Nuclear Weapon Myth or ???

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by snafu7700
the premise is that nuclear weapons can not be detonated in motion,

I will look for the book, but can you elaborate on his reasoning (or lack of) for us, maybe start a thread and link to it?

Yeah, that ought to provide some amusing distraction from the test I'm studying for.

I pre-apologize...any snarkiness that happens will be aimed at Corley and NOT you.

He's actually a pretty good fiction writer, surprisingly enough...wrote under various pseudonyms Air Force One and A Murder of Crows.

edit: "Jesus Factor" is primarily listed under "fiction: thriller" and "fiction: science fiction"

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

This does not make any sense ....

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by snafu7700
the premise is that nuclear weapons can not be detonated in motion,

I will look for the book, but can you elaborate on his reasoning (or lack of) for us, maybe start a thread and link to it?

I resently saw a great documentary on the chernobyl neuclear accident...
And apparently the lattest studies show that the radiation effects of the worst neuclear accident in history are completely different and no where near as bad as scientists expected......
For example the environment around the accident area has reverted back to lush wilderness with a diverse and vigourous eccology.
Basically nature is kickin a##.

And as for the radiation ETC the wild life are hardly effected at all.
And from the studies it is apparent that the charts we have all been relying on to determine how much radiation is required to cause various levels of physical effects EcT are having to be totally re-worked.....
And the most modern science says that radiation although letal at extreme levels is no where near as bad as thought at lower levels.....
IE the graph they showed showing the number of birth defects VS the background radiation showed that below a certain amount that the defects drop right away and that this correlation is not linear as was thought....

Wish i had all the figures... it was a great doco.

Wish I could get more information on that .... if anyone has anymore information on chernobyl Nuclear Accident would be apppreciated.

Originally posted by morphonius821
... is no where near as bad as thought at lower levels.....
IE the graph they showed showing the number of birth defects VS the background radiation showed that below a certain amount that the defects drop right away and that this correlation is not linear as was thought....

Wish i had all the figures... it was a great doco.

Oddly enough, there is some documentable evidence that constant low levels of radiation may actually protect against cancer. The theory is, I think, that the cells that have "lost it" and gone out of control aren't repairing themselves very well anymore. So a few zoomies and they're damaged enough to die. Also the constant low level damage going on stimulates your body to produce lots of NK's to deal with any recognizable tumor cells.

But your intact cells can either repair the damage, or recognizing that they are FUBAR will commit suicide.

So over time, the statistical trend is toward fewer cancer cells.

See also "hormesis".

Links such as this ... CREDITING so much to the A -BOMB .. just has me skeptical of what exactly it woudl really do ...

I AM NOT SURE ABOUT ALL OF THIS ...

LINDSEY ANHALT

Who is Lindsey Anhalt ??? ---- They/he/she wrote this article .... I WANT TO HEAR FROM SOMEONE that has been in the bombings and that has survived and I want to hear them tell me that they were changed and thier families genetics were changed from the BOMB. I guess I want first hand proof .. but that is rather hard to come by ... Anyone ever seen a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION FIRST HAND ????

Well, you can certainly get food that's been sterilized by radiation, a lot of medical supplies are sterilized by radiation.

I don't think you can make a reasonable case for radiation not being harmful.

sorry guys, but i've been rather busy lately. in regards to the book, it's simply a work of fiction that happens to be a very interesting read for CTers. i'd go into further detail, but it's been 15 years since ive read it. you should be able to find it at your local library.

Originally posted by DragonsDemesne
Assuming that Tom Bearden knows any more physics than my pet cat, even with that explanation, you could do it once a day, not once a year. The sun is directly overhead at noon once on any given day, unless you live very near the north/south pole.

Sorry DD, but not true. The sun is NEVER directly overhead anywhere on earth north of the tropic of Cancer, or south of the tropic of Capricorn. And at every other spot on the earth between those two lattitudes (except directly on the equator) it is directly overhead just once per year. Anyplace directly on the equator will see the sun directly overhead twice per year, once on the spring equinox and once at the vernal equinox.

I truly didn't post this to get a dig in at you, just to get the facts straight for everyone else.

Sorry for the brief departure from the main topic.

That's fine, no offense intended. I'm still trying to visualize just how this would work, but for the moment I shall take your word on it.

Originally posted by Deus_Brandon
Links such as this ... CREDITING so much to the A -BOMB .. just has me skeptical of what exactly it woudl really do ...

I AM NOT SURE ABOUT ALL OF THIS ...

LINDSEY ANHALT

Who is Lindsey Anhalt ??? ---- They/he/she wrote this article .... I WANT TO HEAR FROM SOMEONE that has been in the bombings and that has survived and I want to hear them tell me that they were changed and thier families genetics were changed from the BOMB. I guess I want first hand proof .. but that is rather hard to come by ... Anyone ever seen a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION FIRST HAND ????

HAARP is real,and it works. Not really a secret anymore. They've even done shows about it on the science channel.

Good luck finding a hiroshima/nagasaki survivor to talk to you. But you could look into one of the many documentaries about the A-bomb drops on japan. They have survivors recalling their stories in the interview.

Radiation does change and mutate DNA. Ask anyone with cancer. Chemotherapy is brutal on the body. Or simply refer to the disfigured children born in the chernobyl region.

Im sorry but this thread topic is not following the ATS motto of "deny ignorance", its perpetuating it.

Fact. I have personally been to the Maralinga test site in South Australia,WITH a geiger counter and yes there is residual radiation. And there were no people being "attacked with this bomb. It is in a very remote part of the world and in addition was a British weapon so your conspiracy theory that it was a power consolidation plot by Uncle Sam, doesn't hold any water.

Fact. this 90" from the sun is a load of BS. Before believing this pile of crap please think first and ask yourself the following 2 questions.
1. What time did the Hiroshima bomb detonate? Answer: approx 8:15 am.

2. What time did the Trinity test take place? Answer: 5:29.45 am local time. and sits approx 33.6"N of the equator. Do you seriously think the sun would be perpendicular to the site at this time and lattitude?

I welcome posters raising valid points and thought through theories, and having a right for their voice to be heard.

I dont support the right to post these kinds of unsubstantiated fantasies under a misleading thread title. Please do your home work so people like me dont have to shoot you down, we dont do this for fun.

LEE.

Sorry guys but this thread is almost as amusing as the 'chemtrails' thread!

1. Nuclear bombs only working at 90 degrees to the sun when it is totally overhead? LMAO! Tell that to the test engineers who detonated hundreds of nukes in Nevada and Siberia hundreds of meters UNDER the surface...still giggling to myself about that one. High school physics teaches you the basics of a nuclear chain reaction, go do some reading!

2. Salting. Adding chemicals or additional non fissile radioactive isotopes to a weapon is actually counterproductive. After nuking an area it may still need to be occupied, especially in the case of tactical rather than strategic nukes. Not a good idea to make it totally inhabitable for decades. Nuclear weapons are designed to be cleaner than ever, both for efficient use of fissile material and for future occupation/redevelopment. Strategic weapons are a deterrent, hence why their yields are published! If they were salted this would also be advertised to act as an additional deterrent!

Sorry to be snobbish but ATS is about information not propergation of total and utter claptrap!

Cheers

Rob

I agree with the last two posters. I am not a nuclear physicist, but I know enough about nuclear fission and fusion to determine that whoever started this thread has never, ever, ever, taken any physics that dealt with fission or fusion. Nulear reactions happen daily in all sorts of forms. When you turn on a light, there is a nuclear reaction that takes place in the flourescent light above your head. An electrical voltage excites the electrons in the "neon" gas and creates light. There is a small fraction of nuclear material released. UV tanning bulbs work in the same respect. I suggest all who believe that you have to be 90 degrees from the sun in order to have nuclear reactsion, you should read a book about nuclear physics and not a speculative document written by a science fiction writer. This is almost as ignorant as believing in Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code". It is fiction...fiction is not fact. Deny Ignorance, read a book!!!

I STARTED THIS THREAD !!!

And no where will you see that I say that a nuclear bomb has to be anywhere ... especially in relativity to the SUN to explode. I mean Seriously that is rediculous.

But then again I never said there was a NUCLEAR REACTION in a light bulb.


LIGHT BULB !!! Possibly a Chemical Reaction !!!

But most definately not a NUCLEAR REACTION ....

NUCLEAR REACTION

Originally posted by AlphaAnuOmega
I agree with the last two posters. I am not a nuclear physicist, but I know enough about nuclear fission and fusion to determine that whoever started this thread has never, ever, ever, taken any physics that dealt with fission or fusion. Nulear reactions happen daily in all sorts of forms. When you turn on a light, there is a nuclear reaction that takes place in the flourescent light above your head. An electrical voltage excites the electrons in the "neon" gas and creates light. There is a small fraction of nuclear material released. UV tanning bulbs work in the same respect. I suggest all who believe that you have to be 90 degrees from the sun in order to have nuclear reactsion, you should read a book about nuclear physics and not a speculative document written by a science fiction writer. This is almost as ignorant as believing in Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code". It is fiction...fiction is not fact. Deny Ignorance, read a book!!!

Originally posted by spanishcaravan

Originally posted by Deus_Brandon
Links such as this ... CREDITING so much to the A -BOMB .. just has me skeptical of what exactly it woudl really do ...

I AM NOT SURE ABOUT ALL OF THIS ...

LINDSEY ANHALT

Who is Lindsey Anhalt ??? ---- They/he/she wrote this article .... I WANT TO HEAR FROM SOMEONE that has been in the bombings and that has survived and I want to hear them tell me that they were changed and thier families genetics were changed from the BOMB. I guess I want first hand proof .. but that is rather hard to come by ... Anyone ever seen a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION FIRST HAND ????

HAARP is real,and it works. Not really a secret anymore. They've even done shows about it on the science channel.

Good luck finding a hiroshima/nagasaki survivor to talk to you. But you could look into one of the many documentaries about the A-bomb drops on japan. They have survivors recalling their stories in the interview.

Radiation does change and mutate DNA. Ask anyone with cancer. Chemotherapy is brutal on the body. Or simply refer to the disfigured children born in the chernobyl region.

One reason you're confused is that you aren't distinguishing between the different ways the word "radiation" is used. The "radiation" from your telephone is qualitatively different than the "radiation" from a nice lump of cobalt-60, different still than that emitted by, say, plutonium or radon.

hey, how about a vial of that sh#t they killed the russian ex-kgb with in england, what was it.. polyonium-210 er something like that?

Exactly what this thread was supposed to bring out .. Thanks ... What about the Plutonium ??? Or is that already in the Nuclear Warhead ? And if it is in the Nuke does it preform a change into something else or is the waste still laying around after the blast !?!

Originally posted by runetang

One reason you're confused is that you aren't distinguishing between the different ways the word "radiation" is used. The "radiation" from your telephone is qualitatively different than the "radiation" from a nice lump of cobalt-60, different still than that emitted by, say, plutonium or radon.

hey, how about a vial of that sh#t they killed the russian ex-kgb with in england, what was it.. polyonium-210 er something like that?

Most nuclear weapons currently in use (at least by the 'major players') use plutonium as the fissionable material to actually create the nuclear initiation. Since the energy released (the 'atomic blast') is the result of a runaway nuclear fission reaction, by definition, a fair amount of the plutonium gets turned into 'something else'. Exactly what else isn't important for the purposes of blowing things up, and isn't really controllable in any case. The only things you can say with real certainty are that whatever it is, it will be lower on the periodic table than plutonium, and that it will be intensely radioactive for a period of time.

The rest of the plutonium (along with the bomb casing) gets turned into plasma, more or less, and dissipates in the blast wave. Eventually, the 'evaporated' bomb components, along with dust and bits of the target that get sucked into the updraft, become 'fallout'...radioactive dust and particulate matter that gets carried along by the wind, and settles out over time.