Is the A-Bomb Real?

Note: The following is something to consider when we hear about the current war going on in Ukraine (that Russia and the US could use nuclear weapons). Mark my words, as time passes, there will be some reason why nukes were NOT used, OR, that CGI’s will be used to say nukes were used on such-and-such city. When, in reality, it was carpet bombing using conventional weapons. Remember, for the past two years there has been one scare tactic after another. The purpose being is that it’s easy to get people do what the NWO wants them to do. Covid and the Ukraine war is being used to take people’s freedoms away.

There is a lot more to be posted on nuclear weapons, so please stay tuned.

Source:

Some very good posts here have commented on the way official announcements about ‘nuclear bombs’ have varied. (The same sort of thing applies with nuclear power).

If you’re inventing some sci-fi phenomenon, it should at least be consistent. (I’ve heard an account of some film director insisting on making a list of the abilities his filmic superhero was to have).

The basic idea of a nuclear bomb is that a chain reaction gives an instantaneous huge flash, a small star. This is outside the scope of normal human experience, and if the thing is impossible, nobody could check in any case. Even if it is possible, assuming it is ‘expensive’, it would be nearly impossible to replicate. So the designers have to produce something self-consistent, but otherwise have quite a free hand. Who could predict, for example, the effect of a huge cloud at a temperature of thousands of degrees?

Problems
Flash Some films intended as informational, or for scare purposes, show a brilliant flash – easily done photographically by whiting out a few frames. But there are several problems. (1) If this is supposed to be still contained within some sort of shell, it will not be visible. This is a problem with H bombs, which are supposed to have fusion triggered after fission. Some films of ‘H bomb’ tests actually show a double flash, the two flashes of course being separated by a dark frame of film. This gives not only a problem with the first flash, which ought presumably to be contained, but also with the timing – why should there be a convenient 1/15th second or so, to just fit with film frames-per-second speeds? (2) The idea of flashes of X-rays, or of rays which somehow cause air to fluoresce, seems to have led to suggestions of X-ray or ‘neutron bombs’. (3) However a major problem is generating a bright enough flash. It would have to be visible in daylight – ‘brighter than a thousand suns’. So far as I know there is simply no way to emit large enough amounts of energy in a short time. I think this is why flashes are only reported e.g. by supposed eye witnesses in Hiroshima, and why the reports vary so much. And why other ‘eye witnesses’ were allowed ridiculously feeble dark glasses, or made to face the other way for typically ten seconds. [See some of my videos].

Blast The imagery here is far more limited than appears from written ‘descriptions’. Hiroshima and Nagasaki show no signs of a huge central blast. The black-and-white inserts in 1950s films show models and the blast effects aren’t at all convincing. I’ve tried to show this on a pair of videos which look at a 50-second insert taken from a newsreel. So there are problems here, too. Explosive blasts as developed since gunpowder rely on the production of gas from solid, so there’s a sudden volume increase. (1) The assumption must be that the intense heat of fission causes a very sudden huge expansion. Presumably this is meant to be uranium products, possibly uranium oxide, but in gaseous form. Why should such a blast be much bigger than an explosion of a similarly-sized conventional explosive? (2) Obviously there’s a cube root law with distance – the effect will diminish rapidly with distance. Kiloton explosions were known in 1945 – I have a video on the blowing-up of Heligoland. This must have been one reason why ‘megaton’ explosions were invented. [Added Nov 2013:] (3) There are problems producing the results of a huge blast; for example a huge crater would be expected, and the impossibility of getting this might be the reason for the supposed air blast.

Heat seems to have been somewhat suppressed as an effect, despite the fact that the whole point of fission was that it supposedly generated intense heat. Why should this be? (1) In practice, it’s impossible to generate the huge temperatures supposedly reached by these things. (2) There are problems with temperatures quoted as (say) 1 million degrees. What does this actually mean? No equipment could measure such a temperature, as it would no longer exist. Is there an upper limit to temperature? (3) The effect of such intense heat is far outside normal experience. Could it, as some Hiroshima facts, or factoids, state, melt tiles? Melt eyes? Evaporate bodies? Glassify desert sand? Scepticism suggests these things must be fake. For example, Hiroshima in the morning had lots of crowds. Why would there be only one or two alleged ‘shadows’? If tiles could melt, why wasn’t the place a mass of melted brick and tile? How come trees were still standing? (4) Bikini tests (near water) show mist or condensation effects. Many tests in fact show ‘condensation’ – as in a Wilson cloud chamber – which of course hides whatever’s behind. Could clouds really form at huge temperatures? I think such considerations must have led to heat being downplayed.

Radiation. There are some very good postings on this site on the propaganda of ‘radiation’ and its claimed extent and dangers. I won’t add to them here, though it’s worth emphasising that radiation can’t be seen or felt, and therefore is ideal as a subject for obfuscation and lies. (And I don’t think anyone’s mentioned the ‘Lucky Dragon’ fishing boat incident, when Japanese fishermen allegedly had radiation ‘fallout’ dropping onto them. I think probably this was a planned incident. Most of the fishermen lived long lives).

The point is, when making up the properties of these things, mistakes seem to have been made, until some fairly stable description was uneasily fixed on for a time. We can compare the manufacture of the ‘Holocaust’ fraud, in which steaming to death, electrocutions, and rotary beating machines, were dropped in favour of the myth of ‘lethal gas chambers’ and crematoria, and the treatment of ordinary Russians, Ukrainians, Poles and others was ignored.