A Bomb’s birthday party

Be the 1st to vote.

I missed the A Bomb’s birthday last week on 8/6.

To celebrate, here’s an article you don’t see much anywhere besides here or cluesforum.info….

It is the anniversary of dropping an atom bomb on Hiroshima. But the Hiroshima narrative is a lie.

We’ve reported at considerable length about how the whatever was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn’t have the kind of immediate destructive impact that is portrayed.

Here’s Anders “shock interview” (who was banned from cluesforum.info… I think) saying nukes are a hoax. Strangely, he still believes in nuclear fission and nuke plants.

The Daily Bell: OK, then, when did you decide that nuclear weapons were a hoax? You wrote to us that it took 50 years?

Anders Björkman: Actually, it took me 40 years to become an A-bomb denier. I worked in Japan 1972/6 and learnt a lot about the A-bombs there and many other things that didn’t add up.

The Daily Bell: You think nuclear power is valid. How does nuclear power work?

Anders Björkman: Fission works. But it must be moderated and it works only in peaceful, nuclear power stations. Fission was discovered 1938 but most physicists didn’t really understand how it worked until the 1950s

h/t Chris

Cluesforum nuke hoax thread

Remember this call?

10 thoughts on “A Bomb’s birthday party

  1. Barbara Müller

    Björkman is an engineer. I’m having an engineering degree myself. You have to learn a lot of conventional science, lots of physics and chemistry. You have to practice in laboratory experiments creating and measuring values. The theoretical physics part is crap of course, so you just memorize and later forget. But the applied part of physics is real. It’s how we build our cars, homes, airplanes, etc. Fission is applied physics. The initial idea for the A-Bomb came from the experience, that a reactor can so overheat, that all the metals inside inclusive the radioactive stuff melt. It was scary in itself but nor really dangerous. I’ve seen a small reactor many times during my university times over two decades ago. It’s still working. Why exactly was Björkman banned from Cluesforum? He’s such a reasonable person with wide knowledge. I had some email correspondence with him a few years ago. It was him who convinced me, the ISS is fake. Before that I considered it possible to put humans on the near orbit and bring them back. By the way I’ve seen the fake ISS two days ago again on the exactly predicted times. No airplane can fly that precise because of winds and weather. It must be something flying above any weather influence therefore above any atmosphere.

    1. stephen

      As far as one can know anything for certain, with the help of the internet it becomes pretty obvious Nuke Bombs are fake, but, for all the difference it makes, I too think Fission is a real, usable, phenomena; applied science, knowledge, is an amazing thing.

      I suspect Atom Bombs were magic’d up, part of a package, to put an end to, contrived, slaughters like World War One. A noble lie.

      “… it is in fact laudable to lie to the people too dumb to understand the necessity of virtue.”

      “Noble lie”:
      en.wikipedia.org…

      I have also seen the very fast, apparently very high, moving sky object, star-like, you mention Barbara a couple of times in the past year or two maybe. I’m in France. The second time, the next day, I tried to match it up with a given satellite, it didn’t correspond to any though I might have been doing something wrong. Here’s the site I used, you set your location top right:
      www.heavens-above.com…

      [if it interests, the “Interactive sky chart” on that site is good.]

      Is it possible this moving-star-like-thing has always been there, like the Sun or Moon, but we weren’t told about it? And even, maybe, ISS is a cover story for a time when we have the benefit of an internet and its attendants to perceive it?

        1. stephen

          Have you seen the light-object-thing me and Barbara are talking about Ab? Presuming me and Babs are seeing the same thing, I think we are from a previous description she’s given?

          The second time I saw it, two or three months ago, I specifically had in mind that it might be a plane with lights as I’d read that here as you say; and I didn’t think it was.

          It appears to be very high, or as high as the stars and moon appear to be, it is as bright as a bright star, or planet maybe. It’s traveling very fast, very smoothly, much faster than any plane I’ve seen before for the height it seems to be. I suppose it could be a supersonic plane but I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before. It is absolutely silent, so it probably isn’t closer than I think. I’m in the countryside so there is no background noise or light pollution. We have military jets pass over occasionally-regularly and they are really loud, the high flying commercial, I presume, flights that go over are silent too, but much slower.

          Both times I’ve seen it, it caught my eye, I wasn’t looking for it, but went “what IS that?” It doesn’t appear like a plane with lights, which I presume would be directional, the light doesn’t change as it moves away, it looks like a fast moving star or planet, or what we are told are stars and planets.

          Has anyone other than Barbara seen it?

          And further why bother to rig out planes with lights and fly them all over the world to imitate a space-station-whatever, everyday of the year for years-n-years? Why not just say it’s not possible to see ISS/Satellites from earth, look at the ridiculous stories people accept about planes traveling through buildings and what-not, no pictures of stars from the moon, double bloody amputees in wheelchair races pushed by cowboys holding dangling arteries!

          1. ab Post author

            S, it had been proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that Nasa is in charge of space fakery. Therefore, the ISS is fake, from head to toe. If you choose to link moving lights in the night sky to an HG Wells fantasy, then that’s your unfortunate choice. While you’re at it, add Bab’s fission power and you’ve got the fuel issue licked. People that absorb energy by not getting my points here and causing obfuscation are labelled trolls. You are exhibiting these traits. It is therefore logical to ask if you’re a troll. Have you introduced yourself? Have you been on an audiochat to verify that you are genuine? I have only so many neurons left to spare these days, and I don’t want to waste them on those sent to deplete my resources.

            1. stephen

              As far as I can tell ISS is fake [as was the hilarious Skylab]. I have the impression we are shown how silly it is with things like the woman’s crazy-lacquered hair.

              I don’t know what the moving-light is, that’s why I’m asking people here. If I asked the local university-whatever I’m pretty sure they would say it was a satellite or space station and I doubt satellites exist because as far as I can tell the Earth isn’t a globe whizzing through space.

              Because I disagree with you Ab about Fission does not make me a troll, in fact I find the whole idea of Trolls ridiculous, adults can disagree and discuss, children believe in fairies and trolls. Belief does not require evidence, I think there is evidence that Fission exists and that humans use it to perform work.

              If the only way to verify I am genuine, whatever that means, is by speaking on audio-chat well then I can’t because I don’t have a computer set up for that. Even if I did I could simply lie.

        2. Barbara Müller

          in other words, you prefer to believe in some unknown and never heard of “high altitude airplanes”, which cannot be followed using conventional telescopes and always appear as bright and fast moving dots, where other planes no matter how high they fly can easily be followed and seen as airplanes and not dots? Did you ever try to watch airplanes with a telescope? It’s very easy because the higher the airplane flies, the slower it appears. Airplanes are never on time because they need air to fly and the air always moves, there are winds in all directions, sometimes storms, sometimes engine problems. So how can you predict the precise times days in advance, precise to the second and never fail for any part of the Earth it flies over? At least that’s my observation. The “ISS”, whatever that is, comes over the horizon exactly as predicted and disappears exactly as predicted. To the second, every time. The same thing can be observed by somebody in every country it is flying over. What’s your explanation, AB? Don’t get me wrong here. I don’t believe there are humans on board. I also don’t believe rocketry can work in the void space simply because of the pressure difference. Try to ignite a butane bottle and you’ll have an explosion. You’ll have to reduce the pressure first to a point where the exhaust gases have almost no force anymore and burning produces only heat. The pressure difference in a vacuum must be indefinitely bigger than in the atmosphere. I think, all it takes, is to shoot the satellite like a bullet with a certain speed, so it reaches a certain altitude and then it starts circling automatically or it falls back. I think that’s how it is done.

          1. stephen

            “… don’t believe rocketry can work in the void space”, yes, it doesn’t seem to fit anything we observe in life, it’s one of many reasons I’m more or less certain no one and nothing, from Earth, has been to the Moon, presuming the Moon is outside the Atmosphere which I’m not sure it is, if you look when you can see it in daylight, it looks inside, however leaving that aside this vacuum-rocketry raises other issues for me:

            How do we know space is a vacuum?

            What is Space, and what is The Atmosphere? What is above us?

            It seems to be true that the air gets less dense, or has less oxygen as you go higher, though I’ve never experienced it myself I’m prepared to accept that, so does it just fade to nothing?

            Why doesn’t the Atmosphere, the Air, the gases-whatever they are get sucked, infinitesimally dispersed, into the vacuum of Space? It makes no sense to me. Saying an undetectable force called Gravity sticks it down below the Vacuum sounds crazy, if I make even a small pressure difference, in a jar-whatever, here on the ground, it is immediately equalled when I open it.

            The creation is an incredible-amazing thing but the physicality of it follows rules as far as I’ve ever seen.

            For the record, the Sun looks to me like a hole with an incredibly bright light behind it, the Stars like pin-pricks in a revolving cover, with a bright light behind, and the Moon looks strange, can’t quite make out what it seems to be. Talking of strange light, have you ever looked, especially with binoculars, at Sirius? It’s like watching a fast-cycling traffic light, a christmas display! My wife, for days, refused to believe it wasn’t man made!

            Going back to ISS-or-plane and taking a closer look at commercial jets as they go over, if they are roughly-ish overhead I CAN hear them, I thought I couldn’t. And observing a couple around sunset when they mirror-reflect the rays, as I think the ISS is said to, the jets are large-ish, sluggish, distinctly cigar shaped light, not star sized dots.

            1. Barbara Müller

              rainbow is a projection of the sun on a curtain of raindrops. Sometimes we see double rainbow. that’s the corona, which is suns atmosphere. It has a visible border. So has Earth’s atmosphere. At the edges where the sun or the corona ends light gets broken into a rainbow. You can watch sun burning using the h-alpha filter or a special telescope, its fascinating. Or you watch the spots, if there are any visible, using simply a projection of the sun on a piece of paper using binoculars. It’s a sphere, like any other planet, it rotates pretty fast, the spots are moving visibly within a day. We know for sure, the air pressure gets lower the higher we measure it. At some altitude there is no pressure anymore. That’s the end of the atmosphere. Beyond that, there is void. The void maybe not perfect and full of some particles, but it it still can be called void in relation to the atmosphere. It’s not difficult or expensive to make such simple observations at home and everybody can do it. It’s applied science.

Leave a Reply