nuclear weapons question

For general discussion of topics that don't have a specific theme, questions or suggestions for research.

Moderator: daniel

Post Reply
User avatar
infinity
Mage
Mage
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:32 am

nuclear weapons question

Post by infinity » Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:46 pm

This guy takes us on a tour to radioactive places on earth with his hazmat and radioactive detection device, and shows the green glass of the heat of the first nuclear test site too.

https://youtu.be/TRL7o2kPqw0

I'd like to understand how this fits in with the idea that nuclear weapons are a lie. If the tradition picked up by this guy's instrument isn't fake, which I can't see how how it is fake, then I don't understand the nuclear weapons thing being a lie. Maybe I'm just confused or something? Maybe I misunderstood?

animus
Cognitor
Cognitor
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:00 pm

Re: nuclear weapons question

Post by animus » Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:05 pm

I am also not quite sure.
Have you seen the articles from jimstone and the videos of UpNorthOfThe49th?

http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/blackmail.html
http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/demonspider.html

Jump
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqkbYNYHN34

Hidden In Plain Sight - Nuclear Blackmail?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=102dhnHYIpw

also interesting and somehow related:
http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/busted.html
http://jimstonefreelance.com/explosives.html
http://jimstonefreelance.com/cartoon.html


So is it really just to frighten people/governments with no real threat to back it up? I don't think so.
But the analysis on the bikini-atoll tests is definetely spot on!

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: nuclear weapons question

Post by daniel » Sat Mar 28, 2015 4:18 pm

infinity wrote:This guy takes us on a tour to radioactive places on earth with his hazmat and radioactive detection device, and shows the green glass of the heat of the first nuclear test site too.
The technique is called "dusting an area," and comes from the 1940s where unscrupulous landowners would load bits of gold into a shotgun and fire it into the side of a hill, which a perspective client would "accidentally" spot and grab the land, thinking he found the mother lode.

Be careful not to confuse radioactivity (commonplace) with the remnants of a nuclear explosion. I have noticed that tendency building... "no explosion" = "no radiation," which is NOT TRUE. Nuclear reactors run very hot, so yeah, it will melt sand into glass... though one would think that a nuclear explosion might do something like shatter the glass. Curious how it doesn't.
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

pietropirou
Inquirer
Inquirer
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 8:04 am

Re: nuclear weapons question

Post by pietropirou » Thu Apr 02, 2015 12:00 am

In Australia, Frank Collins with his Ucadia System has updated his blog with a post in a similar vein. I feel that fear impedes our potential to foster rapport - shutters/blinders/boxes/presumptions/labels all flow down from this sum of all fears as we are taught power rests in the force of the state, instead of the openness of the individual.

http://blog.ucadia.com/
by the time of the beginnings of the Manhattan project, a number of issues had become clearly apparent:

(1) The first was that causing nuclear fission was extremely fickle. If one or more conditions were not right, then rather than causing nuclear fission, all that would happen would be a release of toxic radioactive poisoning – similar to the deliberate sabotage of Chernobyl and later Fukashima by the bat-shit crazy agents of the clinically insane New World Order elite as parasites within in the United States; and

(2) The second was that nuclear fission is more dependent on atmospheric conditions than conventional weapons – given the effect of electro-magnetic fluctuations on the shield of sub-atomic particles such as electron neutrinos, swirling in and around the atomic nuclei. It was also why effective nuclear fission events needed to be at or very near ground level as the weakest point of atmospheric and ground electro-magnetic fields and therefore electron neutrino fields; and

(3) A thermo-nuclear explosion could/can not be set off in motion. The device needed to be absolutely stationary to work. Let me repeat that in case you missed what I just said. A thermo-nuclear fission event cannot occur through a man-made device unless it is absolutely motionless. Why? Because unlike the Illuminati and Global Elite that refuse to listen or acknowledge Ucadia and the military that continue to disobey direct orders to stand down from such madness as planning for World War III, Mother Nature is not bat shit crazy. Instead, the whole of the universe works against enabling a nuclear fission event whilst an object is in motion. Why? Because if such things were possible, then the moon would have been vaporized billions of years ago, along with the earth upon the nuclear-fission effect of large scale meteorites and other impacts.

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: nuclear weapons question

Post by daniel » Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:49 pm

Here's an interesting tidbit...
"IF we have them [nuclear weapons], why can't we use them?"
--President Donald Trump
Makes you wonder...
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

Post Reply