Moon it's own source of light

Shrewd Manager said:

Don't forget Jack Lemmon in the China Syndrome.

But seriously, as bad as those events were, the product of nuclear (fission) failures they have not been proven to be. For example, those 2 isolated Japanese cities exhibited the exact same aftermath phenomena as the earlier Tokyo firebombing, which left many concrete buildings still intact even around ground zero. Plus the longer term radiation effects (fallout) were not felt, and the first eyewitnesses were a den of Jesuits who miraculously survived. The list of irregularities goes on.

The best way to fake an 'atomic blast' is get shiploads of TNT laced with magnesium, creates a blinding flash followed by a monstrous explosion and the mushroom cloud. Then you hire a drama-queen actor to say something stupid like "I am death, destroyer of worlds" and Viola! Instant myth to wield over a craven populace to this day.

Click to expand...

Shrewd messenger the China syndrome I do not know. But Jack Lemmon I do. Probably the reason I have a soft spot for grumpy old men : ) That’s quite a statement. Your saying that Hiroshima and Negasaki were not nuked. Can you present a little more evidence on that. I do know that most Japanese cities were mostly of wood construction: the reason why so many of the cities were turned into infernos. And with the same devastating effects that were inflicted apon the defenceless city of Dresden near wars end. So there was not really too much left to be nuked. ( Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds) Quoted from the Hindu sacred text by Mr Oppenheimer. Perhaps he was merely parroting the wholesale slaughter that was being perpetrated by the supreme powers on defenceless populations at the time.

As a student of military history, I am of two minds about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am appalled at the terrible loss of life both at the time and since then due to radiation effects. The total I believe may be several hundred thousand.

On the other hand, the invasion of the Japanese main islands was scheduled for the spring of 1946. Military planners were already well aware that the Japanese defense would be desperate and deadly. The official Japanese slogan of the day was "90 million die together”. The Allied planners were preparing for 6 million casualties in the invasion. It was estimated that 2 million of those would be deaths.

It must have been a heart wrenching decision for Truman to have to make. Remember that he had available only those two bombs. Another six would be available in 1946. He may very well have made the right decision based on the lesser of two evils proposition.

What Truman did not know, and is still little known today, is that the Japanese nuclear program was well advanced and was not years behind but only a few weeks behind. Their main research and development facility was located in what is now North Korea at a location known as Project Z. There is evidence that the Japanese actually conducted a successful nuclear test in the Sea of Japan off the coast of North Korea on the day before the Emperor intervened and forced the Japanese surrender.

Interestingly enough, Project Z fell into the hands of the Russian occupiers of North Korea and Russia was a nuclear power within a few short years.

lasthero said:

How many things have you ever seen that look like ‘1000s of miles’ that you could make such a statement?

Regardless, the Sun is really...REALLY big. So even though it’s really far away, it still appears pretty big, even at this distance.

Click to expand...

I do not use or definitely do not believe in the science miles, measurements or years.

They have been very successful at ingraining these lies into the minds of christians.

SPF said:

Yo D Taylor! So glad you’re still around this topic. Mind answering two questions for me?

1) Please explain how the moon produces its own light.

2) Please explain the phenomenon you’ve documented where their are points of light just across the “line” of where the moon goes from bright to dark. Why does this phenomenon occur? Why does it ONLY occur right on the edge of the light transition?

Click to expand...

1) Please explain how the moon produces its own light.

2) Please explain the phenomenon you’ve documented where their are points of light just across the “line” of where the moon goes from bright to dark. Why does this phenomenon occur? Why does it ONLY occur right on the edge of the light transition?

d taylor said:

1) Please explain how the moon produces its own light.
View attachment 266551
2) Please explain the phenomenon you’ve documented where their are points of light just across the “line” of where the moon goes from bright to dark. Why does this phenomenon occur? Why does it ONLY occur right on the edge of the light transition?

View attachment 266552

Click to expand...

Is that your way of saying you have no clue how the moon produces its own light and you have no explanation for the lights you documented at the edge of the light/dark transition?

The problem that I see is that the photos you provided of light “spots” at the edge of the light/dark transition are actually evidence against your position of the moon as it’s own light source.

d taylor said:

1) Please explain how the moon produces its own light.
View attachment 266551
2) Please explain the phenomenon you’ve documented where their are points of light just across the “line” of where the moon goes from bright to dark. Why does this phenomenon occur? Why does it ONLY occur right on the edge of the light transition?

View attachment 266552

Click to expand...

So is it safe to say that the only reason you believe the moon is its own light source is based upon your personal interpretation of a few passages in Genesis?

21st century and people actually believe the moon produces it own light!

d taylor said:

I do not use or definitely do not believe in the science miles, measurements or years.

Click to expand...

And yet that same science developed the very device you are communicating on and the GPS system in your car that you use to navigate. Strange.

They have been very successful at ingraining these lies into the minds of christians.

Click to expand...

OK, I am a Christian and a retired scientist and I am willing to hear your arguments that they are lies. Please keep in mind that a lie is an untruth that is told in the full knowledge that it is an untruth.

d taylor said:

I do not use or definitely do not believe in the science miles, measurements or years.

They have been very successful at ingraining these lies into the minds of christians.

Click to expand...

What does that even? You don’t believe in measurements? That doesn’t even make sense. It’s like saying you don’t belive in the alphabet.

Kate30 said:

Shrewd messenger the China syndrome I do not know. But Jack Lemmon I do. Probably the reason I have a soft spot for grumpy old men : ) That’s quite a statement. Your saying that Hiroshima and Negasaki were not nuked. Can you present a little more evidence on that. I do know that most Japanese cities were mostly of wood construction: the reason why so many of the cities were turned into infernos. And with the same devastating effects that were inflicted apon the defenceless city of Dresden near wars end. So there was not really too much left to be nuked. ( Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds) Quoted from the Hindu sacred text by Mr Oppenheimer. Perhaps he was merely parroting the wholesale slaughter that was being perpetrated by the supreme powers on defenceless populations at the time.

Click to expand...

Hi Kate, I'd encourage you to take some time to research this area, because there are many serious unanswered questions and anomalies herein. This playlist might be a good place to start:
Nuke-hoax - YouTube

JackRT said:

As a student of military history, I am of two minds about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am appalled at the terrible loss of life both at the time and since then due to radiation effects. The total I believe may be several hundred thousand.

On the other hand, the invasion of the Japanese main islands was scheduled for the spring of 1946. Military planners were already well aware that the Japanese defense would be desperate and deadly. The official Japanese slogan of the day was "90 million die together”. The Allied planners were preparing for 6 million casualties in the invasion. It was estimated that 2 million of those would be deaths.

It must have been a heart wrenching decision for Truman to have to make. Remember that he had available only those two bombs. Another six would be available in 1946. He may very well have made the right decision based on the lesser of two evils proposition.

What Truman did not know, and is still little known today, is that the Japanese nuclear program was well advanced and was not years behind but only a few weeks behind. Their main research and development facility was located in what is now North Korea at a location known as Project Z. There is evidence that the Japanese actually conducted a successful nuclear test in the Sea of Japan off the coast of North Korea on the day before the Emperor intervened and forced the Japanese surrender.

Interestingly enough, Project Z fell into the hands of the Russian occupiers of North Korea and Russia was a nuclear power within a few short years.

Click to expand...

Hi Jack a lot of what you hear about Konan in Korea being a atomic facility is mostly hearsay. It was certainly biological and the gruesome experiments performed on locals and prisoners of war do attest to that. Japan did indeed have its own list of war crimes to account for especially with the massacres and rape apon civilians and prisoners of war from other countries and islands it had invaded. But to me war crimes are war crimes and should be acknowledged by both: To both vanquished and victor alike. You say that it must have been a heart wrenching decision for president Truman to make. I’m not so sure. Considering that japan was willing to accept unconditional surrender as early as 1944 that is known through Japanese diplomacy with Sweden, yourselves and finally Russia who were still nuatral at the time. At least until the dropping of the 1st atomic bomb. Of course the only problem being was the submission of their Emperor to that unconditional surrender who the Japanese people saw as divine. Jack being a good student of history which I’m sure you are. Than you must know that America had also broken the Japanese purple code many years prior and were privileged to much correspondence of the Japanese. As to the invasion of japan itself. There was no need to even waste one life with a invasion of japan. The people of japan were starving. They had literally no navy or airforce left. You had air fleets of over 500 American bombers flying freely over japan unhindered at times reining down incendiaries on cities such as Tokyo. Yet Mr Truman nor his predecessor President Roosevelt could not bypass that one little point with unconditional surrender that being the emperor. Instead he chose to allow the murder a few hundred thousand more innocents instead. A lot can learned from general McArthur on that very point of what could have been. For he showed respect for the emperor. And that respect won the hearts of the Japanese people while he was acting governor of japan. So what was little boy and fat man really all about. One was uranium the other was Plutonium. Maybe it was to justify the billions of dollars they had been pumped into the manhattan project. Maybe it was to prepare and condition the world in preparation for the future Cold War. Others even say it was ritualistic sacrifice. But one thing I do know and that is America did not need to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki to bring about that peace.

As I pointed out, that surrender could have been very expensive. On Okinawa women threw their children off cliffs and then jumped themselves to avoid falling into the hands of the hated enemy. The official slogan of the day was "90 million die together". That kind of fanaticism is hard to overcome.

lasthero said:

What does that even? You don’t believe in measurements? That doesn’t even make sense. It’s like saying you don’t belive in the alphabet.

Click to expand...

I will not go over every example but since this about the moon i will used that.

Science sates the moon is 230,000+ miles from earth.
I do not believe that distance so i do not believe sciences miles they are giving for the distance of the moon. Or the age of the earth being billions of years old.

The earth, the one we know in Genesis 1:3 - 2:2 is the age given in the Bible

The distance from the earth's surface to the moon is relatively easily measured by several methods. The oldest is parallax. This used to be used in rangefinders for cameras and for the determining the distance to targets for battleships in the days before radar. For the moon, all that is needed is two observers a measured distance apart to simultaneously measure the elevation angle from the baseline to the same point on the moon. The longer the baseline the better the results. Other methods can also be employed like direct radar or laser ranging. The same method can also be used to measure stellar distances. Earth base telescopes used to be limited to about 20 light years but with space based telescopes we can now range stars out about 1600 light years.

JackRT said:

The distance from the earth's surface to the moon is relatively easily measured by several methods. The oldest is parallax. This used to be used in rangefinders for cameras and for the determining the distance to targets for battleships in the days before radar. For the moon, all that is needed is two observers a measured distance apart to simultaneously measure the elevation angle from the baseline to the same point on the moon. The longer the baseline the better the results. Other methods can also be employed like direct radar or laser ranging. The same method can also be used to measure stellar distances. Earth base telescopes used to be limited to about 20 light years but with space based telescopes we can now range stars out about 1600 light years.

Click to expand...

like Mr Hickson in his fine book, Kings dethroned, who easily shows the errors of science (your exact statements about parallax).

and the, "just" absurd numbers stated by science.

d taylor said:

like Mr Hickson in his fine book, Kings dethroned, who easily shows the errors of science (your exact statements about parallax).

and the, "just" absurd numbers stated by science.

Click to expand...

You have the perfect right to believe as you will but the denial of reality is never wise.

Shrewd Manager said:

Hi Kate, I'd encourage you to take some time to research this area, because there are many serious unanswered questions and anomalies herein. This playlist might be a good place to start:
Nuke-hoax - YouTube

Click to expand...

Hi Ben I have watched a few. Though I did notice many videos have been deleted. Nether the less I did come across some interesting information. Like the planned bombing of Imabari in the province of Ehime on the 5th and 6th August. The only problem being there is that the city of Imabari: population of around 60 thousand had ceased to exist being obliterated in late April and early May from the year before. Of course there was one city directly ahead, only 60-70 kilometres away and that being Hiroshima. So the argument put forth is this: Just what was the real destination of those 66 bombers if there was no Imabari left to bomb on the 5th and 6th August 1945 . Ben it’s food for thought. Though I do have one question. Would not the navigators have realised this about Imabari, along with the briefing they received prior to take off. Unless of course the coordinates were somehow fixed to include Hiroshima unbeknownst to the air crews of that evening and early morning raid. The other video( eye witness account of Hiroshima) you have Father John Cieslik at Jesuit house having all the windows there blown out a few kilometres away from the event. The thing I find most interesting there. Is that along with many others he is out helping out injured close to ground zero where you once had mean temperatures of some 5-6000 degrees where there should have been nothing left at all. Yet in his interview he has no concerns with the radiation nor the side affects for himself in anyway. Which maybe he should had done being so close to the epicentre. So I did find that interesting. The other point is: That it is really hard to discern the difference between the aftermath of incindery bombing and the aftermath of a atomic bomb blast at least with Hiroshima and Negasaki when you compare the photos of both. For both methods of destruction do look the same. Though you would expect to find nothing left at the epicentre of a atomic bomb blast with temperatures of some 6000 degrees. But seems at Hiroshima and Negasaki this seems to the the case as the epicentres seem to have remained intact

Kate30 said:

The other video( eye witness account of Hiroshima) you have Father John Cieslik at Jesuit house having all the windows there blown out a few kilometres away from the event. The thing I find most interesting there. Is that along with many others he is out helping out injured close to ground zero where you once had mean temperatures of some 5-6000 degrees where there should have been nothing left at all. Yet in his interview he has no concerns with the radiation nor the side affects for himself in anyway. Which maybe he should had done being so close to the epicentre. So I did find that interesting.

Click to expand...

The temperature at ground zero would have momentarily been 5-6000 F. This would cause serious, potentially fatal, flash burns and would have ignited flammable material. However, the blast wave which follows would actually blow out most of the fires ignited that way. The potential is still there that those fires could rekindle and merge and possibly result in a firestorm.

JackRT said:

You have the perfect right to believe as you will but the denial of reality is never wise.

Click to expand...

And your reality is =

JackRT said:

The temperature at ground zero would have momentarily been 5-6000 F. This would cause serious, potentially fatal, flash burns and would have ignited flammable material. However, the blast wave which follows would actually blow out most of the fires ignited that way. The potential is still there that those fires could rekindle and merge and possibly result in a firestorm.

Click to expand...

Jack I’m not sure of the time factor that the explosion would have held such temperatures for. You say momentarily. Than that would be under a minute I guess. And probably the reason why other structures survived at the epicentre of the initial inferno.