Exactly right on all scores, there, HD. Mushroom clouds are a regular feature of good 'ol everyday bombs, but we've been made to think they (or at least the supposed "big" ones) are synonymous with atomic/nuclear weapons. (These aren't your grandfather's bombs, I guess.) And, yes, what's up with the filming of the filming? Is it for the …
Exactly right on all scores, there, HD. Mushroom clouds are a regular feature of good 'ol everyday bombs, but we've been made to think they (or at least the supposed "big" ones) are synonymous with atomic/nuclear weapons. (These aren't your grandfather's bombs, I guess.) And, yes, what's up with the filming of the filming? Is it for the making of a "behind the scenes" production, Hollywood style? That alone, imo, makes the whole "event" suspicious.
There's more, Rob. Some months ago I watched a video/podcast where a gentleman was being interviewed on this very subject. This man, who surely is deceased by now, was a top notch researcher and scientist, post World War Two. He was commissioned by the U.S. government to go to the bombed out ruins in Germany and Japan and write detailed reports on the damages for reconstruction evaluation. To his shock, he said the ruins at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, two cities allegedly atomic bombed, were absolutely no different than the ruins of the German cities destroyed by conventional explosives. In particular, the radiation readings from all of the locations were virtually identical. How can this be if atomic weapons were used in Japan? Further, where the atomic bombs allegedly struck the grounds there was no significant hole or crater as there should have been. Almost immediately, post war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt and in less than 2 years, Japanese people were living there again. We were taught that an area hit by atomic or nuclear weapons would be inhabitable for centuries because of the radiation. So how explain this blatant anomaly? The atom was conceived by ancient Greek philosophers as the smallest particle in all matter, so small it cannot be broken down further, the foundational building block of everything that exists. But quantum physics has proven this theory false as apparently, there is no smallest unit, things go down to infinity. No one has ever seen an atom, not even under the strongest electron microscopes. So how can it be split to create fission and a bomb? Additionally, quantum physics asserts that at that level it is all waves and wave function. How do you split a wave? We are lied to by the System and its sycophants about everything of any significance.
Excellent, Heretic. If you have the name and/or link of the guy who was interviewed, feel free to send along. I'm still trying to locate the research I had on all this that included similar findings as those you mention -- i.e., showing that H and N were fire bombed by conventional weapons. (Have scoured both my old and new pcs for that research and it all seems to have gone "poof," as if hit by an atomic bomb.)
Thank you, Rob. Sorry about the typo, it should be, "uninhabitable". I'll try like Hell to find it, I can kick myself for not saving it. I recall this man said that the burns and lesions on the survivors of Hiroshima & Nagasaki were caused by a napalm like substance that Uncle Saul's valiant, murdering pilots dropped on the cities along with the conventional explosives.
Nuclear weapons are as real as nuclear power plants.
One is a controlled chain-reaction, while the other is
immediate. I'm not sure what people think is going on in a nuclear power plant, whether on land or at sea powering ships. Why mine uranium if it can't be split releasing energy? They wouldn't have depleted uranium rounds if the uranium hadn't gone through a fission process.
You make logical points. However, the testimony of a learned man who examined closely the ruins of Hiroshima & Nagasaki override them. Explain why the radiation readings were minuscule there post bombing, exactly the same as in the rubble of German cities. And, not to be redundant, how Japanese people were able to live there without getting sick so soon after the area was allegedly A-bombed. Again, those films of atomic bomb blasts I watched as a young whelp in elementary school were obviously fake because as aforementioned, both camera men and their cameras would have been blasted to kingdom come. They couldn't have been more than 4 or 5 hundred yards from ground zero. Further, with acquired knowledge over time, it is clear that the constructed ramshackle dwellings that were destroyed in these alleged atomic blasts in the films I saw were demolished by controlled demolition from inside of them, not from an external blast. They imploded, just like the towers on 9/11.
Nuclear power plants exist, operate, and we can thus verify as producers of energy. Nuclear weapons, on the other hand, have been used only twice, so we're told (Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1945), and it's precisely THIS claim of their use that we're contesting here -- that is, that a-bombs may NOT in fact have been used in the bombing of H and N. So it begs the question: are nuclear weapons in fact "real"? Until the existing claims of their "reality" based on two supposed historical "events" of their use have been either fully verified or fully debunked, we cannot say definitively either way whether nuclear weapons are real or fake.
Exactly right on all scores, there, HD. Mushroom clouds are a regular feature of good 'ol everyday bombs, but we've been made to think they (or at least the supposed "big" ones) are synonymous with atomic/nuclear weapons. (These aren't your grandfather's bombs, I guess.) And, yes, what's up with the filming of the filming? Is it for the making of a "behind the scenes" production, Hollywood style? That alone, imo, makes the whole "event" suspicious.
There's more, Rob. Some months ago I watched a video/podcast where a gentleman was being interviewed on this very subject. This man, who surely is deceased by now, was a top notch researcher and scientist, post World War Two. He was commissioned by the U.S. government to go to the bombed out ruins in Germany and Japan and write detailed reports on the damages for reconstruction evaluation. To his shock, he said the ruins at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, two cities allegedly atomic bombed, were absolutely no different than the ruins of the German cities destroyed by conventional explosives. In particular, the radiation readings from all of the locations were virtually identical. How can this be if atomic weapons were used in Japan? Further, where the atomic bombs allegedly struck the grounds there was no significant hole or crater as there should have been. Almost immediately, post war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt and in less than 2 years, Japanese people were living there again. We were taught that an area hit by atomic or nuclear weapons would be inhabitable for centuries because of the radiation. So how explain this blatant anomaly? The atom was conceived by ancient Greek philosophers as the smallest particle in all matter, so small it cannot be broken down further, the foundational building block of everything that exists. But quantum physics has proven this theory false as apparently, there is no smallest unit, things go down to infinity. No one has ever seen an atom, not even under the strongest electron microscopes. So how can it be split to create fission and a bomb? Additionally, quantum physics asserts that at that level it is all waves and wave function. How do you split a wave? We are lied to by the System and its sycophants about everything of any significance.
Yes, atomic bombs are fake and ghey. Atoms and molecules are simply constructions of matrix algebra.
Excellent, Heretic. If you have the name and/or link of the guy who was interviewed, feel free to send along. I'm still trying to locate the research I had on all this that included similar findings as those you mention -- i.e., showing that H and N were fire bombed by conventional weapons. (Have scoured both my old and new pcs for that research and it all seems to have gone "poof," as if hit by an atomic bomb.)
Thank you, Rob. Sorry about the typo, it should be, "uninhabitable". I'll try like Hell to find it, I can kick myself for not saving it. I recall this man said that the burns and lesions on the survivors of Hiroshima & Nagasaki were caused by a napalm like substance that Uncle Saul's valiant, murdering pilots dropped on the cities along with the conventional explosives.
Nuclear weapons are as real as nuclear power plants.
One is a controlled chain-reaction, while the other is
immediate. I'm not sure what people think is going on in a nuclear power plant, whether on land or at sea powering ships. Why mine uranium if it can't be split releasing energy? They wouldn't have depleted uranium rounds if the uranium hadn't gone through a fission process.
You make logical points. However, the testimony of a learned man who examined closely the ruins of Hiroshima & Nagasaki override them. Explain why the radiation readings were minuscule there post bombing, exactly the same as in the rubble of German cities. And, not to be redundant, how Japanese people were able to live there without getting sick so soon after the area was allegedly A-bombed. Again, those films of atomic bomb blasts I watched as a young whelp in elementary school were obviously fake because as aforementioned, both camera men and their cameras would have been blasted to kingdom come. They couldn't have been more than 4 or 5 hundred yards from ground zero. Further, with acquired knowledge over time, it is clear that the constructed ramshackle dwellings that were destroyed in these alleged atomic blasts in the films I saw were demolished by controlled demolition from inside of them, not from an external blast. They imploded, just like the towers on 9/11.
Nuclear power plants exist, operate, and we can thus verify as producers of energy. Nuclear weapons, on the other hand, have been used only twice, so we're told (Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1945), and it's precisely THIS claim of their use that we're contesting here -- that is, that a-bombs may NOT in fact have been used in the bombing of H and N. So it begs the question: are nuclear weapons in fact "real"? Until the existing claims of their "reality" based on two supposed historical "events" of their use have been either fully verified or fully debunked, we cannot say definitively either way whether nuclear weapons are real or fake.