18-03-2012, 02:10 PM
|
#441 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
 You see the trails are actuall smoke trails, placed in advance of the blast to measure the shock wave contour. Or so the story goes  So that footage is 100% pure FAKE |
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 02:17 PM
|
#442 | ||
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
allow me to create a more simple example for you.. if you push a shovel in some sand, and lean it to one side, this forces a gap in the sand, but you will not just see a gap while the surface is completely smooth like the rest ... you will see the area where the gap is has been distorted and crushed a little .. for some reason, you are trying to say that a Nuke bomb ripping apart a huge crater in the floor is not going to effect the surface around that crater. Quote:
I dont see a road in the large crater pic. But there are many points you are over looking (not surprising) first of all you can see in the Nuke test site that different size explosions took place obviously using different size nukes. Second of all Nukes to not really create a much bigger initial explosion anyway.. they have a secondary blast which spreads out. A nuke Creator will be deep. the one in the Somma pic does not look very deep at all.
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli Last edited by thirdwave; 18-03-2012 at 02:19 PM. |
||
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 02:24 PM
|
#443 | |
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
no, you see, that is just you pushing more BULLSHIT.. There are two reasons the trails would appear. 1, because contrails become visible due to the condensation and heat in the air. When the bomb goes off, this obviously effects the heat and condensation around it, hence the trails appear. Your claim is stupid anyway as the trails are not consistent to where the explosion goes off. 2, Because the explosion creates light, which also makes the trails more visible.
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli Last edited by thirdwave; 18-03-2012 at 02:26 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 02:43 PM
|
#444 |
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
What I find amusing..
Is not only have you put forward nothing to back up your illogical and baseless claim.. but you have also claimed WHO hoaxed them! lol
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli |
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 06:23 PM
|
#445 | ||
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
Quote:
At least concede this  As for the crater - you are claiming the clumpy piles of material around the crater did not come from blast ejecta, but from ground distortion around the crater? |
||
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 08:24 PM
|
#446 | ||
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
Your question was not about what the trails where, it was why they appeared after the explosion and were not visible before. I gave you a very logical reason for why that may be... as I told you that I did not know what they were So what is it you are saying I should concede exactly?  Quote:
You did not make sense, so I highlighted the reason why. The way I see it if a huge crater has split open the ground and created a crater, then the ground around it would usually be effected in some way and that this would also be visible.. I guess the fresher the crater the more visible the distortion would be.
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli |
||
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 08:45 PM
|
#447 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
The trails are SMOKE (like Red Arrows) used to mark the contours of a blast - this is official info. Smoke does not suddenly appear like that. What you were watching was a cut scene |
|
|
|
|
|
18-03-2012, 09:25 PM
|
#448 | |
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
Ok, when there is no blast the smoke trails do not appear to be visible to the camera lens. However, when the explosion takes place, you can clearly see that the trails a slowly picked up by the lens due to the light from the blast and maybe also down to the heat making the trails more visible.. The fact that the trails also fade out after the blast and become almost not visible again emphasizes this point further, if you are as intelligent and well educated as you claim, you will clearly understand this point. Another point that highlights your bullshit attempt is that such a mistake would be unnecessary anyway as they could have quite easily over laid the films during the blast when it was very bright, meaning the trails would have appeared before and after the blast, keeping you happy. Clearly its a case of the trails not being picked up by the lens and when the light is a great deal lighter it does, and then as the light fades, the trails also fade.. The video is not hoaxed, you just need it to be. Nukes are real, they exists, always have done, and are probably not even at the top of WOMD list. And they were not created by Jews and most certainly not Hoaxed by them.
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli Last edited by thirdwave; 18-03-2012 at 09:27 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
19-03-2012, 06:48 AM
|
#449 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
3rd - You could have built a stronger case for nukes by observing for instance the nature of the stratiations inside the Sedan crater. Here you can see rock strata peeping out from the smooth sweep of soil, with trailing edges from promentories that are oriented outwards, suggesting a force from below. This is something I am already studying.
However the smoke trails issue - WHICH IS NOT IN DOUBT - you continue to dispute with this argument Quote:
The film is shot in daylight, so how come the trails are invisible 'til the blast? Oh - and they do not 'almost fade out' as you claimed. Plus really if you think that gun angle can produce the impact shown well I despair for your personal model of reality. Last edited by rodin; 19-03-2012 at 06:49 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
19-03-2012, 10:57 AM
|
#450 | |||
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And yes I am fully aware this is the film we are talking about. And yes the film is shot in day light. And I have already explained why the trails are invisible till the blast. (or at least why they do not seem to be visible to the camera lens) Cameras need light to pic up on detail this video is clearly not the most modern video and anyone can see its not the most detailed video... If you get a video in a place with not a lot of light and then light a lighter near the lens you will see it pic up on more detail. Not to mention that it seems you only get a couple seconds of a clear shot of that area anyway as its quickly covered by smoke from the gun shot which again would not help the lens. And you are lying about them not almost fading out.. Here
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli |
|||
|
|
|
|
20-03-2012, 11:27 PM
|
#451 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-03-2012, 11:40 PM
|
#452 | |
|
Premier Subscribers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,093
|
Quote:
It is not being disputed that the Lens was not picking up the trails prior to the bomb going off... so why would i need to send a pic to prove something no one is disputing?, You say stuff like that as a smoke screen to make it look like I am hiding something, which Im not. You said that the trails did not almost fade out as the light from the bomb faded... As I pointed out. I have shown that you are wrong.. It would have been interesting for the scene to have been longer as I think when the bomb blast totally faded, the lens would have again not picked up the trails, as you can clearly see the trails fade as the light from the bomb does, as my images prove. I have no idea why you said they did not fade.
__________________
“Every Star has its own Nature, which is ‘Right’ for it. We are not to be missionaries, with ideal standards of dress and morals, and such hard-ideas. We are to do what we will, and leave others to do what they will. We are infinitely tolerant, save of intolerance.” AC http://whosnwo.blogspot.com/ http://www.reverbnation.com/paulobertelli |
|
|
|
|
|
20-03-2012, 11:49 PM
|
#453 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,503
|
Quote:
Sorry Rodin... you have never provided any evidence that remotely proves any photograph is fake, nor any evidence that conventional explosives could have done the crates near Vegas.  For me, this theory gets an F-.... and I'm being generous. 
Last edited by flyermay; 21-03-2012 at 03:22 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
21-03-2012, 10:09 PM
|
#454 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
Just HOW could it happen like you stupidly claim? |
|
|
|
|
|
21-03-2012, 10:12 PM
|
#455 | |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2012, 07:49 AM
|
#456 |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2012, 08:03 AM
|
#457 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: OZ
Posts: 2,434
|
In regards to the quality of film of nuclear tests it must be taken in to account that multiple cameras were used due to the fact that many would be destroyed in the blast or the intensity of the blast would would ruin much of the usable footage. What did survive was edited in to a film.
Also the higher quality film was due to using high speed camera specifically developed to handle the conditions and record the blast (which was over in seconds) in detail. The high speed cameras took only one picture each and when set up in series could be edited in to film. Similar set ups are still used in modern high speed photography. The film was not just for show it was also for scientific research on the effects of the blast. Many were not available at the time and have since been declassified third wave also raises possable camera issues. cameras and editing software (there was no software in the early days)was no where near what it is today. more info http://www.damninteresting.com/rapat...r-photographs/ Rodin claims that mass can not be transformed in to energy. Energy to mass conversion is demonstratively shown to be true by the suns nuclear fusion process. unless he believes that the sun is also a hoax.(most probably a Jewish one at that) the op asserts that all nuclear technology and all nuclear disasters have been faked such as Chernobyl, 3 mile island , Fukushima and the nuclear bomb attacks on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. neutrons, gamma rays, beta particles, and alpha particles are detected following a disaster or detonation. These particle are given of by high energy events ie a nuclear explosion. there is also the issue of nuclear waste and the decommissioning centers IE Dounreay in Scotland which on occasions released nuclear particles in to the environment It is also claimed that that the massive damage to both Nagasaki and Hiroshima was caused with conventional explosive, when the fact is the Americans had been bombing both cities with conventional explosives for months with no where near the same effect.The same as every country in the war. No city suffered this much damage let alone with in the time frame A contaminated bomb would not produce the high energy particles. the sizes of the mushroom could not be created by conventional explosives  tsar bomb the cloud is 56km high at a distance of 16okm. Then there is the massive creators and even areas where the sand has been turned to glass under intense heat and pressure. There is physical evidence off this. America even blew part of bikini island up in a hydrogen bomb test. The biggest h bomb was tested by the soviets. The tsar'bombs shock wave was measured on its third time round the earth, this was the recorded by independent monitoring stations. not to mention all the witnesses including the many victims of the bombings and accidents with injures such as radiation burns. All this is more than documented. Also because i find this interesting here an article about how occasionally nature can produce atomic blasts and even nuclear reactors (not the obvious one like a star): as certain isotopes of uranium/plutonium are needed it is an unlikely event. However these isotopes do exist naturally albeit in small amounts. what increases their rarity is the fact that they can undergo nuclear reactions inside the pressures of the earth.
__________________
A + Ω = 0= ∞ We are the result of a universe trying to understand itself - Neil deGrasse Tyson, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXByRjJnN2A A universe from nothing - Lawrence Krauss Last edited by jon galt; 22-03-2012 at 11:55 AM. |
|
|
|
|
22-03-2012, 11:43 PM
|
#458 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: WA, USA
Posts: 304
|
Quote:
The person that narrated the video has no idea about video editing, use of lens filters or military explosives (the US military did not use dynamite for large bombs in WWII). I felt sorry for him unless it was intended as satire or a joke. Ranb |
|
|
|
|
|
22-03-2012, 11:46 PM
|
#459 | |
|
Inactive
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,991
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2012, 12:04 AM
|
#460 |
|
Temporarily suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,088
|
Galt
Is matter created or destroyed during a chemical explosion? Of course not. Electrons move to less energetic orbits, releasing energy I am not saying fission/fusion etc do not take place. I am saying that all that is happening is nuclear chemistry BTW - yea - this is a real bomb... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=LxD44HO8dNQ Last edited by rodin; 23-03-2012 at 12:14 AM. |
|
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
|
|
