SH Archive Nuclear Weapons: do they exist or not?

[codis]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-10-01 11:43:15
Reaction Score: 2

I've seen blue things though. I could point blue things out to you. I daresay you would agree that they are blue.

Yes, blue things, but not blue as such.
That was my point. IMHO kind of wrong category for "atom". Just felt some hair-splitting was indicated ...

 

[feralimal]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Feralimal
Date: 2019-10-01 12:15:30
Reaction Score: 1

Yes, blue things, but not blue as such.
That was my point. IMHO kind of wrong category for "atom". Just felt some hair-splitting was indicated ...

But atoms are being treated as a 'thing'. Not as a quality of a thing e.g. blue or warm. I don't think I made a category error - you brought in the discussion of blue.

My point is why do we treat atoms as if they are real, when we have no experience of them. I could just as easily claim that atoms are tiny creatures, that look like rabbits. If I were to claim that, you would be right to ask for proof. I would be making an extraordinary claim so I should provide proof. If I said to you that its true because that's what I was told, and everyone else believes in them, is that ok?

'The world' apparently believes in atoms. Fair enough, but why? What is the proof for atoms? Can I see it? If you believe in them can you explain why you do?

 

[codis]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-10-01 12:34:53
Reaction Score: 3

And here the hair-splitting starts ...
The objects supposedly made up of atoms are real - except perhaps for nihilists.
But the "atom" is a still model about how things look like on microscopic level.

Someone, or rather 'the world' apparently believes in atoms.

Belief is - IMHO - the opposite of knowledge, to put it first.
Is matter built of atoms in the sense of the (supposedly) greek "átomos" i.e. indivisible, meaning not divisible into smaller, self-similar elements ?
Yes, I suppose so.
STMs (scanning tunneling microscopes) can supposedly show atoms, but what one sees is the measured energetic interaction.

And what this átomos is made of ? Quanta, finally only oscillating energy waves, i.e. nothing really tangible ?
Not sure.

 

[feralimal]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Feralimal
Date: 2019-10-01 13:24:08
Reaction Score: 3

The objects supposedly made up of atoms are real - except perhaps for nihilists.

And

Is matter built of atoms in the sense of the (supposedly) greek "átomos" i.e. indivisible, meaning not divisible into smaller, self-similar elements ?
Yes, I suppose so.

Why do you suppose so? What convinced you atoms are real?

Rather than respond, you want to sling mud and call me a nihilist. Nihilist? I'm not the one that believes in nukes!

I'm a no nihilist. Quite the opposite. I think of myself as a empirical skeptic. I have to understand how a thing works for me to hold is true. I don't like to assume too much, and I don't believe in magical thinking, even if most other people seem to.

This isn't to say that atoms couldn't exist. It's possible they do. But I haven't seen much that convinces me yet. There only seems to be a bunch of very complicated evidence that no one really understands. The complexity is such that no one researches it.

I note a genuine piece of circumstantial evidence, with regards as to how this belief makes people act. The 'too complicated to understand' proof has a disempowering effect on most. In their apparent ignorance those people then defer to experts who claim they do understand the evidence. And those experts also say they have created a bomb so powerful that everyone is in fear of the bomb.

This evidence suggests the posibility that a trick is being played. As this trick is disempowering and fear inducing, it provides a tangible leverage to the tricksters, as it can make them move the people as they want.

Is this a possibility for you?

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Starmonkey
Date: 2019-10-01 17:48:11
Reaction Score: 1

ACTUALLY, our entire reality is a clever trick!

So, where do you START and where do you STOP?
It's ALL just perspectives. Points of view based on "individual"(which is also debatable) perceptions.
So there's UNITY. And there's everything else.
And when I confer more strongly with "my" cells and configuration, I probably won't find the need to try and prove it to anyone. Gotta find out for "your" self.

 

[mifletzet]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Mifletz
Date: 2019-10-01 18:25:20
Reaction Score: 2

"New Earth" claims that the fire that destroyed Moscow in 1812 during Napoleon's occupation was of a nuclear nature!

 

[feralimal]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Feralimal
Date: 2019-10-01 19:37:57
Reaction Score: 1

ACTUALLY, our entire reality is a clever trick!

So, where do you START and where do you STOP?

I may be wrong, but I don't think it is all a trick. I think there is an objective reality, and that sometimes you can peel back the trick to reveal something deeper. And actually, it seems what I find revealed is much more pleasant. Eg in this case, no nukes would be a fantastic result, no? I worried about that stuff as a child - its no good.

The sooner illusions like that are undone (if they are indeed illusions), the better. You can pretend that the tricks, when they are believed, don't impact you but I think you'd be lying to youself. At least I would be. It chills you and disassociates you from yourself and others. A lack of care is dangerous IMO and can be a disservice to yourself and the rest of us.

And when I confer more strongly with "my" cells and configuration, I probably won't find the need to try and prove it to anyone. Gotta find out for "your" self.

Confer. Interesting choice of word.
"to consult together; compare opinions; carry on a discussion or deliberation."

We are conferring here. I don't know about conferring with one's cells and configuration. Well, I suspect that conflicted, fear-based thinking make for less not more cellular conversation (to extend your metaphor).

I agree that you have to find out for yourself, that it's the only way. But sometimes you need to be introduced to an idea that you haven't considered - the case needs to be made. (There are no new ideas under the sun.) You compare opinions, discuss - confer. Its how we learn. I think it's fair to express alternative ideas and possibilities. Surely its fine to do on this forum! And it's also fine for others to ignore, agree, disagree, misunderstand, partially understand, etc.

Perhaps putting out your best ideas on a topic, being prepared to undo negative learning when you find it, is a start! Ideally you would want a correction to your position! That would be moving forward.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Starmonkey
Date: 2019-10-01 23:34:02
Reaction Score: 0

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-10-02 01:58:45
Reaction Score: 1

‘The Emperor Deterrence may have no clothes, but he is still Emperor.’ Despite his nakedness, this emperor continues to strut about, receiving deference he doesn’t deserve, while endangering the entire world. Nuclear deterrence is an idea that became a potentially lethal ideology, one that remains influential despite having been increasingly discredited. - concluded Lawrence Freedman (the dean of British military historians and strategists) in his classic The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (1989).

The atomic bomb, and nuclear bombs, are powerful weapons that use nuclear reactions as their source of explosive energy. Scientists first developed nuclear weapons technology during World War II. Atomic bombs have been used only twice in war - both times by the United States against Japan at the end of World War II. - History

View attachment 12940

There is this theory out there that nuclear weapons do not exist. I am not quite sure what this "do not exist" is supposed to mean exactly. Apart from having all of them explosion videos made up, it appears that at the very least we do have the evidence of some humongous explosions. Yet, we have bizarre videos similar to the one below, where an alleged scientist claims to have been eating Uranium for years. With no negative consequences apparently.

Another suspicious event to add to the bunch would be the bombing of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. A diligent observer would notice, that image googling any other WW2 Japanese city will produce levels of destruction, comparable to the ones suffered by Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Of course all the damages suffered by other Japanese cities were officially caused by fire bombings. Those "fire bombing" damages can be observed in the below thread:

• Urban fire damage or was it a powerful nuclear-like explosion?

Additionally, I could say that very similar damages have been taking place quite a few years prior to the first alleged Atomic Bomb detonation in July of 1945.

• Who nuked San Francisco in 1906?
• Urban Fire verdict: global attack on our civilization or incompetency?

View attachment 12941

I am not pretending to be some sort of an expert on nuclear weapons, but one of the dangers of nuclear explosions is the Nuclear Fallout.

• Nuclear fallout, or fallout, is the residual radioactive material propelled into the upper atmosphere following a nuclear blast, so called because it "falls out" of the sky after the explosion and the shock wave have passed.

My conventional education suggested that the affected area could be contaminated for hundreds of years. Do we really observe the consequences of such contamination in Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. I do not know, do you?

*****

KD: I'm essentially trying to figure out what exactly is being questioned in the existence of Nuclear Weapons. Is it the ability to produce the explosion of certain magnitude, or is it the subsequent radioactive contamination? Both explosion power, and contamination, or something entirely different?

What is your opinion on this issue? "Yes" or "No", and why?

My interest here: "something" leveled San Francisco in 1906, just like something did Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Damages are indistinguishable from each other. I find it highly suspicious. Could it be the same weapon? The one we do not know about.

just a small drop into the nuclear bucket. Confirmation Tianjin was Nuked – Veterans Today | Military Foreign Affairs Policy Journal for Clandestine Services

This articular explains a lot you do not know, it is completed, alas.

 

[SuperTrouper]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: SuperTrouper
Date: 2019-10-02 02:11:32
Reaction Score: 1

So, where do you START and where do you STOP?
So there's UNITY. And there's everything else.

As above so below. You can start wherever you like and head in either direction, in perpetuity, until the cows come home. Unity is the only truth. Our matrix/illusion is one of separation, duality, good v bad, black v white. The more your vibration rises above it, the harder the matrix tries to tempt you to bring you back down, but you gradually mature and learn its tricks, avoid getting caught up in polarisation and figure out that your thoughts create your own reality. Then you cruise...

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Starmonkey
Date: 2019-10-02 04:39:33
Reaction Score: 1

As above so below. You can start wherever you like and head in either direction, in perpetuity, until the cows come home. Unity is the only truth. Our matrix/illusion is one of separation, duality, good v bad, black v white. The more your vibration rises above it, the harder the matrix tries to tempt you to bring you back down, but you gradually mature and learn its tricks, avoid getting caught up in polarisation and figure out that your thoughts create your own reality. Then you cruise...

I was being facetious, but not.
Smelling a discoursive challenge.
The Trump dilemma. Anything can be true or fake news. All up in the air.
And then anything is up for grabs. Love and war. Say goodbye to death and taxes.
Goin for it. Ant-Man style. Quantum like.
And I'd LOVE to play word games. Context. Semantics. Etymology and entropy. I have some good authorities to quote. Be good to stretch the old mental limbs.
And yes, it's all about VIBRATION.

 

[codis]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-10-02 05:41:23
Reaction Score: 2

Rather than respond, you want to sling mud and call me a nihilist. Nihilist? I'm not the one that believes in nukes!

Where did I say you are a nihilist ?

The 'too complicated to understand' proof has a disempowering effect on most. In their apparent ignorance those people then defer to experts who claim they do understand the evidence. And those experts also say they have created a bomb so powerful that everyone is in fear of the bomb.

As I understand it, your opinion about nuclear weapon is mostly based on the malintent of their proprietors and said experts.
I think there are much cheaper and more effective ways to instill fear.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: rengel
Date: 2019-10-02 09:34:55
Reaction Score: 3

...
I find it astounding that in the US, only one new reactor entered into operation since the mid 1990s (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant - Wikipedia), the construction of which commenced in 1973, well before Three Mile Island.

Haven't you forgotten the US Navy? They have a lot of nuclear-powered (aka driven by power produced by a reactor) ships and submarines.

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-10-02 20:01:21
Reaction Score: 1

This is one of the things that bothers me, If it blows up it will kill everything in a 30 miles radius and nothing will be able to live there for 100 years, but yet chernobyl seems to be a veritable paradise for all the local wildlife and fauna, same with fukushima, have a look on google earth and look back through the historic images, same story here. Let me just say that again it will kill everything within thirty miles and nothing will be able to grow for a hundred years!

how they work. It is complicated. Ultimate Leaks: The History of Nuclear Weapons Design 1945-2016 – Veterans Today | Military Foreign Affairs Policy Journal for Clandestine Services

Thermonuclear weapons are one of the deep state's favorite weapons. Indeed, they were the primary demolition devices used to destroy WTC 1, 2, and 7 on 9/11. I feel like this "nukes don't exist" meme is an effort to conceal this fact.

"New Earth" claims that the fire that destroyed Moscow in 1812 during Napoleon's occupation was of a nuclear nature!

His commanders wrote in their diaries of the event. They were diaries from not only the French but Germans ect.

During the Napoleonic Wars, France conquered Egypt, Belgium, Holland, much of Italy, Austria, much of Germany, Poland and Spain. France directly conquered or controlled through alliance most of western Europe by 1812

Update:

The files presented did not work so well. Try this : nuclear bombs how do they work site:veteranstoday.com,veteranstodayarchives.com

Option; go to veteranstoday.com , them find the "search the archives window, type in "how do nuclear bombs work, you will be in their archives looking at lists of articles ranging over years that should explain the process to everyone.
My over site on the first attempt.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Jaska
Date: 2019-10-26 00:14:55
Reaction Score: 3

If there's no nukes or nuclear radiation/fallout, what pings the Geiger counters? They don't ping post dynamite explosions. Not trying to be contrary, just seeking info.

It's tritiated water, tritium, super heavy water, which is radioactive. I think nuclear power is really waterpower/hydropower. Nuclear plants are steam machines.

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-12-01 07:25:18
Reaction Score: 6

I am wondering how one would fake a nuclear reactor to those that say nuclear power is fake. Idk, but from what I stand they do exist, only underutilized because governments fake nuclear weapons and purposely fail nuclear reactors as a way to strike fear into the public against nuclear power.

After considering that anything I personally experienced is out of date here goes. I had the honor to have worked with the nuclear physicist that had the patients on the reactor inside the Nautilus. He was a nuclear physicist and engineer, Georgia Tech. He worked directly for Admiral Rickover.

As "Whitewave" once remarked about a patient of hers, this man could not leave the United States without DOD approval. I would accompany the Nuclear Engineer abroad as his personal security aid. As we got older we separated but always kept in touch. In 1993 he called me out of the blue and asked if I was available for a trip to Europe. Yes a pleasure to help.

He had become leary of the new Navy Admirals since Rickover had died. He needed someone he trusted. We had others with us from Canada.We did not make it very far at an underground subway in Brussels we encounter a small group of thugs and they knocked us about while stealing the all important briefcase. The DOD banded me from going to Europe, because the briefcase contained my passport.

The above is to set the seriousness of this man. At this point you should know that Admiral Rickover was Russian as was this man. I had hours to study his papers and even went on the Nautilus. The many conversations with these men left no doubt that Nuclear weapons are real. They talked about designer bombs for special application. The smallest one was the size of a baseball.

There were different combinations of material used. Some gave off almost no heat, some gave a bright blue light apparently the blue light would fry your retinas, ouch. They could make them with no fallout, directional and even to cause specific illness from the radiation.

The project we were working on did not include weapons, but showed that the "Cold War" and the anti-Russian story in America was deeply flawed. .If this is off topic move it please.

 

[Grumpy Owl]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Grumpy Owl
Date: 2019-12-01 17:47:25
Reaction Score: 5

To answer the question posed in the OP, I probably used to believe that they did, but I am not so sure now.

For sure, the "perception" that they exist is an important one for TPTB to perpetuate.

I recall during the UK General Election campaign in 2015 or 2017 (we seem to be having GEs so regularly now it is easy to lose track!) there were debates and the subject of the UK's renewal of Trident came up.

One party was pledging to spend huge sums of money 'renewing' the Trident system, presumably by buying new submarines and thermonuclear warheads, while the other was pledging to save money by scrapping it altogether.

To the best of my knowledge, while the Trident submarines have routinely patrolled around the UK coastline, the nuclear missiles have never actually been used. So certainly there is in my mind a strong argument against spending huge sums of money to replace something you've never used (and are probably never likely to need to use, what with the changing face of modern warfare), especially while there are other vital public services being starved of funding.

That is my opinion anyway. But sadly, there are a large number of people in the UK who believe that we DO need this Trident nuclear deterrent to 'protect' us.

I quipped at the time "why don't we just scrap Trident but not tell anyone? We could just announce that we've spent £12bn 'upgrading' Trident, and our 'enemies' would be none the wiser."

As I type this, I now realise that perhaps this has been the case already, and perhaps the UK has NO nuclear weapons, but it is a good excuse to siphon off huge sums of money into 'black-ops' projects.

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-12-02 07:28:49
Reaction Score: 5

To answer the question posed in the OP, I probably used to believe that they did, but I am not so sure now.

For sure, the "perception" that they exist is an important one for TPTB to perpetuate.

I recall during the UK General Election campaign in 2015 or 2017 (we seem to be having GEs so regularly now it is easy to lose track!) there were debates and the subject of the UK's renewal of Trident came up.

One party was pledging to spend huge sums of money 'renewing' the Trident system, presumably by buying new submarines and thermonuclear warheads, while the other was pledging to save money by scrapping it altogether.

To the best of my knowledge, while the Trident submarines have routinely patrolled around the UK coastline, the nuclear missiles have never actually been used. So certainly there is in my mind a strong argument against spending huge sums of money to replace something you've never used (and are probably never likely to need to use, what with the changing face of modern warfare), especially while there are other vital public services being starved of funding.

That is my opinion anyway. But sadly, there are a large number of people in the UK who believe that we DO need this Trident nuclear deterrent to 'protect' us.

I quipped at the time "why don't we just scrap Trident but not tell anyone? We could just announce that we've spent £12bn 'upgrading' Trident, and our 'enemies' would be none the wiser."

As I type this, I now realise that perhaps this has been the case already, and perhaps the UK has NO nuclear weapons, but it is a good excuse to siphon off huge sums of money into 'black-ops' projects.

In England you have Porton Down a longtime research base for chemical,biological and nuclear. Look for your real weapons there. I doubt that a large nuclear based weapon will ever be used, except as you mention, to scare the other countries into submission.Again the boutique nukes are being used as we talk. Example. Bali, 911, Syria, Japan, Ukraine, Yemen.

The Japanese event was a great example of coercion, blackmail, making an example. The security company that had cameras in that plant, replaced their cameras a few weeks prior to the explosion. One of those cameras was in an open area close to the reactor that blew up. See picture below.

The Japanese had signed a contract for enrichment of nuclear fuel with Iran. The Tsunami originated in an ocean trench east of Japan about 100 miles. One of those "weapons" went off near the sea bed, covering up the nuke explosion at the reactor. Look close at the videos and photos of the tsunami as it hit shore. Remember the earthquake, no signs of earthquake damage.

The company that had the security contracts with the airports during 911 was owned by the same people that had security in Japan.Go figure.

One must keep in mind that nuclear weapons were developed in the 1920s-50s. We have leaped past nuclear and straight to beam and nano weapons.

Looking at numerous archaeological sites TNT does not melt rock.

 

[codis]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-12-02 08:45:52
Reaction Score: 2

Looking at numerous archaeological sites TNT does not melt rock.

One plausible argument of Dmitri Khalezov, stating that WTC I and II were brought down by underground thermonuclear charges. The molten rocks were visible on "ground zero" images. He argues they were installed as controlled-demolition devices from the beginning.

 

[asatiger1966]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: asatiger1966
Date: 2019-12-02 09:16:15
Reaction Score: 2

One plausible argument of Dmitri Khalezov, stating that WTC I and II were brought down by underground thermonuclear charges. The molten rocks were visible on "ground zero" images. He argues they were installed as controlled-demolition devices from the beginning.

Do not know anything about when they were installed. Did you notice that after the buildings fell that a convoy of large dump trucks filled with dirt starting spreading dirt on the ground. This could lessen the effects of radiation, especially if mixed with other retardants? The trucks showed up really fast?

‘The Emperor Deterrence may have no clothes, but he is still Emperor.’ Despite his nakedness, this emperor continues to strut about, receiving deference he doesn’t deserve, while endangering the entire world. Nuclear deterrence is an idea that became a potentially lethal ideology, one that remains influential despite having been increasingly discredited. - concluded Lawrence Freedman (the dean of British military historians and strategists) in his classic The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (1989).

The atomic bomb, and nuclear bombs, are powerful weapons that use nuclear reactions as their source of explosive energy. Scientists first developed nuclear weapons technology during World War II. Atomic bombs have been used only twice in war - both times by the United States against Japan at the end of World War II. - History

View attachment 12940

There is this theory out there that nuclear weapons do not exist. I am not quite sure what this "do not exist" is supposed to mean exactly. Apart from having all of them explosion videos made up, it appears that at the very least we do have the evidence of some humongous explosions. Yet, we have bizarre videos similar to the one below, where an alleged scientist claims to have been eating Uranium for years. With no negative consequences apparently.

Another suspicious event to add to the bunch would be the bombing of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. A diligent observer would notice, that image googling any other WW2 Japanese city will produce levels of destruction, comparable to the ones suffered by Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Of course all the damages suffered by other Japanese cities were officially caused by fire bombings. Those "fire bombing" damages can be observed in the below thread:

• Urban fire damage or was it a powerful nuclear-like explosion?

Additionally, I could say that very similar damages have been taking place quite a few years prior to the first alleged Atomic Bomb detonation in July of 1945.

• Who nuked San Francisco in 1906?
• Urban Fire verdict: global attack on our civilization or incompetency?

View attachment 12941

I am not pretending to be some sort of an expert on nuclear weapons, but one of the dangers of nuclear explosions is the Nuclear Fallout.

• Nuclear fallout, or fallout, is the residual radioactive material propelled into the upper atmosphere following a nuclear blast, so called because it "falls out" of the sky after the explosion and the shock wave have passed.

My conventional education suggested that the affected area could be contaminated for hundreds of years. Do we really observe the consequences of such contamination in Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. I do not know, do you?

*****

KD: I'm essentially trying to figure out what exactly is being questioned in the existence of Nuclear Weapons. Is it the ability to produce the explosion of certain magnitude, or is it the subsequent radioactive contamination? Both explosion power, and contamination, or something entirely different?

What is your opinion on this issue? "Yes" or "No", and why?

My interest here: "something" leveled San Francisco in 1906, just like something did Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Damages are indistinguishable from each other. I find it highly suspicious. Could it be the same weapon? The one we do not know about.

Picked up this video from Veterans Today site.

Nuclear History: Stopping Denied Nuclear Attacks, How to Fight Back – Veterans Today | Military Foreign Affairs Policy Journal for Clandestine Services