow the whistle.

    The sterling engines are there to cover up the steam-generation-is-a-hoax conspiracy.


    Quote Comment
  14. 114
    DV82XL Says:

    What a sad little man.


    Quote Comment
  15. 115
    Jack Says:

    Ok I need to pull a “Heat” movie moment here. That’s when Robert De Niro’s character before flying off to paradise goes back and kills the snitch who ratted out his gang. You are that rat DV82XL.

    TRUE STORY: While I was a kid on an exchange trip in Quebec I was on a bus and this pompous ass french kid was bullying the other kids. He was brandishing a knife saying how he would knife anyone who got in his way. The next day I decided to bring my own pocket knife. As usual he started getting mouthy. When we got off the bus I told him he was a ****. Of course he pulled his knife on me. That’s when I then pulled out my knife and told him to make his move. His last words were “You’re Crazy!” as he dashed away. This is who the French really are, absolute cowards. So go ahead “call me a little man”. If you were standing here face to face with me, I’d have you down on the ground repeatedly punching you in your nose until you clarified with me who was the little man.

    By the way, what 60 year old man uses the term sock anyways? This is the current generations term for a socket clone, implying I was Alexis 1111. Its obvious DV82XL is not a 60 year old and I am no socket clone for anyone.


    Quote Comment
  16. 116
    BMS Says:

    It’s clear that Jack could use some good therapy. Plenty of personal issues that haven’t been addressed, including pent up anger issues.

    Let’s hope he gets some help.


    Quote Comment
  17. 117
    Jack Says:

            jcarlton said:

    If this is a hoax i would like to know how they did it. And what happened to the USS Saratoga, The USS Pennsylvania, The USS Nevada, IJN Nagato, The Prinz Eugen and a bunch of other ships. Or how they made this movie:
    http://www.archive.org/details/AtomBomb1946

    I will leave you guys in peace. I promise. But in reviewing all the posts on this forum one last time I decided to indulge one posters comment and look into that video he linked. It was created by jcarlton post 11, clip titled 1946 atom bomb footage. The link is still good. In his post he was asking others on this forum how the US Navy would fake the ships being damaged if the nuclear bomb was a hoax.

    To answer, if you are a film studio team tasked with building this hoax and you have authorized high level clearance, it would not be a problem for that studio team to direct the US navy in helping them create a series of propaganda films. Using a pre-scripted shot and scene list they would ask the Navy if they had any ships that were heavily damaged in the Pacific battles. They would use these images of damaged ships to demonstrate the devastating effects of the so-called nuclear bomb. But it wouldn’t stop at just this trick. There would be all sorts of film trickery.

    You can call me crazy or a man who needs professional help (even though my social, professional and love life are all satisfying). But in my defence, I encourage you to review this film. In particular the scene between 2:04-2:12 minutes. You will notice the so-called explosion. Keep your eye on the registered image of the clouds before the explosion advances. You will see the clouds dissipate by a white mushrooming “nuclear” blast wave. At approximately 2:12 you will see the clouds are miraculously back in their same registered position like it was at 2:04 minutes. This my friends is a superimposition. If you are a film expert you will know how this special effect was created.

    So go ahead and poke fun at me but this example and many others is what is causing people to go what the f**ck. And then we start looking for more clues and then piecing together the names of the people behind the perpetuated clues. We find it strange that their names are all meeting a common criteria and when we point this out, all of a sudden the attack dogs come out as if someone blew the attack dog whistle. Maybe Pavlov was onto something when he demonstrated that humans could be conditioned to behave like rabid dogs. Many years of television conditioning have made it quite taboo to mention there may be a tribe like cabal behind this trickery.

    I know trend wise the usual suspects are going to reply to this post with incendiary remarks and so be it. But I encourage anyone else to explain how that particular explosion was not a superimposition of a special effect scene and a pre-registered cloud scene.


    Quote Comment

Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *

Please copy the string 5AN4n6 to the field below:

*

Protected by WP Anti Spam