It's a very good question. I believe they are large amounts of conventional explosives, and in some cases aided by special effects.
There are many inconsistencies and logical fallacies of what we are told about the bomb. Today I think the population has generally fallen victim to propaganda. Obviously if one blows up, I would change my opinion. But Chernobyl did not result in childhood mutations or mass death; neither did 3-Mile Island or Fukushima (at least not from radiation). The articles about suitcase nukes since the 80's would suggest that some terrorist would get hold of one and detonate it somewhere, which hasn't happened. My personal favorite is that the nuclear symbol looks too much like a classic film reel for it to be coincidence. Certainly worth researching on your own.
You have to understand nuclear weapon nomenclature. A 20-kiloton nuclear weapon (Hiroshima class) would be matched in effect by 20,000 tons of TNT. The maximum bomb load for a B-29 (short distance) was 10 tons. The "It was only conventional explosives" hypothesis is bunk.
You are told the exaggerations about nuclear weapons and radiation by the people who don't want them, nor nuclear power in general. The people that know about the weapons can direct you to the source material. The radiation symbol is the simplest icon for radiation that was thought at the time. If you think it looks like a film reel, that is coincidence.
So the Nagasaki bomb was real, but the Tsar bomb is fake? And the suitcase nukes are real, but security on them has been 100% effective? Nuclear reactors on cruisers were safe, but nuclear reactors on land are not.
No 3-eyed fish from 3-mile island, no mutated fish from anywhere in the Pacific after Fukushima, no birth defects around Chernobyl or the other cities above? What they publish about nuclear power is riddled with contradictions that cannot all be true.
The symbolism links cannot be proven by their nature. But sure, it's a coincidence that Alone Gay flew the same time as Hiram Johnson died, ending opposition to open alliance with the USSR. And it's coincidence that the next plane's name sounds like boxcar, and so it could not possibly have been a reference to the trans-Siberian railroad's recent completion, facilitating a USSR front against Japan. And it's coincidence that the nuclear symbol looks like a film reel, and coincidence that the #1 symbol of scantily clad ladies is just a tribute to a nuclear test site, and has nothing to do with compromising prominent politicians.
You can't fire-bomb anything with only one bomber. The Operation Meetinghouse raid on Tokyo required 334 B-29 bombers, 279 of which were able to drop bombs. It required an elaborately coordinated dropping pattern. Only one very special B-29 was used on Hiroshima ("Enola Gay") and one similarly special one on Nagasaki ("Bockscar"). The bombers were specially modified to carry the nuclear bombs. The pilots had undergone specific training to make the drop. It happened.
The link leads to unmitigated bullshit by someone who knows absolutely nothing about nuclear weapons or their effects. If his story is correct, there could be no such thing as trinitite, a fused mineral made by the detonation of the Trinity device. I have samples of the mineral. My father saw the ruins of Nagasaki in November of 1945 and described them to me. I worked for a government contractor that made nuclear delivery systems...on strategic defense against nuclear weapons. I had a Classified Nuclear Weapon Design Information (CNWDI) clearance.
Here's the problem, anons. You allow the world to peek in on this page and laugh their heads off at your deliberate ignorance. All you need to do is read "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons" by Glasstone, and you would be up to speed. But no, you decide to go the way of the Know-Nothing...and prove you know nothing. I am wondering if the real anons are not on this page...
Try this. With historical sauce, and valuable links, suggesting that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were likely traditional firebombing. https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2021/09/08/nuclear-q/
Right, and the houses were made of wood and were consumed quickly in the massive fires.
I am not discounting the idea that this is used for comms but I have to ask what this is?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_MFrnkOo3A
It's a very good question. I believe they are large amounts of conventional explosives, and in some cases aided by special effects.
There are many inconsistencies and logical fallacies of what we are told about the bomb. Today I think the population has generally fallen victim to propaganda. Obviously if one blows up, I would change my opinion. But Chernobyl did not result in childhood mutations or mass death; neither did 3-Mile Island or Fukushima (at least not from radiation). The articles about suitcase nukes since the 80's would suggest that some terrorist would get hold of one and detonate it somewhere, which hasn't happened. My personal favorite is that the nuclear symbol looks too much like a classic film reel for it to be coincidence. Certainly worth researching on your own.
You have to understand nuclear weapon nomenclature. A 20-kiloton nuclear weapon (Hiroshima class) would be matched in effect by 20,000 tons of TNT. The maximum bomb load for a B-29 (short distance) was 10 tons. The "It was only conventional explosives" hypothesis is bunk.
You are told the exaggerations about nuclear weapons and radiation by the people who don't want them, nor nuclear power in general. The people that know about the weapons can direct you to the source material. The radiation symbol is the simplest icon for radiation that was thought at the time. If you think it looks like a film reel, that is coincidence.
So the Nagasaki bomb was real, but the Tsar bomb is fake? And the suitcase nukes are real, but security on them has been 100% effective? Nuclear reactors on cruisers were safe, but nuclear reactors on land are not.
No 3-eyed fish from 3-mile island, no mutated fish from anywhere in the Pacific after Fukushima, no birth defects around Chernobyl or the other cities above? What they publish about nuclear power is riddled with contradictions that cannot all be true.
The symbolism links cannot be proven by their nature. But sure, it's a coincidence that Alone Gay flew the same time as Hiram Johnson died, ending opposition to open alliance with the USSR. And it's coincidence that the next plane's name sounds like boxcar, and so it could not possibly have been a reference to the trans-Siberian railroad's recent completion, facilitating a USSR front against Japan. And it's coincidence that the nuclear symbol looks like a film reel, and coincidence that the #1 symbol of scantily clad ladies is just a tribute to a nuclear test site, and has nothing to do with compromising prominent politicians.
You can't fire-bomb anything with only one bomber. The Operation Meetinghouse raid on Tokyo required 334 B-29 bombers, 279 of which were able to drop bombs. It required an elaborately coordinated dropping pattern. Only one very special B-29 was used on Hiroshima ("Enola Gay") and one similarly special one on Nagasaki ("Bockscar"). The bombers were specially modified to carry the nuclear bombs. The pilots had undergone specific training to make the drop. It happened.
The link leads to unmitigated bullshit by someone who knows absolutely nothing about nuclear weapons or their effects. If his story is correct, there could be no such thing as trinitite, a fused mineral made by the detonation of the Trinity device. I have samples of the mineral. My father saw the ruins of Nagasaki in November of 1945 and described them to me. I worked for a government contractor that made nuclear delivery systems...on strategic defense against nuclear weapons. I had a Classified Nuclear Weapon Design Information (CNWDI) clearance.
Here's the problem, anons. You allow the world to peek in on this page and laugh their heads off at your deliberate ignorance. All you need to do is read "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons" by Glasstone, and you would be up to speed. But no, you decide to go the way of the Know-Nothing...and prove you know nothing. I am wondering if the real anons are not on this page...
Suit yourself.