REs Please Explain

  • 331 Replies
  • 54065 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45115
  • +87/-129
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #270 on: June 17, 2014, 11:44:34 AM »
Now go look at the U.S. first H-bomb test.  It is fake as fuck. 

Can you please cite references to support this?  What alleged empirical evidence led you to this viewpoint?  Or is it nothing more than your personal opinion?
Take a look at all the footage. No ordinary person who views it all will come to any other conclusion as to it full on, in your face, fakery.
Then what should a real H-bomb test look like?  Obviously you must know what a real one looks like if you can spot a fake so easily.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #271 on: June 17, 2014, 12:25:27 PM »
Take a look at all the footage. No ordinary person who views it all will come to any other conclusion as to it full on, in your face, fakery.

I have, and it looks perfectly legitimate to me.  I asked you for empirical evidence, and not personal opinion.

You need to do much better than this sceptimatic before making the hollow claim that no "ordinary" person will conclude it's "fakery".

It's more than obvious you have NO empirical evidence.  Sorry.  You lose.  Again.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #272 on: June 18, 2014, 06:17:25 AM »
Unless one is a nuclear physicist, or some other such individual, (which I'm not), I fail to see how one could declare whether a photo or video of a nuclear bomb going off (whether in a test or, God forbid, for military purposes) is real OR fake. Whether the photo/video originates in the US, Russia, the PRC, the DPRK, or any of the other 6 or so nations thats possess nuclear weapons is irrelevant. I say 6 or so because if memory serves, there are 9 declared members of the Nuclear Club. Then there is Israel, which neither admits nor denies having them, but if one thinks they don't, one is a fool. Not that it matters. They could never use them. Any country they hit, the fallout & radiation would get to them eventually. Israeli nukes exist as a deterrant by means of mutual self-destruction by both sides. But, back on my point, how is the avg teacher, ditchdigger, policeman, banker, or psychiatrist supposed to be able to tell the difference between a photo/video of a nuclear test that is real v. one that is fake?

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #273 on: June 18, 2014, 07:54:42 AM »
Someone with expertise in fakery itself would be a reasonable candidate. Explosives and meteorology might be valuable expertises to have as well. But even so, you probably couldn't say definitively that footage of a nuclear explosion was faked.

Other than unquestioning scepticism, I wonder what it is that convinces scepti that it's fake.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #274 on: June 18, 2014, 08:34:32 AM »
Certainly expertise in fakery would help. Therefore, a forensics expert might, the key word being 'might', be able to detect, say, a doctored photograph or video. Also, a photographer or videographer might have those skills, again, the stress on the word 'might'. The difficulty is that people in those fields are not usually doubly trained in military activity beyond the common soldier level. & the people responsable for nuclear bombs aren't common soldiers, sailors, marines, or airmen. They are highly trained scientists, officers, all possessing top secret or higher security clearances, who are authorised to do & know shit that no one else in a country is even aware exists. Thus, someone like you or me being able to detect fakery in what they are doing is like finding a needle in a haystack.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #275 on: June 18, 2014, 09:51:03 AM »
Absolutely. The fact that nobody with those skills nor anyone involved in actual nuclear tests has ever expressed skepticism over the legitimacy of the Chinese tests is more than enough to convince me.

That and -personally- knowledge of VFX in the mid 40s. There is literally no way to have faked even the public footage of the tests let alone all the espionage, intelligence, seismic and radiological evidence that bitterly opposed factions used to study the tests to their own satisfaction.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #276 on: June 18, 2014, 11:44:06 AM »
The history of nuclear weapon development is not an expertise of mine. What is or was VFX? That aside, some of you may remember a few years ago when then Presidents Bill Clinton of the USA & Jiang Zemin of the PRC had a mutual crowing & back-slapping session re: the fact that each nation had 'de-targeted' its missiles. In laymen's terms, this meant that, instead of having a missile targeted on, say, Beijing, all our missiles designated for China were now in neutral, as were theirs. This remains the case. Of course, during this Presidential love-fest, no one bothered to state the obvious: targeting a missile takes only 15 minutes. If diplomatic relations went south w/ China, you can bet that is what both countries would do. & the Chinese aren't stupid; they know we spy on them. Why risk lying to us & looking like total schmucks?

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #277 on: June 18, 2014, 12:27:14 PM »
Visual eFfect... X     - Visual Effects.

It's a bit of a stretch, but hey :P
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

Rama Set

  • 6875
  • +1/-0
  • I am also an engineer
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #278 on: June 18, 2014, 12:29:47 PM »
FX is an onomatopoeic acronym for effects.

Anyway... *coughs*
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #279 on: June 18, 2014, 01:24:16 PM »
Ah. Visual effects. If you are a specialist in that field, I see your point.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #280 on: June 18, 2014, 10:31:52 PM »

As an Aussie old enough to remember these nuclear tests off the coast of Australia, I can assure you that live film footage of the event was not—and could not have been in the early fifties—doctored so as to escape detection with modern imaging forensics.


An image from the HWT book "Moments in Time" showing observation
of a nuclear bomb blast test on Monte Bello Island in October 1952.

 
The Western Australian archipelago of Monte Bello Islands—west of Karratha—as well as Maralinga and Emu Field in South Australia, were the sites of British nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s and 1960s.

This is Monte Bello Island today:
 


In my opinion, it's ludicrous for people (other than conspiracy theorists of course) to accept/claim/believe that nuclear weapons testing has never taken place.

Only last year, a veteran's wife won a ten-year battle for the war widow's pension after she successfully argued her husband committed suicide because of his involvement in earlier atomic bomb testing in Australia. His 2001 suicide at age 67 was deemed to have been brought on by the chronic pain of his dermatitis.

The persistent skin condition, his widow argued, had been brought on when her husband flew his RAAF Neptune aircraft through a nuclear mushroom cloud off the Western Australian coast on May 16, 1956.

From the report:  "Relying on 57-year-old log books of Operation Mosaic—the code name given to the atomic weapons testing at the Monte Bello islands—as well as a witness account of the explosion and design points of the aircraft, the tribunal found the pilot would have suffered contamination.

It heard navigation in the 1950s was not precise, meaning avoidance of the atomic cloud could be difficult, and the the Neptune aircraft was not sealed, nor fitted with filters and the crew did not wear protective clothing.

A retired captain, who had experienced the explosion from a ship anchored off the islands and later worked with the pilot, also recounted a conversation with his old colleague in which he told him he had flown through the mushroom cloud. The tribunal heard the pilot suffered from a very rare skin condition that could have been caused by ionising radiation."

And a report from "The Canberra Times" 12 June 1956 says:

 
All Ready For Next A-Bomb But Weather

ONSLOW, (WA), Monday—It is only a matter of weather now. That is the feeling at Onslow.

When the surface winds and upper winds are offshore in the Onslow area and conditions are right in Perth, someone will press a button and Britain's second Monte Bello atom bomb of the current series will be fired.

The final parts of the bomb have arrived.  The safety committee has arrived.  The Neptune security patrols have begun.

Everyone and every thing is in place, waiting.

 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #281 on: June 18, 2014, 10:51:24 PM »

And in case someone here should claim I'm "derailing" this thread, I should point out that the topic of nuclear testing and fake footage was first brought up by two flat earthers:

johnreynaga said:  "China fakes all of their space missions.  Now go look at their nuclear bomb tests.  Go watch those videos.  They are also BS.  Now here's the part where everyone has to use their brain.  How is it that the world powers are letting China get away with all of this nonsense?  Now go look at the U.S. first H-bomb test.  It is fake as fuck".

sceptimatic then said:  "Take a look at all the footage. No ordinary person who views it all will come to any other conclusion as to it full on, in your face, fakery".




*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #282 on: June 19, 2014, 03:32:23 AM »
Good post Geoff. Nuclear tests in Nevada were big tourist attractions in Vegas for a while, too, iirc. Bars would advertise a good view from their roof and organise events to watch the explosion in the distance.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #283 on: June 19, 2014, 04:46:22 AM »
A most excellent post indeed, & quite informative. I was unaware that nuke testing had been done in Australia, although that does seem like a logical place to do it, as I think about it now. My only question is the following, & it is 2-fold. A, who the hell would order someone to fly through a mushroom cloud, & B, who the hell would would follow an order like that? Mind you, I do not mean that Australia deserved to be a test site. Only that from a govt's point of view, it would be a logical choice (like Nevada in the USA).
« Last Edit: June 19, 2014, 04:56:53 AM by Yaakov ben Avraham »

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • +0/-0
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #284 on: June 19, 2014, 10:03:10 AM »
A most excellent post indeed, & quite informative. I was unaware that nuke testing had been done in Australia, although that does seem like a logical place to do it, as I think about it now. My only question is the following, & it is 2-fold. A, who the hell would order someone to fly through a mushroom cloud, & B, who the hell would would follow an order like that? Mind you, I do not mean that Australia deserved to be a test site. Only that from a govt's point of view, it would be a logical choice (like Nevada in the USA).

From the post it sounds like the pilot either didn't realize at the time he was passing through it, or couldn't avoid passing through it. That being said, knowledge about radiation being what is was at the time, I wouldn't be surprised if a pilot was ordered to do it and he complied. It's not like it would be the craziest thing ever to have happened in the military.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #285 on: June 19, 2014, 10:15:46 AM »
Yeah, every military organisation was desperate to know everything possible about the effects of nuclear weapons. After all, in 1946 it wouldn't have mattered who you asked, it was almost a dead certainty that at some point people would be deployed in a nuclear environment, whether that be during or after a detonation, friendly or hostile.

So that need for information drove organisations to be pretty cavalier with having personnel get exposed to radiation, flash, fallout and whatnot during tests. But additionally, we have to remember that prior to gaining that information throughout the course of the nuclear age, watching a nuclear explosion from a safe distance or flying through some dust safe inside your plane would have only sounded a little risky. There wasn't the pervasive, unconditional dread of all things nuclear that exists today.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #286 on: June 19, 2014, 11:30:27 AM »
Granted, you both make excellent points. People of the time, especially govts & militaries, were just in love w/ the things. Individual lives lost in learning about them could have been rationalised away.

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • +0/-0
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #287 on: June 19, 2014, 11:32:45 AM »
Not to mention that back in the old days, high doses of radiation could give you superpowers.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #288 on: June 20, 2014, 08:15:48 AM »
Granted, you both make excellent points. People of the time, especially govts & militaries, were just in love w/ the things. Individual lives lost in learning about them could have been rationalised away.

This image exemplifies how little was known about the effects of radiation from large scale nuclear devices in the early 1950s...
 
 

On 10 May 1980, A federal judge in
Salt Lake City, Utah, found the US government
negligent for its above-ground testing of nuclear
weapons in Nevada from 1951 to 1962.

*

Madeleine Alec

  • 38
  • +0/-0
  • A third dimension is not gratuitous.
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #289 on: July 02, 2014, 07:26:50 AM »
This undoubtedly would effect how the sun is seen throughout the seasons.

And it does.
You really are not that serious about this whole "look out your window" business, are you?

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • +0/-0
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #290 on: July 02, 2014, 12:05:52 PM »
This undoubtedly would effect how the sun is seen throughout the seasons.

And it does.
You really are not that serious about this whole "look out your window" business, are you?
Spacey is an ice dome believer.
I'm sure she (?) is just as serious about the "look out your window" business as the rest of us.
That isn't meant to necessarily be taken as literal evidence - "You can't observe the Earth being round from the viewpoint of the Earth.", is what is meant.
Seeing as only 543 people have ever been above 100 km (in "space"), I'm assuming you should be subject to the "look out your window" rule.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #291 on: July 03, 2014, 01:53:11 AM »

Seeing as only 543 people have ever been above 100 km (in "space"), I'm assuming you should be subject to the "look out your window" rule.

No, we round earthers shouldn't be subject to the flat earthers' "look out your window" rule.  We accept that the earth is round, and regard that nonsensical "rule" as totally unwarranted, and riddled with fallacies of logic.  Those 543 people have seen the sphericity of the planet with their own eyes, whereas NO flat earther has ever seen earth from those peoples' perspective in space.

And until at least 500 flat earthers have travelled into space, and seen the planet with their own eyes, they're arguing from a very weak "factual" base comprised only of untested hypotheses, guesses, personal opinion and an almost(?) total lack of empirical scientific evidence.

?

Goth

  • 220
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #292 on: July 03, 2014, 05:28:15 AM »

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • +0/-0
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #293 on: July 03, 2014, 11:32:42 AM »

Seeing as only 543 people have ever been above 100 km (in "space"), I'm assuming you should be subject to the "look out your window" rule.

No, we round earthers shouldn't be subject to the flat earthers' "look out your window" rule.  We accept that the earth is round, and regard that nonsensical "rule" as totally unwarranted, and riddled with fallacies of logic.  Those 543 people have seen the sphericity of the planet with their own eyes, whereas NO flat earther has ever seen earth from those peoples' perspective in space.

And until at least 500 flat earthers have travelled into space, and seen the planet with their own eyes, they're arguing from a very weak "factual" base comprised only of untested hypotheses, guesses, personal opinion and an almost(?) total lack of empirical scientific evidence.
Geoff, I find your posts to be worded very nicely.
I also find that you often have very poor points in counter to others.
Those people have only allegedly been in "space".
Right now you're arguing that my point is moot because 500 flat Earth enthusiasts have not been in space.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

Rama Set

  • 6875
  • +1/-0
  • I am also an engineer
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #294 on: July 03, 2014, 11:38:20 AM »
Can't wait until you understand what AusGeoff actually said.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • +0/-0
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #295 on: July 03, 2014, 11:39:44 AM »
Can't wait until you understand what AusGeoff actually said.
Can't wait until you understand that people can't go to "space".


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

?

Goth

  • 220
  • +0/-0
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #296 on: July 03, 2014, 12:26:10 PM »
There is no space outside, the dome...  ;)

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • +0/-0
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #297 on: July 03, 2014, 12:30:07 PM »
There is no space outside, the dome...  ;)
What dome?


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

Moosedrool

  • 342
  • +0/-0
  • Ice Wall Guardian
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #298 on: July 03, 2014, 02:33:03 PM »
And until at least 500 flat earthers have travelled into space, and seen the planet with their own eyes, they're arguing from a very weak "factual" base comprised only of untested hypotheses, guesses, personal opinion and an almost(?) total lack of empirical scientific evidence.

A certain amount of intelligence is required to become an astronaut. The chances are better for Nasa to build a giant space mirror visible from the ground before a flat earther will go to space.
I'm not trying to disprove gravity. I've succeeded in disproving it. It's called denpressure.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45115
  • +87/-129
Re: REs Please Explain
« Reply #299 on: July 03, 2014, 03:01:13 PM »
Can't wait until you understand what AusGeoff actually said.
Can't wait until you understand that people can't go to "space".
Can't wait until you understand the difference between "going to space" and "staying in space".
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.