Two years ago today, COVID fear-mongering began in earnest: “Two weeks to flatten...” Today’s talking heads revert to an older, more durable fear-mongering.
I am much more concerned about a starving, lawless, immoral populace in a collapsing civilization than I am of nukes. And we are seeing the beginnings of that collapsing civilization right now. I am choosing to focus on the real threat, and nukes are not it. Once again, all of this nuke crap is to make us forget what they have/are doing to civilization right now. IMHO. Stay alert. The monsters would love for us to forget what they've done over the last 2 years... and, unfortunately, it is working. Sigh.
Hmm... nuclear bombs were tested in the 1950s at Maralinga in South Australia (other places too, of course, but Australia is my own country) - and the dangers of the radiation was not understood for quite some time. Dignitaries used to go out to watch, on viewing platforms - and turn their back just before the explosion, since they did know that you would go blind by looking at the explosion directly. But the army guys would wander out in their ordinary shoes and clothing to inspect the aftermath... the fallout sometimes did drift all the way to Adelaide, and there was some gradual awareness that it was not good for you to touch, to breathe, to ingest in any way.
Like covid however, I am sure that whatever real danger exists (and I think there IS real risk) is being blown up to hysterical levels. And yes, used to keep everyone terrified and docile...
Nuclear weapons are very real and are very dangerous. They have not necessarily been left dormant. Nevertheless, the risk of nuclear war is low because the foundation of the Cold War stalemate of mutually assured destruction remains intact.
Maybe the fact that 30 year-old nuclear eggs won't crack well are why the military is going towards biological weapons, easier to do clandestine tests.
I wondered about this, so I asked a high school classmate of mine who was, incidentally, an actual rocket scientist (with the US Army). He said the following:
“The nukes in the bunkers, silos & submarines are real & ready to go. They are every bit as effective as advertised. Reentry vehicles are accurate to at least 100 meters.
What should concern you is that there are only 44 interceptors ready to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles. And we'd like to shoot two at each incoming warhead.
I don't think NK has reentry survivable reentry vehicles, much less accurate ones. I doubt Russia & China's are as capable as ours, but are plenty capable & sufficiently numerous.
As bad as anything is destruction of most any nuclear power plant could pollute the world.
P.S. I've been to ground zero at Trinity Site. That was an impressive event.”
Excellent, Dr. Huber. A while back I decided to stop living in fear (of dying/becoming ill). It changed everything, and made the lying fearmongering very obvious. Everyone is staring at screens all the time, letting themselves be constantly freaked out. I say call their bluff. Refuse the mask, what’s the worst that can happen? I appreciate your writings.
they were 2 for 2 in the 1940s with dumb drop weapons, 80 years later im sure they have improved their abilities.
my thoughts are not nuclear though they are biological, having read Ken Alibeks' book called biohazard (freely available in pdf https://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/esmallpox/biohazard_alibek.pdf) i see the advantages to not just nations but other world actors.
An open minded look but perhaps a bit if wishful thinking. These things are maintained, not gathering dust or rusting. Many nations have them. Are they all just shooting craps and saying.....these may work ? The destructuve power of what currently exists is way beyond what was used in WW2.
The bombs work and the DoD spends a lot of money to ensure that they keep working. The electronics decay along with the fissile materials. They are periodically replaced and upgraded. Even if only 10% work, that's still a whole lotta Armageddon goin' on.
May I suggest reading, "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes and "The Los Alamos Primer" by Robert Serber to gain a basic understanding of fission bombs. The book "Dark Sun" by Rhodes will give you a basic understanding of fusion bombs.
Colleen: "this distance between the nuclei of adjacent atoms even in the same molecule is 7,400 times the width of the nucleus"
Which is why you need critical mass, which means a huge number of nuclei. When you have enough nuclei, each neutron is likely to hit something before it leaves. This is also why the shape matters.
The critical mass for U-235 is around 52 kg. One kg of U-235 contains around 4 x 10^25 nuclei. Do you see how that's a whole lot of mosquitos the neutron can hit?
If you remove the mosquitos (go below critical mass), then yes, the chain reaction fizzles.
If this does not work, then how does France generate 70% of its electricity with nuclear power? Nuclear power is all about balancing the chain reaction so it neither explodes, nor fizzles out.
While I appreciate the reassurance, I'm not entirely sure I want to test the theory.
I am much more concerned about a starving, lawless, immoral populace in a collapsing civilization than I am of nukes. And we are seeing the beginnings of that collapsing civilization right now. I am choosing to focus on the real threat, and nukes are not it. Once again, all of this nuke crap is to make us forget what they have/are doing to civilization right now. IMHO. Stay alert. The monsters would love for us to forget what they've done over the last 2 years... and, unfortunately, it is working. Sigh.
Fear does not prevent dying---it prevents living. Thats the plan.
Hmm... nuclear bombs were tested in the 1950s at Maralinga in South Australia (other places too, of course, but Australia is my own country) - and the dangers of the radiation was not understood for quite some time. Dignitaries used to go out to watch, on viewing platforms - and turn their back just before the explosion, since they did know that you would go blind by looking at the explosion directly. But the army guys would wander out in their ordinary shoes and clothing to inspect the aftermath... the fallout sometimes did drift all the way to Adelaide, and there was some gradual awareness that it was not good for you to touch, to breathe, to ingest in any way.
Like covid however, I am sure that whatever real danger exists (and I think there IS real risk) is being blown up to hysterical levels. And yes, used to keep everyone terrified and docile...
Nuclear weapons are very real and are very dangerous. They have not necessarily been left dormant. Nevertheless, the risk of nuclear war is low because the foundation of the Cold War stalemate of mutually assured destruction remains intact.
Maybe the fact that 30 year-old nuclear eggs won't crack well are why the military is going towards biological weapons, easier to do clandestine tests.
Nuclear science is fake - as fake as the covaids. Nuke lies: https://fakeotube.com/video/209/nuke-lies
Why focus on nukes? That is so last century!
The greater and far more occulted threat, is from Direct Energy Weapons (DEWs) which are being deployed globally as we type.
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/11/24/directed-energy-weapons-dew/
I wondered about this, so I asked a high school classmate of mine who was, incidentally, an actual rocket scientist (with the US Army). He said the following:
“The nukes in the bunkers, silos & submarines are real & ready to go. They are every bit as effective as advertised. Reentry vehicles are accurate to at least 100 meters.
What should concern you is that there are only 44 interceptors ready to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles. And we'd like to shoot two at each incoming warhead.
I don't think NK has reentry survivable reentry vehicles, much less accurate ones. I doubt Russia & China's are as capable as ours, but are plenty capable & sufficiently numerous.
As bad as anything is destruction of most any nuclear power plant could pollute the world.
P.S. I've been to ground zero at Trinity Site. That was an impressive event.”
So I’m still wary of WWIII.
Excellent, Dr. Huber. A while back I decided to stop living in fear (of dying/becoming ill). It changed everything, and made the lying fearmongering very obvious. Everyone is staring at screens all the time, letting themselves be constantly freaked out. I say call their bluff. Refuse the mask, what’s the worst that can happen? I appreciate your writings.
they were 2 for 2 in the 1940s with dumb drop weapons, 80 years later im sure they have improved their abilities.
my thoughts are not nuclear though they are biological, having read Ken Alibeks' book called biohazard (freely available in pdf https://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/esmallpox/biohazard_alibek.pdf) i see the advantages to not just nations but other world actors.
While I applaud your openness to considering heterodox ideas, you are very wrong here. Nuclear weapons are real, and extremely dangerous and powerful.
You’re right to not worry too much about them, though. If it comes to that there’s not much you can do anyway. ;)
If you don’t think nuclear chain reactions are possible, what do you think has happened at all the hundreds of nuke explosions in the 40s, 50s, 60s?
An open minded look but perhaps a bit if wishful thinking. These things are maintained, not gathering dust or rusting. Many nations have them. Are they all just shooting craps and saying.....these may work ? The destructuve power of what currently exists is way beyond what was used in WW2.
The bombs work and the DoD spends a lot of money to ensure that they keep working. The electronics decay along with the fissile materials. They are periodically replaced and upgraded. Even if only 10% work, that's still a whole lotta Armageddon goin' on.
May I suggest reading, "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes and "The Los Alamos Primer" by Robert Serber to gain a basic understanding of fission bombs. The book "Dark Sun" by Rhodes will give you a basic understanding of fusion bombs.
Colleen: "this distance between the nuclei of adjacent atoms even in the same molecule is 7,400 times the width of the nucleus"
Which is why you need critical mass, which means a huge number of nuclei. When you have enough nuclei, each neutron is likely to hit something before it leaves. This is also why the shape matters.
The critical mass for U-235 is around 52 kg. One kg of U-235 contains around 4 x 10^25 nuclei. Do you see how that's a whole lot of mosquitos the neutron can hit?
If you remove the mosquitos (go below critical mass), then yes, the chain reaction fizzles.
If this does not work, then how does France generate 70% of its electricity with nuclear power? Nuclear power is all about balancing the chain reaction so it neither explodes, nor fizzles out.