Are you saying I am not allowed to make an anonymous SS? I only provide info, people can take it any way they want. So my writing is accountable to the public that reads it, anyone who is not interested can not look at it.
On nukes I have mainly collected info from others that make sense to me and I posted it in a palatable way
Are you saying I am not allowed to make an anonymous SS? I only provide info, people can take it any way they want. So my writing is accountable to the public that reads it, anyone who is not interested can not look at it.
On nukes I have mainly collected info from others that make sense to me and I posted it in a palatable way
and in the top comment photos and articles by Japanese who lived thru it.
If you dont agree with Palmer article (Tom Cowan also pushed that one recently) or the Mathis article, that's fine. You can tell me/us why or you can ignore it. So far you don't seem to have read links I've sent you. Up to you.
Of course you can make an anonymous Substack. I am saying that my editorial policy does not count you as an investigative reporter or a reliable source. As far as nukes, there is no discounting the eyewitness testimony, and we are still in the territory of the precautionary principle. However, nukes are also a pastime or hobby since there is nothing you can personally do about them, now or if you are vaporized by one. That there are questions about August 1945 does not automatically invalidate Ivy Mike.
None of the concrete bldgs or people in them at ground 0-or anywhere in Hiroshima or Nagasaki even died much less got vaped, because exactly like the bldgs in Tokyo, Hamamatsu, Tochigi, all the dozens of firebombed Japan cities looked just like Hiroshima, firebombed-with all concrete bldgs and bridges intact, and being used in the next weeks even. Those Japanese are damn good at fanning 6,000 degree nukes down to a few hundred degrees (which would have destroyed all those concrete bldgs and bridges) and sweeping up radiation aren't they? You just think wooden structures destroyed means a nuk, tell the Tokyoites they were actually nuked. The Palmer article has scientific data of the Gamma and Neutron thermal energy left in building blocks, far lower than for a nuke, that is objective evidence, witnesses are subjective and even possibly with leading questions that persons can not distinguish fire bomb from a nuke, or even faked.
I agree there are questions about Fukushima and Nagasaki. But because in any event these involve genocide, these must be asked with consideration that there was mass murder whether the cause was a chain reaction or massive TNT bombs. However, whatever may have happened in August 1945 does not provide any proof or even evidence related to the Trinity Test, or to Ivy Mike, or to the 140 or so air-burst tests in the Nevada desert.
To those who may say that the accounts contained in American Ground Zero (Gallagher, Random House, 1993) are stories, I would remind you that everything that is published is metaphor. Every word you write is a story.
Morally and legally, it's insufficient to say that people who have given their accounts of their pain and loss are categorically lying; and whether they are or not, to accuse them of that in the first instance is inhumane. They describe in detail what happened to their lives, their families and their communities, putting their names and faces to their words — more than I can say about most of the people writing in this space.
Eric, just admit this is a subject you havn't read deeply about. You are getting silly actually. In the Wiki page for Pile of shit 1, the plaque says, "On December 2, 1942 man achieved here the first self-sustaining chain reaction and thereby initiated the controlled release of nuclear energy." You are deeply confused my good man, nuc energy is not the same as a flash nuc explosion which is impossible. Nuc energy is also made in the hills of Gabon by uranium decay-do you think your local utility wants you to have Uranium in your back yard? ITS SO DANGEROUS! Wiki also reminds us, "they trusted Fermi's safety calculations and decided they could carry out the experiment in a densely populated area" RIGHT! you dont want to have to travel into the desert just for a psyop? How do we know Pile 1 wasn't just a pile of BS with some radioactive uranium that "powered a light bulb"? Did it prove flash nuc explosion was possible, did it prove there was a nuc chain reaction? The gov't wouldn't want to make a nuc weapons psyop just to take $$$ out of the treasury? Maybe Sars-CoV-3 will mutate out of Pile 3 of bat shit?
proton please put that URL here -- either your post or Mathis. btw in the astrology scene I am the preeminent expert on the astrology of nuclear incidents, originating with the atomic pile chart I referenced above, through the Fukushima incident. That is not much of a distinction; hardly anyone cares about acquired knowledge these days, and few astrologers have the patience to keep a file of 20 different events studied over 25 years.
Stop with the silly. I am coming from an ethical and religious position and not a historical position.
The plan for mutually assured destruction is as bad as the reality. Whether my parents and I grew up under the fake threat of nuclear annihilation or a real threat amounts to the same thing from a spiritual point of view. They have the same effect on consciousness. And that is the effect that the "nothing is real" people are not considering.
Please put some resources where I can find them. And then maybe tell me how you define this problem in human terms and what you plan to do about it.
In my SS I gave you there are links then go from there. The more the word gets out the better. My focus is biomed but I do deep dives into other things occasionally. The global blob isnt gonna do anything about it, YOU MY GOOD MAN can take it up and if you are on the right side of the truth coin I will restack your posts etc. Thats all I can do. The blob isn't gonna blow up the world, only enough bits to bring down the house, a little Lahina here, and little Anapulco there, a little Paradise over there...
I read some of the posts and I've been familiar with this issue for four years (and have been involved in various nuclear issues since the 1970s as my father was in the industry).
I think that we are missing the point in this discussion. We have all grown up under the threat of MAD. What was the effect of that? Additionally, we are told there is horrendous contamination spreading underground toward the West Coast and the Pacific via underground rivers out of Hanford. Is that true?
And so what if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were conventional weapons. That does not excuse the mass murder. It also does not explain the radiation sickness unless they packed some uranium in with the TNT and they were really dirty nukes.
Sorry I dont have a point on MAD now. But if there are no nukes there is no MAD from a nuc war.
-On contamination I dont have that data. "We are told" is not proof of anything.
-In Hiroshima the lake 2km from ground 0 was dowsed with radiation months after the attack which increased the rad level from initial readings to make it seem like from bomb-see Palmer.
-Mass Murder is eugenics; you are living thru its current iteration now.
-"Radiation sickness" was burns from fire bombing, it was called Radiation sickness. Do you think the Japanese Drs were standing around burn victims with a Geiger counter? There was no proof of radiation (see Palmer at Hiroshima on gamma nor neutron thermal energy analysis of building remains). Now they can call it Covid. They can call any illness anything they want-if you believe it as you are well aware.
Lets break from this, I've got 2 Clark Kent Jobs to attend to. thx
To suggest that something must be true because of "eyewitness" accounts (aka easily faked stories) is the height of human stupidity. I can find you all sorts of eyewitnesses who insist they've been abducted by Aliens from another planet, or saw Elvis shopping at the grocery store. By your logic, that all must be true because there is no discounting their stories and therefore they "must stand on their own."
Really, dude? You're a journalist? This is nonsensical thinking for the simple fact that people lie about all sorts of things, everyday, and are sometimes paid to do so, to sell a larger lie.
You can't honestly believe that Nuclear Weapons exist simply based on stories in a book? Are you readers this easily manipulated? There are COUNTLESS detailed analysis available of the fraudulent Nuke footage that far outweigh any silly stories you read in a book.
My only remaining question is - are you really this stupid, or is there something else going on here?
No, you're deflecting. You never answer direct questions and never bother to comment on links that people send you. You're a clown, masquerading as a "journalist"
I think you can absolutely discount eyewitness testimony. There are so many limitations that can affect it's accuracy and reliability that there is always a need for caution. Memory distortion and decay, interpretations of what they are seeing based on suggestive questioning/projection of authority, cognitive biases, stress and anxiety, to name just a few.
So what I hear you doing is discounting testimony you haven’t seen or read nor have you seen the photos nor are you familiar with the work or the author. I’m curious if you’ve accounted for your own cognitive bias.
Are you saying I am not allowed to make an anonymous SS? I only provide info, people can take it any way they want. So my writing is accountable to the public that reads it, anyone who is not interested can not look at it.
On nukes I have mainly collected info from others that make sense to me and I posted it in a palatable way
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/spooks-with-nukes
and in the top comment photos and articles by Japanese who lived thru it.
If you dont agree with Palmer article (Tom Cowan also pushed that one recently) or the Mathis article, that's fine. You can tell me/us why or you can ignore it. So far you don't seem to have read links I've sent you. Up to you.
Of course you can make an anonymous Substack. I am saying that my editorial policy does not count you as an investigative reporter or a reliable source. As far as nukes, there is no discounting the eyewitness testimony, and we are still in the territory of the precautionary principle. However, nukes are also a pastime or hobby since there is nothing you can personally do about them, now or if you are vaporized by one. That there are questions about August 1945 does not automatically invalidate Ivy Mike.
None of the concrete bldgs or people in them at ground 0-or anywhere in Hiroshima or Nagasaki even died much less got vaped, because exactly like the bldgs in Tokyo, Hamamatsu, Tochigi, all the dozens of firebombed Japan cities looked just like Hiroshima, firebombed-with all concrete bldgs and bridges intact, and being used in the next weeks even. Those Japanese are damn good at fanning 6,000 degree nukes down to a few hundred degrees (which would have destroyed all those concrete bldgs and bridges) and sweeping up radiation aren't they? You just think wooden structures destroyed means a nuk, tell the Tokyoites they were actually nuked. The Palmer article has scientific data of the Gamma and Neutron thermal energy left in building blocks, far lower than for a nuke, that is objective evidence, witnesses are subjective and even possibly with leading questions that persons can not distinguish fire bomb from a nuke, or even faked.
I agree there are questions about Fukushima and Nagasaki. But because in any event these involve genocide, these must be asked with consideration that there was mass murder whether the cause was a chain reaction or massive TNT bombs. However, whatever may have happened in August 1945 does not provide any proof or even evidence related to the Trinity Test, or to Ivy Mike, or to the 140 or so air-burst tests in the Nevada desert.
To those who may say that the accounts contained in American Ground Zero (Gallagher, Random House, 1993) are stories, I would remind you that everything that is published is metaphor. Every word you write is a story.
Morally and legally, it's insufficient to say that people who have given their accounts of their pain and loss are categorically lying; and whether they are or not, to accuse them of that in the first instance is inhumane. They describe in detail what happened to their lives, their families and their communities, putting their names and faces to their words — more than I can say about most of the people writing in this space.
Mathis has the Trinity info. Take your time and read them. They are in my SS post, I DID READ ALL OF THEM.
What is your view on the atomic pile experiment U. Chicago Dec. 2, 1942 (3:25 pm CST, Chicago)?
Eric, just admit this is a subject you havn't read deeply about. You are getting silly actually. In the Wiki page for Pile of shit 1, the plaque says, "On December 2, 1942 man achieved here the first self-sustaining chain reaction and thereby initiated the controlled release of nuclear energy." You are deeply confused my good man, nuc energy is not the same as a flash nuc explosion which is impossible. Nuc energy is also made in the hills of Gabon by uranium decay-do you think your local utility wants you to have Uranium in your back yard? ITS SO DANGEROUS! Wiki also reminds us, "they trusted Fermi's safety calculations and decided they could carry out the experiment in a densely populated area" RIGHT! you dont want to have to travel into the desert just for a psyop? How do we know Pile 1 wasn't just a pile of BS with some radioactive uranium that "powered a light bulb"? Did it prove flash nuc explosion was possible, did it prove there was a nuc chain reaction? The gov't wouldn't want to make a nuc weapons psyop just to take $$$ out of the treasury? Maybe Sars-CoV-3 will mutate out of Pile 3 of bat shit?
proton please put that URL here -- either your post or Mathis. btw in the astrology scene I am the preeminent expert on the astrology of nuclear incidents, originating with the atomic pile chart I referenced above, through the Fukushima incident. That is not much of a distinction; hardly anyone cares about acquired knowledge these days, and few astrologers have the patience to keep a file of 20 different events studied over 25 years.
Its 7 comments above, keep track pretty please.
Stop with the silly. I am coming from an ethical and religious position and not a historical position.
The plan for mutually assured destruction is as bad as the reality. Whether my parents and I grew up under the fake threat of nuclear annihilation or a real threat amounts to the same thing from a spiritual point of view. They have the same effect on consciousness. And that is the effect that the "nothing is real" people are not considering.
Please put some resources where I can find them. And then maybe tell me how you define this problem in human terms and what you plan to do about it.
In my SS I gave you there are links then go from there. The more the word gets out the better. My focus is biomed but I do deep dives into other things occasionally. The global blob isnt gonna do anything about it, YOU MY GOOD MAN can take it up and if you are on the right side of the truth coin I will restack your posts etc. Thats all I can do. The blob isn't gonna blow up the world, only enough bits to bring down the house, a little Lahina here, and little Anapulco there, a little Paradise over there...
I read some of the posts and I've been familiar with this issue for four years (and have been involved in various nuclear issues since the 1970s as my father was in the industry).
I think that we are missing the point in this discussion. We have all grown up under the threat of MAD. What was the effect of that? Additionally, we are told there is horrendous contamination spreading underground toward the West Coast and the Pacific via underground rivers out of Hanford. Is that true?
And so what if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were conventional weapons. That does not excuse the mass murder. It also does not explain the radiation sickness unless they packed some uranium in with the TNT and they were really dirty nukes.
Sorry I dont have a point on MAD now. But if there are no nukes there is no MAD from a nuc war.
-On contamination I dont have that data. "We are told" is not proof of anything.
-In Hiroshima the lake 2km from ground 0 was dowsed with radiation months after the attack which increased the rad level from initial readings to make it seem like from bomb-see Palmer.
-Mass Murder is eugenics; you are living thru its current iteration now.
-"Radiation sickness" was burns from fire bombing, it was called Radiation sickness. Do you think the Japanese Drs were standing around burn victims with a Geiger counter? There was no proof of radiation (see Palmer at Hiroshima on gamma nor neutron thermal energy analysis of building remains). Now they can call it Covid. They can call any illness anything they want-if you believe it as you are well aware.
Lets break from this, I've got 2 Clark Kent Jobs to attend to. thx
Appeal to emotion. Pathetic.
To suggest that something must be true because of "eyewitness" accounts (aka easily faked stories) is the height of human stupidity. I can find you all sorts of eyewitnesses who insist they've been abducted by Aliens from another planet, or saw Elvis shopping at the grocery store. By your logic, that all must be true because there is no discounting their stories and therefore they "must stand on their own."
Really, dude? You're a journalist? This is nonsensical thinking for the simple fact that people lie about all sorts of things, everyday, and are sometimes paid to do so, to sell a larger lie.
You can't honestly believe that Nuclear Weapons exist simply based on stories in a book? Are you readers this easily manipulated? There are COUNTLESS detailed analysis available of the fraudulent Nuke footage that far outweigh any silly stories you read in a book.
My only remaining question is - are you really this stupid, or is there something else going on here?
hahahahaha something else? Yes, I am trying to write the December horoscopes.
And since you are so obsessed with my alleged masturbation, here is an academic citation, sadly, without any photos:
Francis, Eric — From Self to Self: Masturbation as the Future of Sex: Journal of Bisexuality Vol 4(3-4) 2004, 167-176.
https://audio.pwfm.tech/documents/masturbation-future-sex.pdf
alleged?
Now you're just deflecting.
No, Poo. I am reflecting. When you discuss the self-sex of another person, you are really talking about yourself.
No, you're deflecting. You never answer direct questions and never bother to comment on links that people send you. You're a clown, masquerading as a "journalist"
Reflecting!
I think you can absolutely discount eyewitness testimony. There are so many limitations that can affect it's accuracy and reliability that there is always a need for caution. Memory distortion and decay, interpretations of what they are seeing based on suggestive questioning/projection of authority, cognitive biases, stress and anxiety, to name just a few.
So what I hear you doing is discounting testimony you haven’t seen or read nor have you seen the photos nor are you familiar with the work or the author. I’m curious if you’ve accounted for your own cognitive bias.