Are Nuclear Weapons Real or Fake?

[Phi for All]

There is nothing "convenient" about the truth except that it always seems to make more sense and sounds more believable.

Always? I think this is where you've gone wrong, Chuck. An omnipotent God creating the universe in 6 days sounds more believable than the unbelievably intricate and time-intensive way it really happened. I've often found the truth can be quite astonishing.

[Reaper]

[Response to racist rant removed]

Great rebuttal of my debunk. You must be a genuis.

...............................................

That is a good motive for supporting a pack of lies agreed upon. I don't blame him for being reluctant about a truth that could make him the laughing stock of his entourage. People might point at him and say what kind of genuis are you if you could not understand simple elementary logic. He has a direct interest in crushing the truth about those bogus sciences.

......................................

That is a good motive for supporting a pack of lies agreed upon. I don't blame him for being reluctant about a truth that could make him the laughing stock of his entourage. People might point at him and say what kind of genuis are you if you could not understand simple elementary logic. He has a direct interest in crushing the truth about those bogus sciences.

 

By the way, you spelled "genius" wrong.......idiot

 

 

Also, unless you bring some evidence to bear and start being serious, this thread will go into the can.

 

You should probably do that now, I don't think he will be presenting any, ever.

[ecoli]

[Response to racist rant removed]

 

You also said that a conventional firebombing wouldn't like the same as an atomic explosion... BUT since (according to you) atomic energy is just a farce, we wouldn't know what an atomic energy explosion looks like.

 

How can you claim that atomic weapons exist and also claim that you know what an atomic explosion would look like?

If you know what an atomic explosion, than you admit that atomic weapons exist.

 

 

ALSO, would you care to explain this footage?

 

http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/films/testfilms.aspx

Or is that faked too? I hear computer graphics wasn't that great in the 50's... how do you suppose they did it?

 

Always? I think this is where you've gone wrong, Chuck. An omnipotent God creating the universe in 6 days sounds more believable than the unbelievably intricate and time-intensive way it really happened. I've often found the truth can be quite astonishing.

 

Yet, I think creation theorists have even more proof than this guy... maybe.

I'm mean at least they get so far to convince me that evolution is indeed a complex theory and that a designer would actually simplify things.

 

In this case, the only way he can explain the atomic bomb is through an intricate and elaborate hoax spanning centuries...

 

At least creationists pretend to adhere to occam's razor... this guy isn't even trying.

[ydoaPs]

As far as faked radiation reading are concerned you can't deny that a lot of fraud exists in science and scientific claims.

Such as?

 

Does your work involve going into the core, removing the parts and examining them?

Actually, I have handled the pieces and parts.

 

My contention is that the core is full of baking-oven type elements that "sink" the excess energy coming in from the grid running on conventional sources outside the building. The water circulates and cools these huge elements while the instruments running on secret proprietary software report what the technician expects to see. That is what I think. I think your statements only prove what you do for a living, not what is really going on inside the core of those so-called nuclear reactors.

So, we take power from the grid to power huge heaters. These heaters heat the primary coolant which in turn makes steam via the seam generators for use in the secondary system to generate electricity. Is that what you are saying? What about losses? There are losses to ambient in the primary. There are losses to ambient in the secondary. There are losses in every square inch of piping due to friction(ie headloss). There are turbine losses. There are IR² losses in the electrical part of the turbine. There is no way you could even pass this off as a power GENERATING system.

 

You must not only power these heaters, but also your coolant pumps, condensate pumps, feed pumps, oil pumps, pressurizer heaters, and of course the lighting. Where does all of this power come from?

 

 

 

Logic and inductive reasoning, you know, the stuff you apply to the study of these technologies, say that only a pack of fools would design a super bomb only to deploy it at such a high altitude that the resulting damage looks like the burning of leaves in autumn.

If you are going to destroy a city, would you use one bomb or hundreds(maybe thousands)?

 

I know about the rules of evidence in courtrooms. The rules of evidence are not the same for a civil proceeding as they are for a criminal proceeding. The civil proceeding will admit lots of circumstantial evidence that the criminal proceeding will not allow. So, that analogy is defective.

The rules of debate still apply in the civil courts. It is not up to the defendant to prove his or her innocence. Ever hear of the phrase Innocent until proven guilty"?

 

 

 

 

Who says I need a doctor's degree in physics to understand the basic and numerous flaws in the official records as they apply to the nuclear hoax clusters?

How are you going to tell me it doesn't work if you can't even tell me how it is supposed to work?

 

The game begins when we enter the control room. What is a control room anyways?

It is where the steam demand is controlled, various plant conditions are monitored, and the electric plant is controlled.

 

The truth is that the control panel is an advanced simulator running on highly specific top secret application software developed secretly a long time ago and refined many times since.

Which control panel?

 

The so-called reactor has a network-type grid to distribute the energy it is said to produce to it's customers. The trick is that instead of distributing electricity it is "consuming" electricity tapped off the conventional source along it's distribution grid where they intersect.

What is the power source for a NUCLEAR submarine? Do you think we run the diesel all the time? That's pretty bad for your health if we are below snorkel depth.

 

You see the trick is that a generator can be a motor if the current is coming in instead of out. So, the turbines pushing the water around to give the employees that rumble feeling of might and energy are driven by electricity arriving from conventional sources.

Then why have the big heaters in the first place?

 

The industry is compartmentalized and Joe knows nothing of what Al is doing and so on while the whole mess of illusions is shrouded in national secrecy protocols. The hoaxster's paradise.

No. We all know each others jobs and what they are doing. We work together as a team to make sure nothing goes wrong and to diffuse the situation when it does.

 

radiation poisoning which is another convenient fallacy to shroud the racket.

So what afflicted the survivors of Chernobyl?

 

I don't agree with the concept of commercially-viable nuclear energy production because I don't believe one can create energy where there is none to create.

A nucleus is composed of positively charged particles and neutral particles. We all know like charges repel. If there is no energy to be had, how does the nucleus stay together?

 

Frankly I could care less how you describe my responses. The so-called nuclear navy is either powered by super-high efficiency batteries or battery/Sterling engine hybrids.

That's hilarious! You have no idea how little time we can get from our batteries. Using the battery is our LAST resort.

 

I have another question. What happened to Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and SL-1 if nuclear power does not exist?

[Phi for All]

This thread has been edited and placed back into the main forum for further replies (the OP will not be joining us). ChuckWest revealed his true colors when he began an anti-Semitic rant late in the thread. Those comments have been removed and the thread reinstated to Pseudoscience, mainly because of the time spent trying to debunk this particular conspiracy theory.

 

And also because ChuckWest is the absolute crown in our crackpot collection and we wanted to share his particular POV. Blindsight is 20/0, after all.

[Reaper]

I award Chuck(full of crap)West the Wack-job of the Year award. Seriously, this thread really made my day.

 

...............Farsight, you seem to be losing your edge here! Gotta start racking up those Baez points if you want to hope to compete with this one.

[Pangloss]

Thanks to Phi for All for making the effort to clean this up and get it back online, and also thanks to the members who requested it. What I mostly thought was interesting about this thread was just that it was so unique. I don't think any of us had even HEARD of this particular conspiracy theory before. It's a great example of backwards logic, yes, but it's also just a darned unusual conspiracy theory. I thought it was worth keeping for that reason alone.

 

I guess this makes Chuck happy because he's "reached people" with his theory. But I'm okay with that. Full exposure for the win.

[ydoaPs]

This thread is the fourth result on google under "nuclear hoax."

 

Apparently, we aren't the only ones. Much of it is verbatim.

[JaKiri]

People might point at him and say what kind of genuis are you if you could not understand simple elementary logic.

 

He says I'm a genius, we were wrong to ever doubt him guys.

 

I here and now start a campaign to get him unbanned.

 

FREE THE CHUCK WEST ONE

[ydoaPs]

He says I'm a genius, we were wrong to ever doubt him guys.

 

I here and now start a campaign to get him unbanned.

 

FREE THE CHUCK WEST ONE

 

FREE THE CHUCK WEST ONE

[bascule]

As someone who has been to the Hiroshima Peace Park and witnessed the effects of this bomb firsthand, I find this thread disgusting

[Pangloss]

This thread is the fourth result on google under "nuclear hoax."

 

Apparently, we aren't the only ones. Much of it is verbatim.

 

Well results 1-3 don't have anything to do with the subject we're discussing here. In fact none of the results on the first page do. It looks to me like you got the same result I got when I googled this up -- a lot of stuff on China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, etc -- unrelated subjects and little if anything about Hiroshima or nuclear theory. It looks to be a very rare conspiracy theory.

 

Good catch on the sciforums thread, though. It doesn't even appear on the first page of a google on "nuclear hoax", so I don't know where you got it (maybe the second page?), but that's some good digging there. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the same guy who posted here (and it's interesting to note that he was banned there as well, and apparently for the same reason).

 

And thanks for asking that the thread be revived, btw. It was your PM that prompted action.

[ecoli]

I just realized another thing... how can ChuckWest say that nuclear energy is fake and still say that x-rays were used as part of the hoax... What does he think x-rays are?

[JaKiri]

I just realized another thing... how can ChuckWest say that nuclear energy is fake and still say that x-rays were used as part of the hoax... What does he think x-rays are?

 

Radioactivity is different from nuclear power, if you don't understand how atoms work in terms of energy.

[JohnB]

Why do I always miss the good ones?

 

Must admit, I had to clean the coffee off the monitor when he asked Yourdad if he'd ever taken a reactor apart.

 

On the off chance Chuckie's still reading. A really big bang and no crater? What can I say? 60 degrees 55 minutes North, 101 degrees 57 minutes East.

 

Enjoy.

[YT2095]

a Nuke will give off all types of radiation, incl X-Rays, the rest are Particles.

 

X-rays being used to "contaminate" things is just as ludicrous as everything else he came out with.

[Phi for All]

Good catch on the sciforums thread, though. It doesn't even appear on the first page of a google on "nuclear hoax", so I don't know where you got it (maybe the second page?), but that's some good digging there. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the same guy who posted here (and it's interesting to note that he was banned there as well, and apparently for the same reason).

We've sent several tinfoil types over to Sciforums. They are much more lenient (and verbally abusive) with unscientific speculation. PhysicsForums would most likely trash his thread the minute it was posted. We fall somewhere in between and I like it that way.

 

Chuck got 72 posts at Sciforums (IIRC) but only got 21 here. Of course, part of Chuck's body of work at Sciforums was a second thread cursing all those filthy Jew Mods that work there, keeping the truth from... the non-Jewish, truth-seeking, open-eyed, anti-nuke, good guy types.

 

rolleyes, rolleyes, rolleyes, ad infinitum.

[ecoli]

Radioactivity is different from nuclear power, if you don't understand how atoms work in terms of energy.

 

Yeah, i know... but this research on radioactivity was done by the same Jewish scientists that worked on the "manhattan project."

 

The Curirebergs, and Nikola Teslastein for example.

[Norman Albers]

Why do I always miss the good ones?

 

Must admit, I had to clean the coffee off the monitor when he asked Yourdad if he'd ever taken a reactor apart.

 

On the off chance Chuckie's still reading. A really big bang and no crater? What can I say? 60 degrees 55 minutes North, 101 degrees 57 minutes East.

 

Enjoy.

JohnB, Is this where the meteorite blew down miles of trees?

[JohnB]

Yes Norman, the Tunguska event.

 

The explosion was in the 10-15 megaton range detonating at between 5 and 10 kilometres up. Wiki puts the blast area at 2,150 square kilometres.

 

If you have Google Earth the exact co-ordinates are 60 55' 04.66N and 101 56' 54.22E.

 

99 years later and there are still few trees and large bare areas at Ground Zero.

 

[edit]

I was just looking at the site and noticed something odd. Google Earth lists the site as 60 54'N 101 55'E some 2.5 klm SE of all other references. There is a roughly circular depression (approx 2.2 klm wide) at this point. I guess that someone saw the depression and figured that it was ground zero. Curious that the depression exists as it could not have been caused by the event.

 

The underlying geology of the area is basalt and there is no way that an air burst (even in the 20 megaton range) could cause such a depression, so I wonder what did?[/edit]

[Ophiolite]

I don't think any of us had even HEARD of this particular conspiracy theory before.

I have a light fiction book called The Jesus Factor by Edwin Corley. The underlying idea is that, for an unknown reason (the Jesus factor of the title) atomic bombs will explode when stationary on the ground, but not when dropped from a plane, or launched by a missile.

The author then builds an entertaining structure to explain the Japanese bombs, involving diverted fire bombing missions, low level explosion of powerful photographic flares to simulate the flash, dispersal of radioactive material, and patient waiting for an anticipated earthquake.

I haven't read the book since the 1970s, but it was almost as entertaining as this thread. (It was probably more convincing.)

[Sayonara]

The underlying geology of the area is basalt and there is no way that an air burst (even in the 20 megaton range) could cause such a depression, so I wonder what did?[/edit]

 

Vaporisation of some organic or mineral component of the ground that was helping to maintain its integrity? Good question

[Norman Albers]

Possibly some sort of fragment?

[Reaper]

Maybe somebody dug a hole?

[Norman Albers]

Basalt crop circles? I don't know..