'Nuclear bombs' are a hoax - and the consequences

Could you tell that to those that are still surviving after WW2, in Japan?

Because we all know they are fake and lies right?

SO FAKKEE

Cuz i mean seriously, have you ever seen 100 tons of TNT exploded before? lol

These old testing videos are 100% fake. Anyone can see they are miniature sets, unless you feel like bullshitting yourself.

I think this lends weight to the argument that Nukes are a hoax.

Japan cities could have been heavily carpet bombed. Some of the old photographs show rickety little buildings still standing in the alleged blast zone. Doesn't really make sense.

Good topic, OP. This is another one that comes up against extremely heavy opposition, despite some very credible arguments based off empirical evidence.

That's usually when you know you're close to a truth.

They did have some impressive "fuel air" type bombs in the past but my main problem with this OP is the the temperatures required to flash burn objects at a distance. It would require hundreds of thousands of degrees to ignite objects with heat alone at distance of several miles, something a chemical reaction can't pull off.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

In physics, an inverse-square law is any physical law stating that a specified physical quantity or strength is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source of that physical quantity.

Last Edited by IRQ_1 on 02/19/2012 05:20 PM

are you basing these "flash burns" off of video or what?

Most of the photographs of damaged urban areas just look conventionally bombed out.

As much as I would love to believe that nukes don't exist, the sad truth is that they do. Japan wasn't about to to give up without a fight to the death, until 2 bombs destroyed 2 cities. The burn and radiation sickness caused by both attacks was well documented. Ask the city fathers of Hiroshima what they think of this nonsense. The shadows of people were burnt into the ground from the intense light and heat. You people should get involved in something useful, like getting rid of the damn things, rather then pretending they don't exist.

Thanks for your comments (even though most of them are laughable).

I know you have problems, I realise your personas are dependent on your beliefs, I understand you have sound reasons for avoiding facts.

But look at [link to www.nukelies.com] - it's arranged much more readably than most forums. Look at the home page, spend a few minutes - the layout makes perfect sense - all the topics are arranged as efficiently as possible.

(The weakest section is on checking supposed nuclear test sites, which we're working on).

If some topic doesn't fit very clearly, there are offtopic sections - one for people, and one for ideas.

Feel free to register and comment. BUT ONLY if you have something to say which isn't quoted from the mass media!

Last Edited by rerevisionist on 02/20/2012 10:04 AM

You idiots, you insult the people who lost their lives on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by nuclear explosion and radiation exposure.

As someone that works in the industry per se, I can say without a doubt that there is nothing fake about the destructive properties of offensive nuclear devices.

It seems to me the OP is just here to pimp his forum that seems to be mostly his own rambling on this topic.

Go buy a science book or go back to school. It's a pretty simple concept once you actually know what you're talking about.

Thread: What's the fuss about "Nuclear Weapons"?

BTW, I don't doubt there are nuclear weapons, I doubt the quantity we're being told.

FYI.

agreed.
along with doubting their reliability
especially considering half life of materials vs the life of the units

btw, nice link to a new source of info

there are some very good arguments against their existance

dr

Thanks, everyone. It's always amusing to read posts from people who pop up claiming to have worked in some 'industry' or other, but who manage to have no evidence whatever to back their assertions.

Anyway -- [link to www.nukelies.com] though it deals with other big lies too.

Feel free to register and post. BUT ONLY IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY. We don't encourage silly graphics, parrot-like repetitions, people who spam, people who refuse to anser questions, people who post irrelevant youtubes, people who can't concentrate, people who lie, etc ....

:wrongness332:

This is interesting. I've never even heard of such a theory. It's pretty way out, but...

I've never seen a nuclear explosion with my own eyes. I'm sure neither have any of you. So all we have to go by is hearsay and videos.

Dr Know, thanks for your honest comment. When I first heard the idea, a few years ago, my reaction was the same as yours. (And, despite my being aware of a number of frauds - NASA, 'Holocaust', suppression of war crimes in Vietnam, even the Shakespeare authorship issue - I don't think I'd have spontaneously thought for myself of checking the 'nukes' belief). My introduction was a Youtube video - I thought, well, I can spare 5 or 10 minutes.

/thread.

Nuclear bombs are harmless. My uncle told me so.

Last Edited by Desert Fox on 02/21/2012 02:20 PM

In other words, no comments wanted from folks who REALLY disagree with your beliefs.

No, it's for people who have something to say - obviously this doesn't include you

Probably one of the dumbest things Man could have invented. They have created something that could wipe out the Human Race..

Stupid people!!

The leading theory about nuclear power is that it doesn't work, and never worked. The so-called 'power stations' are likely to be dumploads - they waste electricity to even out peaks in demand. (Suppose 10 million people make coffee in a TV break - that's megawatts - whole power station loads. Normally MORE electricity is generated than is needed; the surplus goes to boil water).

Nuclear power doubts - Dumpload idea
[link to nukelies.com]

Inventing properties of 'atom bombs'
[link to nukelies.com]

Inventing properties of 'H bombs'
[link to nukelies.com]

Vanunu as plant to pretend Israel has 'nukes'
[link to nukelies.com]

Hiroshima was NOT 'atom bombed'
[link to nukelies.com]

No submarines are nuclear-powered?
[link to nukelies.com]

Nukes and Iran - revisionist discussion
[link to nukelies.com]

Last Edited by rerevisionist on 02/29/2012 10:25 AM