NUKE LIES 'Atom bomb test' - 50 sec sequence edited frame by frame negative

[joessoap]

Sorry to say, but your logic is flawed everywhere. Go do a BSc in physics and then come back here to apologise. I suppose you think the sun is wood or coal-fired? Ha ha ha.

[rerevisionist]

@joessoap - No, but I do think some people are less intelligent than others....

[yourmajezty]

nukes are fake

[jutubaeh]

the smoke plumes come from the burning of the surrounding combustible materials as paint etc helped by additionary energy from the light and ´invisible´spectrum of radiation emitted...

comparable to how in ordinary air you can light steel wool with a simple lighter..!

rather believe your national monuments and gateways (as very precisely named in ghostbusters 1 for one..) are giant dicks and pussies to put it simple..!

[rerevisionist]

@jutubaeh - I'd be grateful if you could translate that into standard English. Thanks,

[AtticusStount]

To the creator: please learn to use punctuation IE: apostrophes and such. This is a such a good video, but at the same time you are in danger of making yourself seem like an ill-educated ass.

[rerevisionist]

@AtticusStount - if you're addressing me, perhaps you could give one example of what you mean? Thanks.

[AtticusStount]

@AtticusStount I have no idea what I was thinking. I checked through the video and it all seems fine to me. I suppose I should stop eating those blue pills. They don't do me any good.

[rerevisionist]

@AtticusStount - Thanks for your polite withdrawal. I wish I could do that!

[ScalerWave]

Very compelling

[rerevisionist]

@ScalerWave - Thanks. And there's a lot more evidence!

[declaration963]

If Atomic Bomb are hoax, one thing is...

"WE ARE SAFE FROM APOCALYPSE"

[rerevisionist]

@declaration963 - Yes, I think it's good news.

You seem to be Japanese - my best guess is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were firebombed, like Tokyo and Dresden

[Mal1234567]

The aunt of a friend of mine viewed an atomic bomb test from the back porch of her house. Unfortunately, she's no longer around to ask about the experience, she died of cancer.

[rerevisionist]

@Mal1234567 - A lot of people die of cancer. In that subject, the Japanese fishermen in the 'Lucky Dragon' - remember that? - supposedly were covered with powdery radiation. Even now only about half have died, of liver disease.

[GregFox100]

This is interesting stuff. Is there any way you can separate your silly BNP videos from your eminently sensible ''atom bombs don't exist'' videos?

[rerevisionist]

@GregFox100 - I'm pleased you think these are 'eminently sensible' - lots of people think the exact opposite.

[GregFox100]

@rerevisionist yeah I was being sarcastic ^_^ but at least the atom bomb ones aren't just irritating. The BNP stuff is.

[rerevisionist]

@GregFox100 - it's only irritating because you haven't worked out how the propaganda tricks work. In the case of so-called 'Jews', I recommend you look up Kevin MacDonald's work - a lot is available on Internet so you don't even have to pay.

[GregFox100]

@rerevisionist wait: ''so-called 'Jews'''? There's no such thing as Jews even though they (collectively, somehow) are responsible for faking the whole cold war including the USSR itself and nuclear weapons?

I do find the atom bomb stuff interesting because there really is a question to be answered: why, given the politics and barbarism of the 20th century, were nuclear weapons never used after 1945?

I don't think that blaming it all on the Jews is a productive line of inquiry though.

[rerevisionist]

@GregFox100 - 'so-called Jews'. Yes. This is because of the Khazar theory, which you appear to know nothing about.

[FirstClassSceptic]

@GregFox100 Ha ha. That's funny. Most people would say the visa versa.

It's not a separate issue after you understand that at the end of World War II, nationalism was proclaimed to be evil because it lead the world to the brink of total destruction. One of the main excuses for the formation of the United Nations was to deter the destruction of the world by nuclear weapons, which now you know don't exist. Who gains power by this atomic bomb myth?

[friedchickenlittle]

lol

[friedchickenlittle]

If they existed the would have been used by now without a doubt.The supposed footage of "nuclear bombs"is laughable at best.

[JohnnyGasTank]

@friedchickenlittle totally agree

[nameofthepen]

@4:13: "As the site was barred for 24 hours (radiation hazard') there was of course time to 'pull' them. (© L Silverstein)"

.

LMFAO!!

[rerevisionist]

@nameofthepen - yes - 'demolish' is too long a word for Silverstein. Maybe his own name put him off them!

[nameofthepen]

@rerevisionist - lol. You're droll. ;-)

.

So true. "Fraud", Crook", "Murderer" are also not sesquipedalian words.

[ALTF4me]

So the japanese surrendered due to a a bomb that didnt explode and kill thousands instantly at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Cool.

[rerevisionist]

@ALTF4me - I replied but wasn't poster for some reason.

They were firebombed in daytime. It's a myth they surrendered because of 'the bomb' - they were trying to surrender but the US paid no attention - see David Irving's video on my site, part 8 I think

[FirstClassSceptic]

@ALTF4me LeMay had already destroyed about 67 Japanese cities by burning them with napalm. The Japanese were begging to surrender, before Hiroshima and Nagasaki were burned.

[aardvark9100]

Lastly, I just want to say I admire your meticulous assesment of these videos and I only want to present fact to you and not be a hater. There are many strange anomalies in atomic tests that can be easily explained. There are other times that editing is done for this, or that reason. Nuclear bombs are real, however, and have been detonated in many tests, even in war. If you have any questions further then please ask me. I don't claim to be a guru, but I will answer what I can.

[rerevisionist]

@aardvark9100 - Thanks. The video I made isn't 'meticulous' - when I made it I only had Moviemaker (and Irfan view) - I couldn't even zoom in on detail. There's much more detail in there...

[aardvark9100]

At 2:07 you note "irrelevant smoke being blown in" This is from the thermal flash and rises due to heat. The movement can be explained by wind direction. The "prolonged flash" is not really a flash at all. The initial flash is so bright it can't be easily visualized from film, but the light does continue in some intensity for many moments after the blast. For reference review operation desert rock videos at the trench line. Even in broad daylight the "flash" lasts for around five seconds.

[rerevisionist]

@aardvark9100 - the models have several odd features - smoke next to wires, and a narrow jet of smoke directed from the front, for example. Your comments on flashes I'd say are complete nonsense - a flash is just a flash. If there's subsequent heating, incidentally, the sand should be melted, which it isn't.

[aardvark9100]

@rerevisionist I'm guessing that the wires were insulated with rubber and the rubber smoked from the heat.

I'm not certain how much heat it takes to turn sand to glass, but it did happen at the Trinity test for around 1/4 mile diameter. Heat at ground zero from air bursts can exceed 7000 Fahrenheit outside the fireball, but drops off substantially with outward increments. The houses were 1 or more miles from ground zero. Sand would not have to turn to glass (melt) to produce smoke.

[rerevisionist]

@aardvark9100 - you're not getting it. There should if these people are right be melted silica pretty much everywhere these bombs were - there are claims for example that the heat at Hiroshima was so intense that silica certainly should have melted. But there's no trace of anything of the sort. There's a mineral, lechatelierite, which has molten/solidified characteristics, but its obvious origina is volcanic.

[FirstClassSceptic]

@aardvark9100 There's a vast expanse of glass in the dessert of Lybia in Africa, very similar to that in New Mexico. How did it get there?

[aardvark9100]

On your issue of dust accumulation either on the lens of a camera, or on the house being demolished: The concussion does 2 things here. 1: creates an overpressure stirring up dust. 2: The air is sucked back in to ground zero drawing a large amount of dust and debris forming the base, stem, and cap of the mushroom cloud. Any settling dust would be minute due to dispersion and takes time. The lens would not be affected immediately since it was mounted above ground level.

[aardvark9100]

At around 3:30 you note how steady the camera stays and remains in operating condition. I am probably going to piss you here since in your own video compilation at 1:17 - 1:35 it is very clear that the camera was swayed heavily on it's mount from the concussion. Check it out yourself. The thing is that they were built upon sturdy mounts that were grounded to support them to take a nuclear blast. Remember... this is not ground zero so a camera properly restrained will survive the blast.

[aardvark9100]

At around the 1 min mark on your video you ask how something can be burning in the air. This can be from different ways, but most notably it is caused by gamma radiation. Gamma rays cannot pass easily through oxygen and are slowed and contained in a short distance creating massive heating of the surrounding gasses. This heating is responsible for the secondary flash which is prolonged in duration due to slower thermal dissipation.

[aardvark9100]

An atomic blast will emit light for up to 20 seconds (below 1 megaton). Larger hydrogen bombs can emit light for over 40 seconds. The "flash" refers to the initial burst of light which is very intense. Actually a nuclear blast has 2 flashes of light, but that is getting too technical and I won't detail the specifics here. There were 2 main methods of filming atomic blasts. One used a static filter, the other relied on quick exposures which creates a similar darkening effect.

[rerevisionist]

@aardvark9100 - the two flashes argument is flawed. Obviously it's supposed to be fission, then fusion. But you or your handlers haven't realised that fusion needs the initial fission to be contained, so it wouldn't be visible. It's a careless mistake which they have a problem working around.

[aardvark9100]

@rerevisionist I'm only allowed around 500 characters when I post so I can't detail everything out so easily. I realize how the containment of the fission process is necessary to initiate the fusion process. These reactions are not directly responsible for the two flashes, but they occur when the energy has left the bomb shell and reacts to the environment. In the post I said I would not detail the specifics, but that does not mean that I do not understand them.

[aardvark9100]

There is a number of times you say there are multiple explosions. The "explosions" are nothing more than smoke rising from objects exposed to flash heat of the thermal radiation. The prolonged flash can be explained in two regards. 1: some of the clips you show ARE slowed down. 2: Some of the cameras were fitted with devices that changed exposure settings in accordance to light intensity. Check out the Mike hbomb video how the exposure setting was changed by signal of detonation.

[fnagel]

There are inconsistencies in the films. Taking into account the abundant evidence of anomaly (huge steel columns cut in diagonal, for example) in the so called 9/11 terrorist attack, I would not be surprised if this was tampered, too. Thanks.

[rerevisionist]

@fnagel - Yes, I agree. And don't take my word for it - you can get DVDs of tests, and Pathe newsreels from eg birth year cards which may have 'nuclear test' footage on. And of course photos in e.g. Nat Geographic and Science.

[TheTVLicence]

You are right though, they are inconsistencies in these films, without a doubt!

Thank you rerevisionist for your work here.

[TheTVLicence]

Interesting indeed, nuclear weapons never were or are now. Like some sort of wonder weapon propaganda bluff from the second wold war. So running with this we could say that the Russians never had these weapons for 45 years during the cold war and were bluffing too and for all that time?

And that everyone that claims to have them now is full of shit too?

Very interesting, never crossed my mind and it is good to go back and double check the apparently obvious history that is taught as gospel.

[rerevisionist]

Thanks for your reply. I'm sceptical too - but if these things existed, why the obvious fakery? It applies even more with H bomb footage, some of which is clearly faked, but pre-digitally - presumably by using matte boxes or something or maybe direct painting of 25 frames for each second. However, H bomb stuff seems to be less publically available. Quite possibly because the phoniness is clearer. I think the USSR/USA conflict may have been entirely made-up.

[rerevisionist]

@TheTVLicence - Not just the Russians. The Chinese H bomb film/video shows the same fakery. It's *possible* that governments were duped, of course. If you think of NASA, what did e.g. Nixon know about it? My best guess is he was made aware it was a phoney, and in effect secretly decided with them not to say anything, but cut their money. Maybe the same is true with nuclear weapons? Certainly they seem very casual about India & Pakistan supposedly having them.

[rerevisionist]

@TheTVLicence - The USSR was run by Jews from the USA. Obviously this was kept rather quiet. To this day 'Russian' criminals and oligarchs are Jews. Note the USA and USSR were allies too, remember, during WW2. German rocket scientists were split 50:50 between the USA and USSR. So it's entirely possible the whole thing was bullshit. I'm not saying it was, but it's possible, especially as much of the media in the US - more fanatical than Europe - was Jewish owned.

[catleugh]

Nuclear weapons a myth? Great news. No need to invade Iran now.

[rerevisionist]

If they are a myth, the news will be announced AFTER any NWO invasions!

Or rather it will not be announced so much as drop out of all news etc reporting until only a few dim memories will remain. "Didn't people used to talk about h bombs? What happened to them?"

[FirstClassSceptic]

@catleugh The geopolitical scenery can be viewed in an entirely different light, by a person who realizes the non-existance of nuclear weapons. The realization comes that there really are no international hostilities, except those which are contrived by the ruling super elite, to keep all the masses under control.

[rerevisionist]

The separation of stills was done with Irfan view, highly recommended as free image processing software. I couldn't find a way to recombine them and in any case it's interesting to see this slowed down version of the 1500-ish frames.

[voerioc]

Another thing which is just ridiculous. You have a device which is tall of 3 meters on 1 meter. And you have a cloud of smoke which is tall of 1 km on 5 km.

So atomic bombs create matter. Absurd.

Those so called atomic explosions are clearly napalm explosions.

[grendelee]

@voerioc What the hell are you talking about? I have a campfire 1 foot hight, it makes a plume of smoke 400 feet high. So campfires create matter?

[voerioc]

@grendelee

Paid evangelists like you always forget some parameters. Here, you have forgotten : the density of the smoke, and the circumference of the cloud. And it is also much higher than only 400 feet. The cloud is at least 2 or 3 km high (between 6500 and 9000 feet).

[grendelee]

@voerioc Im a paid evangelist? lol ok. I was obviously using to fire analogy to show you that THE SMOKE CAN BE BIGGER THEN THE FIRE. You can disprove a nuclear bomb if you want, but saying things like "it has a big mushroom cloud" (which other bombs have" or "explosions arent bright" or"theres no such thing as fire" isnt going to do it. Try harder. If it is fake, tell me about it. But not through such obvious stupid shit.

[voerioc]

@grendelee

Paid evangelists like you like to invent sentences that his opponent never said. Like "the smoke can't be bigger than the fire". I never said that. What I obviously said is that the cloud is enormously bigger than it should be.

In fact, we shouldn't have any cloud, since it is supposed to be a nuclear explosion, not a chemical one. You see what I mean ?

[grendelee]

@voerioc well, its not actually smoke. The intense heat rises, bringing debris up from the ground. You should look into nuclear bombs more, if you guys seek to disprove them.

[FirstClassSceptic]

@grendelee A campfire converts a solid fuel to gases, so there's more volume, I can see your point. But there are no gases formed by a nuclear fission reaction. The products would be solid, same as the initial material.

[grendelee]

@FirstClassSceptic so explosions dont get bigger? are you kidding?

[FirstClassSceptic]

@grendelee Where is the explosion in nuclear fission? According to their atomic theories, there are no gases formed.

[grendelee]

@FirstClassSceptic why dont you look up what an nuclear explosion actually is first?

[voerioc]

It's true that the presence of telegraph poles with their telegraph lines is ridiculous. Telegraph poles, why not. But with their telegraph lines... Just ridiculous.

[iloveme171]

They are in negitive so the radiation doesn't effect them dumbass

[rerevisionist]

hello loveme, as presumably nobody else does.  You don't seem to know what a negative is. It was the film that the normal, potiive, is made from. Radiation has nothng to do with convesion into postitive.

[rerevisionist]

LIFE mag had photos of nuclear weapons (some small ones are online) and before TV this must have been a major way to shove this stuff in the public mind.

ALSO search here for "atom bombs dimensional analysis" for a LIFE picture supposed;y of the first A bomb - it's the same cut out style as in the H bomb picture.

[I posted this before but I think the URLs prevented it getting through]

[rerevisionist]

I also emailed

john sloboda

paul rogers

hamit dardagan

chris abbott

fiona harrison

andy roberts

thomas phipps

rosie holdsworth

At the 'Oxford Research Group' - names taken from their website. Oddly, hardly any seem qualified in physics - mixed batch of people with town planning, language, English, and other somewhat irrelevant qualifiications. Satirically-minded readers will not be surprised to know that none of them replied.

[rerevisionist]

I emailed Frank Barnaby, veteran of real or supposed nuclear control attempts. He replied:

I have no knowledge about any films of nuclear tests containing fake material. Many people would have to be involved in the conspiracy if it were true. Although, of course, one cannot say it is impossible. I am sorry that I can't be of more help.

He is or was part of a real or supposed charity, the 'Oxford Research Group'.

[rerevisionist]

Thank you!

[rerevisionist]

Come on. someone give me five stars!