Nuclear weapons don't exist.

[Ernie Nemeth]

Maybe the problem is semantics. A "fake nuclear explosion" does not rule out a new type of weapon that was understood using the misleading standard model. Maybe "nuclear" is not the right word but the massive explosion is fact. What is happening may be explained wrong but something different is definitely occurring. Whether the atom truly has a nucleus that can be forced to pump out things called neutrons that will then crash into other nuclei in a cascading effect, or whether a portal of some sort is forced open by the violent inward concussive wave front, or whether a torsion field interacts with the ether releasing massive amounts of energy, or whether it is a process we have no idea about is not yet conclusively determinable.

[Hughe]

@Paul

Thanks for the summary work.

I spent half hour to make a PDF file from Dewey Larson's web book. Larson was the fourth scientist who came up with new theory in physics
What gain will I have to post sensational thing here? I try to limit my forum activity here. Speculation, exchanging ideas were thing of the past to me. When you find really good one, it's better to share with others.

I'm in two third way of getting one practical solution I planned. Once it's done, I'll start developing a vehicle that goes 100 km/L, inspired by Craig Vetter's work in US. Limited time and poor performance of human body drags me down. I gotta sleep five to six hours a day, handle all kinds of bull**** from time to time.

I bought a used motorcycle whose engine size is 100cc, rode it 10 months in last year to find average fuel mileage. It already has 45 km/L. Applying Craig Vetter's technology, it's feasible to make it to 80 km/L+ vehicle. I'll have perfected the prototype, then move to somewhere I can build it legally. In South Korea no individual is allow to work on fuel efficient vehicle. It's ticket to the jail or business bankrupt.

Average car owner spends thousands dollars just for fuel expense. Reducing one fifth to one tenth of the fuel expense help car owners but somehow people do not see it. The government and auto manufacturers, oil companies will do anything to prevent new type of vehicles. US demonstrated it decades ago. Other countries have obediently followed it.

Cheering up electric cars powered by battery seems big scam to me. Big energy companies which build fossil power plants would love it though. They gotta keep maintaining profit margin, exploit new market.

Craig Vetter spent over thirty years to perfect one aerodynamic technology for fuel saving.
http://www.craigvetter.com/pages/470...ine-intro.html

The solution is simple: We must do more with less. Inventor and Designer Buckminster Fuller said this over 50 years ago. If we reduced our consumption by 3/4ths, we would not be buying foreign fuel for our vehicles.

Creating a Freedom Class Vehicle will make "doing more with less" popular.

@Nick Matkin

The official claims become nonsense when you apply common sense, basic laws in physics, and alternative theories. The two bombers which dropped atomic bombs on Japan would be destroyed by the EMP. EMP travels in speed of light.

Are you honestly believe one nuke will wipe out entire grid of USA by EMP shockwave? This is pure non-sense, propaganda, another form of manipulation of public. If nuclear bomb is so powerful, USA or other powerful countries could've used EMP attacks on previous wars. Why the hell US army spent astronomical resources to invade 2nd and 3rd world countries, Vietnam, Iraq. They should do EMP attack dropping one or two bombs in high altitude.

Electricity is blood of modern society. When the grid falls, the society goes back to stone age within a month. This is absurd reality we live in but the government doesn't tell us nor delusional scientists and professionals. The problem is so big, average folks tend to turn away from it or goes back to sleep mode. Only few, who are driven by self preservation or whatever motive they have, make emergency plan and act on it.

Thermonuclear fission energy (1), thermonuclear bomb (2), thermonuclear fusion reactor, and a lot of absurd constructs in mainstream science, including the discovery of gravitational wave are close to bull****. There are the brainchild of garbage, hopeless Theory of Relativity.
One nuclear power plant that have hundreds times more radioactive material poses great threat to any country. Nuclear bomb? Its conversion ratio of matter to energy is similar to conventional bomb. If the nuclear bomb converts 5 percent of matter into energy, we wouldn't see the Mushroom cloud. Pure energy is invisible. All nukes are fracking dirty bombs, radioactive chemical weapons.

A physicist who believes in Theory of Relativity proudly explains how a nuke's EMP attack is so deadly, how the Sun's core by fusion reaction generates all the energy, blah blah blah. Astronomers even go further: Black Holes, 4D spacetime, the Big Bang universe. We've been duped, brainwashed by these kind of crap in schools over one hundred years. Involuntarily and subconsciously as a collective we've been creating absurd world that ultimate fear and destruction rules everything.

Finding a problem without a solution makes people being hopeless. I think this is the main reason why most people become ignorant, refuse to face the truth. The truth sucks and make them even unstable. So people go back to normal lives. Things slowly get worse due to engineered collapse of coming economy.

What I've learned for the past five years, real scientists started waking up. Most scientists and individuals in Electric Universe consider Theory of Relativity as a nonsensical hypothesis. However EU community is reluctant to talk about political, societal issues. I suspect they are tasting the water, change in public consensus carefully. Who knows. Real science supports full disclosure, easy to duplicate experiments, and work with Nature.

Professionals who are so ignorant to alternatives in science actually are digging their own graves.

[Nick Matkin]

The equipment used on the bombers was all thermionic (i.e. valves/tubes) which are orders of magnitude more robust against EMP, be that man-made or from close lightning strikes. The fragility of modern electronics against EMP has always been a problem. That was why the underground emergency communications centres used the old electro-mechanical telephones phones, teleprinters and Strowger exchanges.

I didn't say (has anyone?) that one nuke would wipe out the US by EMP. But at the right height and yeild it would do a lot of damage as the extremely high voltages would likely be induced into the thousands of miles of exposed electricity grid - which in effect is a massive RF receiving antenna, inductively coupled to ground at various points, and capacitively coupled wherever cable pass over the ground.

If that were not enough to damage the terminating equipment (transformers, switches etc.) the massive voltage pulse propagating through the network wouldn't leave may devices that were connected to it working very well. The gate junctions of many FET semiconductors need to be protected against mere static charge from clothing for goodness sake! (Semiconductor vulnerabilities are not something many consumers are aware of - until it's a problem.)

Anyway, a lot of money has been spent hardening military electronic equipment against EMP damage over the decades. It could all be a red herring I guess just to waste money on the military, although if it was all made up, that would mean the all tests results on hardening equipment from all the different nations' experiments were also all made up. Someone would notice that...

Your expertise will be in demand by all sorts of companies, as you have an insight into the real facts.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
The equipment used on the bombers was all thermionic (i.e. valves/tubes) which are orders of magnitude more robust against EMP, be that man-made or from close lightning strikes.

I don't know for sure, but I doubt that. Do you have a reference for that?

Tubes are fragile. If I were designing a bomber in the 50's or 60's (The B-52 was designed circa 1952 and beyond, with about 100,000 logic gates) I'd rather set about hardening a mostly transistor based implementation, rather than shock mounting a tube based implementation. By that point, the US Military was the primary consumer of transistor technology. Discrete and low integration semiconductor technology can be designed to handle a fair bit of voltage.

[Nick Matkin]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombers.

Military tubes are far from fragile, either mechanically or electrically as they normally have metal envelopes and their internal construction goes beyond that of their domestic equivalents. But even domestic valves are extremely tolerant of relatively short lived abuse from over voltage, shorted loads, etc. By comparison, a transistor isn't known as the fastest fuse on three legs for nothing!



I don't know what the later bombers used, although the military would have been the first adopters of transistor devices, even the electrically noisy and low gain first germanium transistors of the late 40s and 50s

Obviously valves/tubes were unsuitable for the complex logic demanded by calculating or navigating due to their power requirements and size.

It may be apocryphal, but didn't the US get hold of a Soviet MiG fighter in the late 60s or early 70s and were surprised at the crudeness of the thermionic avionics, until it was pointed out that, although crude and basic, it was much more immune to EMP effects.

[DSKlausler]

Posted by Paul (here)
...I do not trust the official reports on such matters.

Bingo; why would any reasonably informed individual?

[DSKlausler]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)

...does not rule out a new type of weapon...

...whether it is a process WE have no idea about is not yet conclusively determinable.

(Emphasis mine)

Indeed... and propulsion (for those magic "thrusters" in a vacuum).

[Tangri]

Posted by KiwiElf (here)

Posted by Ellisa (here)
And tests at Woomera in Australia by the Brits. They have since had to pay out people whose health was damaged in those tests--- including Aborigines whose native lands, as well as the people themselves, were ruined by the explosions.

Personally I think Edmund Matthews is either delusional or a sensationalist, or possibly both. Note that the UK appears in the list--- but the damage was done mainly in Australia. The area is still cordoned off in some places.

Yeeees... I've filed it in the same place as the FE believers... (the RUBBISH BIN )

"...I'm no longer interested in why people are stupid, I'm just interested in the fascinating new ways people have chosen to be stupid..."

Although only title is in my criticizing , your color writing part is my other side of the boundaries which I could be agree with my heart but i would never type them .
In these cases I use Dennis's words as a quotes. Next time I can borrow yours eh?

[KiwiElf]

Posted by Tangri (here)

Posted by KiwiElf (here)

Posted by Ellisa (here)
And tests at Woomera in Australia by the Brits. They have since had to pay out people whose health was damaged in those tests--- including Aborigines whose native lands, as well as the people themselves, were ruined by the explosions.

Personally I think Edmund Matthews is either delusional or a sensationalist, or possibly both. Note that the UK appears in the list--- but the damage was done mainly in Australia. The area is still cordoned off in some places.

Yeeees... I've filed it in the same place as the FE believers... (the RUBBISH BIN )

"...I'm no longer interested in why people are stupid, I'm just interested in the fascinating new ways people have chosen to be stupid..."

Although only title is in my criticizing , your color writing part is my other side of the boundaries which I could be agree with my heart but i would never type them .
In these cases I use Dennis's words as a quotes. Next time I can borrow yours eh?

Sure, I borrowed it too! (author unknown) - and to clarify - ALL and ANY criticism I've made on this thread is aimed at the title and producer of the video - Edmund Matthews - (and first video itself), NOT Hughe.

[ketikoti]

Please read the following interview with Anders Björkman who makes a compelling case that nukes are scientifically unfeasible:

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-ana...ieve-in-nukes/

His website is a most interesting read:
http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm

Related to nuclear weapons are the deployment mechanisms like ICBMs that go into space, orbit and re-entry to strike. Well, dream on. Any missile would burn up beyond usability upon re-entry into the atmosphere. Please study the info on these pages:
http://planetaryvision.blogspot.com....-vehicles.html

Now, we already had a fantastic thread here about the nuclear technician Galen Winsor who whistled the bell decades ago about how the government and special interest groups scared the public by exaggarating the dangers related to nuclear technology (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...omic+bomb+hoax), leaving both a lot of power and money.

I am still pondering about the many implications of this.
I understand the Americans wanted to deceive the enemy (Japan, Russia) with a fictitious super weapon, but shortly afterwards the both superpowers decided both to deceive the world with their dummy space programs and fake mutual annihilation programs. They were not deceiving each other! They were deceiving us. And still do. And already doing so for many generations. In the meantime having a cover to extract a lot of money that undoubtedly goes to black programs. To keep the show going, science had to be corrupted too with weird theories, and dumbing down the general public?

There is not only a cover-up about hidden human history, ufo's etc but it seems all of reality as we were thought is a deception...

[Pearls For Swine]

The field of physics is awash with lies and disinformation- possibly to cover up over-unity, free energy and other technologies which threaten the status quo.
However, radiation is real, radioactive pollution is real, and radiation sickness is real. Provably so.
Find another theory which explains the horrible damage done by the nuclear industry and THEN you can claim that "nuclear weapons aren't real".
Until then, the evidence still supports the current theory of nuclear weapons.
Besides, this meme is being pushed by the flat earthers (red flag alert!).