No Nukes Were Dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki


“In Hiroshima I was prepared for radically different sights. But, to my surprise, Hiroshima looked exactly like all the other burned-out cities in Japan. There was a familiar pink blot, about two miles in diameter.

It was dotted with charred trees and telephone poles. Only one of the cities twenty bridges was down. Hiroshima’s clusters of modern buildings in the downtown section stood upright. It was obvious that the blast could not have been so powerful as we had been led to believe. It was extensive blast rather than intensive.

I had heard of buildings instantly consumed by unprecedented heat. Yet here I saw the buildings structurally intact, and what is more, topped by undamaged flag poles, lightning rods, painted railings, air raid precaution signs and other comparatively fragile objects. At the T-bridge, the aiming point for the atomic bomb, I looked for the “bald spot” where everything presumably had been vaporized in the twinkling of an eye. It wasn’t there or anywhere else.

I could find no traces of unusual phenomena.

What I did see was in substance a replica of Yokohama or Osaka, or the Tokyo suburbs – the familiar residue of an area of wood and brick houses razed by uncontrollable fire. Everywhere I saw the trunks of charred and leafless trees, burned and unburned chunks of wood. The fire had been intense enough to bend and twist steel girders and to melt glass until it ran like lava – just as in other Japanese cities. The concrete buildings nearest to the center of explosion, some only a few blocks from the heart of the atom blast, showed no structural damage.

Even cornices, canopies and delicate exterior decorations were intact. Window glass was shattered, of course, but single-panel frames held firm; only window frames of two or more panels were bent and buckled. The blast impact therefore could not have been unusual.”    -Major Alexander Seversky


Aerial view of central Hiroshima before fire bombing

If we go back to the pre-Hiroshima nuke propaganda, we find talk of areas being urned into a glass parking lot where no life would be able to grow for the next 500 years. This obviously did not happen! Here are a few photos comparing the aftermath of a firebombing of Tokyo and the aftermath of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima. Are they very different other than that of the larger Tokyo having more surviving buildings? Is it possible that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen as targets for this deception instead of a more strategic target like Tokyo because they were mainly filled with cheap light paper-thin wooden structures, thereby making the devastation of the firestorm appear more complete?

Tokyo, photo take March 10, 1945 after a firebombing

Hiroshima, photo taken after nuke attack

Should any buildings, bridges and trees have been left standing after a nuclear devastation? Where is this glass parking lot?

Hiroshima aftermath, ground view

Hiroshima aftermath, poles and trees

Well folks it appears another massive lie has been propagated and propagandized into our minds through the mass education/indoctrination system.

Much evidence suggesting that the United States never dropped nuke bombs, (one uranium, one plutonium) is emering. Watch this short clip from a 1945 newsreel and you cannot see any difference between the U.S. fire carpet bombing 62 cities directly before Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


No Remaining Radiation in Nuked Cities. Why?

 Burchett’s reference to the atomic plague immediately moved the War Department into action. At first they ordered Burchett to leave Japan. Then the camera he had used in Hiroshima mysteriously disappeared. The US occupation authorities claimed that Burchett had been taken in by Japanese propaganda about radiation. [20]

They decided to let him stay in Japan and opted instead to deal with his charges about atomic sickness by simply denying that radiation had caused any problems. As a result, a New York Times reporter who had a week earlier reported witnessing sickness and death due to the lingering effects of the atomic bomb simply reversed the truth.

He now reported that according to the head of the US atomic mission to Japan the bomb had not produced any “dangerous, lingering radioactivity.” [21] The Washington Post uncritically noted that the atomic mission staff had been unable to find any Japanese person suffering from radiation sickness. [22]  (Source)

Now the fact that both cities are flourishing with no evidence of prolonged rates of cancer or radioactivity, which should be increasing yearly due to the nuke bombing 75 years ago.

“For all other cancers, incidence increase did not appear until around ten years after the attacks. The increase was first noted in 1956 and soon after tumor registries were started in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki to collect data on the excess cancer risks caused by the radiation exposure.

The most thorough study regarding the incidence of solid cancer (meaning cancer that is not leukemia) was conducted by a team led by Dale L. Preston of Hirosoft International Corporation and published in 2003.

The study estimated the attributable rate of radiation exposure to solid cancer to be significantly lower than that for leukemia—10.7%.

According to the RERF, the data corroborates the general rule that even if someone is exposed to a barely survivable whole-body radiation dose, the solid cancer risk will not be more than five times greater than the risk of an unexposed individual.

….One of the most immediate concerns after the attacks regarding the future of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki was what health effects the radiation would have on the children of survivors conceived after the bombings.

So far, no radiation-related excess of disease has been seen in the children of survivors, though more time is needed to be able to know for certain.

In general, though, the healthfulness of the new generations in Hiroshima and Nagasaki provide confidence that, like the oleander flower, the cities will continue to rise from their past destruction.

Perhaps most reassuring of this is the view of the cityscapes themselves. Among some there is the unfounded fear that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still radioactive; in reality, this is not true.”


To drive home the point that radiation was not a problem, General Groves invited thirty reporters out to the New Mexico site where the bomb had first been tested two months earlier.

This effort paid off with a banner headline in the New York Times: “U.S. Atom Bomb Site Belies Tokyo Tales; Tests on New Mexico Range Confirm That Blast, and Not Radiation, Took Toll,” [23]

Life magazine concluded after the escorted tour in New Mexico that no Japanese person could have died as a result of lingering radiation.

Radiation Should Continue to be Increasing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it’s NOT!

“The atomic bomb that detonated over Hiroshima used Uranium-235, while the Nagasaki bomb had Plutonium-239. The half-life of U-235 is 700 million years, while that of Pu-239 is 24,000 years.

In other words, once on the ground, they will be there for a very long time. I thus again visited both peace parks to get to the bottom of all this.

I asked for and received several pages from the Hiroshima Peace Museum regarding this issue. To quote:

“Today, the background radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the same as the average amount of natural radiation present anywhere on Earth. It is not enough to affect human health.”

Part of the answer is that these bombs exploded high up in the air and all the radioactive material blew or rained away… somewhere. I guess.

But, Little Boy over Hiroshima was only about 1% efficient, so what happened to the 139 pounds of the U-235 that were particularized? From all reports, the plume dissipated over land and sea. Same for Nagasaki and the 12 pounds of Pu-239 particles.

There was a slight increase of leukemia in the Nagasaki region, but no additional incidence of cancers anywhere in and around Hiroshima.

Thus, contrary to any kind of logical sense, while the high altitude (1968 feet for Hiroshima and 1800 feet for Nagasaki) of the nuclear explosions immediately killed 200,000 people, these cities soon became safe, and are thriving today.

I’m still wondering why.


The reasons most of these and many more pictures by LIFE photographers on the ground in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never published have largely been lost or simply forgotten over the intervening seven decades.

First Reports of Nuke Bombing Reported

The first photograph of Japanese victims appeared in Life magazine about two months after the end of the war. [15] But the magazine used a caption to undercut the power of the photos. The caption stated that the photographer “reported that [the] injuries looked like those he had seen when he photographed men burned at Pearl Harbor.” [16] For the most part, photographs of the human cost of the atomic bombings seldom appeared in the American media until the 1950s, [17] by which time they would have had little influence on nuclear policy, which had fully absorbed nuclear arms and power into American military planning and civilian life.


Smoke rises more than 60,000 feet into the air over Nagasaki from an atomic bomb, the second ever used in warfare, dropped from a B-29 Superfortress bomber in this U.S. Air Force photo dated August 9, 1945.

Said to be Atomic blast of Nagasaki yet clearly shows two separate bomb clouds

Of course, one of them must be fake. Or perhaps – uh…- could both be? :blink: To those unfamiliar with photo-analyses: Note that the background in the pictures has evidently moved – meaning the 2 shots (if real) must have been snapped at different moments in time(as the airplane moved along). Now, look at the mushroom cloud in the foreground: It is identical in shape. Enough said? Or are you willing to believe that the mushroom cloud’s shape remained static between the two shots? Or that the two shots were captured by two photographers – at the exact same moment in time?


More Hype and Propaganda from Life Magazine

“In the following waves [after the initial blast] people’s bodies were terribly squeezed, then their internal organs ruptured. Then the blast blew the broken bodies at 500 to 1,000 miles per hour through the flaming, rubble-filled air. Practically everybody within a radius of 6,500 feet was killed or seriously injured and all buildings crushed or disemboweled.” — From the article “Atom Bomb Effects,” LIFE magazine, 3/11/1946

“In Hiroshima, 30 days after the first atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, mysteriously and horribly—people who were uninjured in the cataclysm—from an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague.

The Atomic Bomb hoax 1945-2015

Today 25460 days have passed since the first media fake propaganda about the Hiroshima atomic bomb was published by the USA during WW2.


1. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not destroyed by atomic bombs 1945. The Japanese towns with their poor inhabitants in their simple wood/paper shanty houses were destroyed and burnt down by US napalm carpet bombings. The rich Japanese lived in the suburbs!
2. That two atomic bombs exploded in Japan 1945 were just US wartime propaganda (false information) to impress the Soviet union. Stalin wasn’t fooled. He (or his deputy Beria) invented/faked his own atomic bomb 1949.
3. The almost 70 years old hoax from 6 August 1945 is of course still working kept going strong by several governments, crazy generals and plenty physicists incl. Nobel prize winners that cannot get any better jobs than lying for their governments – the only real job many physicists can get apart from being low paid school teachers – and by mainstream media that are experts in publishing false info to brainwash you.
4. The USA use billions of dollars to maintain the hoax. Russia doesn’t spend a rubel or kopek to keep the show going.
5. France faked its atomic bomb in the 1960’s.
6. 10 000’s of atomic bombs have since 1946 been built, transported around, mishandled, dropped by mistake by incompetent soldiers but none has ever exploded. Reason is that an atomic bomb cannot explode. It is physically impossible as shown in this article.
7. A thermonuclear war is therefore not possible!
8. Nuclear arms are very safe and secure! They cannot harm anything. But it is illegal to say so!
9. The Islamic Republic of Iran is trying since 30 years to fake an atomic bomb that Stalin did in four years 65 years ago assisted by Gulag prisoners and Wismut AG of Aue, Saxony.
10. The International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, and its boss Yukiya Amano and the dictator of North Korea are part of the hoax. Just ask them about it. They are paid to lie about atomic bombs. Just laugh at them and refer them to this web site.
11. The good news are that atomic bombs or A-bombs do not work and are nothing to be afraid of.

After a while the crazy but law abiding physicists got serious and believed their own lies and started to teach them as truths at universities. Internal criticism was no longer possible. You had to believe or you were not part of the gang(sters). It is against the law to tell otherwise!

The US Atomic Energy Act of 1946 (and its revisions) charges the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and later the US Department of Energy (DoE), with regulating restricted data wherever it appears and wherever it comes from, i.e. control of information. In plain language – censorship!

The restricted data clause of the US Atomic Energy Act specifies that all nuclear weapons-related information is to be considered classified unless explicitly declassified, and makes no distinction about whether said information was created in a laboratory by a government scientist or anywhere else in the world by private citizens (sic).

Thus nuclear weapons information is born secret according to the US law.

The US authorities don’t have any choice in the matter 2015. Therefore all information that a-bombs are fake are effectively censored in the USA. It seems this web page has been overlooked by DoE … and that I am in breach with the law. And you the readers are also at risk! You are reading classified information.  

It must be kept secret! 

The hoax works today 70 years later by keeping plenty silly, unintelligent, opportunistic people occupied. It is a criminal threat. And now terrorists may use them! What a crazy world.



Go Team USA! We Kill ’em Better Than Anyone Else! Yea!

Killing poor, unarmed civilians were common practice during WW2 by terrorists on both sides but the allies were in the lead. A typical US bomber run on a civilian, non-military Japanese town, and there were many, would be made at night, at low altitude and deliver a mixture of high explosive and incendiary bombs. The objective was to turn the closely-packed, wooden homes and buildings prevalent in Japanese cities into raging infernos and ultimately into the most destructive of all weapons – the fire storm. Tokyo on the night of March 9-10, 1945 is a typical example.

B-29s was unleashed – each plane stripped of ammunition for its machine guns to allow it to carry more fire bombs. The lead attackers arrived over the city just after dark and were followed by a procession of death that lasted until dawn. The fires started by the initial raiders could be seen from 150 miles away. The results were devastating: almost 17 square miles of the city were reduced to ashes. Estimates of the number of defenceless civilians, mostly elderly, women and children killed range between 80 000 and 200 000. The young men were evidently not at home but served in the armed forces. The industry was located far away. The military value of the fire bombing raids was zero.


Good Source of More Info


Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wimington, NJ. Among his positions of expertise he was in charge of measuring and controlling the nuclear fuel inventory and storage.

He completely blows the lid off the idea of “nuclear meltdown” or “nuclear waste,” it simply does not exist, he even eats a good portion of live radioactive waste on video and claims to have been doing it for years! In this excellent presentation Galen shows that fear of nuclear radiation has been greatly exaggerated to scare people and so a few powerful organizations can maintain total control of the world’s most valuable power resource:

] Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These events have been given an almost surreal significance; we have collected together threads on the topic, which completely debunk the official lies. Click here for our forum on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the US bombing

Issues include in no particular order:
• First report by John Hersey, in a special edition of the New Yorker. His piece on Hiroshima filled the entire issue – and was published in 1946, many months later than the bombing. Here it is – 1946 Hersey piece, and comments
• The antennae on the supposed bombs: The antennae on the claimed bombs would not have worked
• The Norden bombsight error radius: as supposedly used by Ferebee, had an error radius bigger than the entire town The Norden bombsight as supposedly used by Ferebee in the Enola Gay, had an error radius bigger than the entire town
• Tibbets’ accounts are contradictory – see the section on the Enola Gay, the bombing plane that supposedly bombed Hiroshima. Click here for detailed analysis of newsreel and propaganda footage at the time: Enola Gay plane, crew, Tinian, testimony and evidence
• The airplane supposedly sent specifically to collect data, didn’t
• We note the small number of photos of the supposedly hugely significant ‘mushroom cloud’ from the ground in Japan, and anomalies in the very few photos. The Japanese were technologically advanced; where are the photographs and films?
• Generally, note how few photos there are, and how unconvincing they are even the ‘declassified’ ones – the photographs and films, and even drawings, are unconvincing.
• Watch for eye-witness giveaways – e.g. an extract from Osada’s book ‘Children of the A bomb’ which shows the town was firebombed e.g. an extract from Osada’s book ‘Children of the A bomb’
• Jungk’s post-war ‘Brighter than a Thousand Suns’ was a big seller. We look at problems in 1950s historical accounts: Robert Jungk’s 1956 (German) and 1958 (English translation) book ‘Brighter than a Thousand Suns’
• Fake testimony – Claud Eatherly is an example Eatherley’s book (with a foreword by ‘Gunther Anders’ who was also associated with the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation)
• Fairly new information on the Japanese surrender, and dealing with Stalin and ending the war – this is a short Youtube Video talk by David Irving on Hiroshima’s purpose and timing
• Management of radiation scare stories has been ridiculously erratic:
. . . • “Hiroshima Study finds NO GENETIC DAMAGE” Years after – no genetic problems found in Japan!
. . . • “Hiroshima – Was there radiation, or wasn’t there?” – One or other must be a lie!
. . . • (The same confusion applies with Fukushima…) Japan’s Prime Minister says it was “a very grave crisis”; but was it?
. . . • Getting rid of witnesses? Story of the USS Indianapolis, sunk in 1945 on the way back from supposedly shipping two atom bombs; the sailors were left for days (mentioned in the film ‘Jaws’. Note: not to be confused with the Annapolis ships and seaport). Few survived, but only by chance.
• Watch for oddities in all official stories. I’m told B H Liddell Hart’s History of the Second World War remarks that no Japanese knew they’d been atom bombed until long after the end of the war. In our interpretation, of course, this is a restatement of the fact that US propaganda was responsible for the hoax.
• Here we look at the process of making up properties such a bomb should presumably have, and inconsistencies – flash, blast, heat generated, radiation, ‘mushroom cloud’, and the general lack of nuclear phenomena Inventing A bomb properties
• Media switch to friendship with Japan after the War Herman Kahn and Japan & Post-War Switch to Friendship, possibly in exchange for no staged Japanese war crimes tribunal


46 thoughts on “No Nukes Were Dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

  1. Really peachland? did you look at the 1945 newsreel? the after effects are EXACTLY the same? Why?
    Why is there no reported increase in radiation in Fukushima and Nagasaki 75 years later? Great, they told/sold us that the A bombs exploded above the cities but the fallout (get it fall?) would of surely covered the surface of those cities and should of continued to cause death from the uranium and plutonium isotopes that we are told/sold increase exponentially over tens, hundreds and thousands of year.

    How do you know thyroid cancer increased around the world due to these blasts when some 2200 other nuke blasts are said to have occurred as well?

    If you think this is crazy, then your going to really get on me for my new website. bubble burst yet truth remains my friend. What is so bad about proposing alternative narratives and thoughts when we have been lied to by pro’s for so very long?

    “Minds are like parachutes, they work best when fully opened!”

    My body of work speaks for itself. You are welcome, and encouraged to provide your counter “proof” if this is so bogus.


    Liked by 2 people

  2. I agree with your article. There are other websites and YouTube videos that prove the same. The cost of the Manhattan project, 2 billion, (27 billion in 2007 dollars), was a crime that had to be hid by the military. “National Security” was the fear command for anyone who told about the firebombing. Pictures don’t lie, the stone buildings were standing exactly like Tokyo. If there were nuked, according to scientists, they should have melted.
    Survivors were kept quiet by Gen Douglas MacArthur’s occupation forces after the war.
    The art of photo fakery has improved much since WW2, and the fakes of WW2 are more obvious than ever. Nuclear weapons are a bluff and a con. They are a huge waste of money, unless you are connected to the defense industry and don’t mind accepting their campaign donations. The public was fooled in 1945, and was fooled again about the JFK assassination by a “lone” gunman, and fooled again about the 9-11 “plane” attacks.


    1. What sold me, was how there would be mass increase in radiation some 70 yrs. hence, yet there is none. We are told that is because they detonated above ground….yet isn’t that we call “fall”-out. there should be less and less people living in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, yet this is the opposite of what is happening.


  3. In Hiroshima almost everything up to about one mile from X was completely destroyed, except for a small number (about 50) of heavily reinforced concrete buildings, most of which were specially designed to withstand earthquake shock, which were not collapsed by the blast; most of these buildings had their interiors completely gutted, and all windows, doors, sashes, and frames ripped out. In Nagasaki, nearly everything within 1/2 mile of the explosion was destroyed, including heavy structures. All Japanese homes were destroyed within 1 1/2 miles from X.
    The fire damage in both cities was tremendous, but was more complete in Hiroshima than in Nagasaki. The effect of the fires was to change profoundly the appearance of the city and to leave the central part bare, except for some reinforced concrete and steel frames and objects such as safes, chimney stacks, and pieces of twisted sheet metal. The fire damage resulted more from the properties of the cities themselves than from those of the bombs.

    The conflagration in Hiroshima caused high winds to spring up as air was drawn in toward the center of the burning area, creating a “fire storm”. The wind velocity in the city had been less than 5 miles per hour before the bombing, but the fire-wind attained a velocity of 30-40 miles per hour. These great winds restricted the perimeter of the fire but greatly added to the damage of the conflagration within the perimeter and caused the deaths of many persons who might otherwise have escaped. In Nagasaki, very severe damage was caused by fires, but no extensive “fire storm” engulfed the city. In both cities, some of the fires close to X were no doubt started by the ignition of highly combustible material such as paper, straw, and dry cloth, upon the instantaneous radiation of heat from the nuclear explosion. The presence of large amounts of unburnt combustible materials near X, however, indicated that even though the heat of the blast was very intense, its duration was insufficient to raise the temperature of many materials to the kindling point except in cases where conditions were ideal. The majority of the fires were of secondary origin starting from the usual electrical short-circuits, broken gas lines, overturned stoves, open fires, charcoal braziers, lamps, etc., following collapse or serious damage from the direct blast.

    Fire fighting and rescue units were stripped of men and equipment. Almost 30 hours elapsed before any rescue parties were observable. In Hiroshima only a handful of fire engines were available for fighting the ensuing fires, and none of these were of first class type. In any case, however, it is not likely that any fire fighting equipment or personnel or organization could have effected any significant reduction in the amount of damage caused by the tremendous conflagration.


    1. can you provide sources for this information. many articles say there was a news blackout for months and then only limited releases of what went down that week.


  4. “Of course, one of them must be fake…Note that the background in the pictures has evidently moved – meaning the 2 shots (if real) must have been snapped at different moments in time…Now, look at the mushroom cloud in the foreground: It is identical in shape.”

    No it isn’t identical in shape – that is why when you cross your eyes to view it as a stereo pair you can see the mushroom cloud in 3D.


  5. With regard to not just the no nukes conspiracy theory, but any such conspiracy theory that deals with enormous and convoluted subject matter it is always the strongest argument (they think) of those seeking to discredit the conspiracy theory as being impossible die to the sheer enormity of the conspiracy. As it has been said it is easier to make people believe a big lie than a small one. Occam’s Razor is no refuge because it works well with natural events, but falls apart when dealing with human beings who go to great lengths to cover their tracks in sometimes extraordinarily convoluted ways and then after they have done so they call any one who may be on to them crazy because the truth that exposes them must necessarily be “crazy” – and by design.

    So, it is entirely possible that there are no nukes and it is entirely possible that the governments of many nations have been engaging in a big coverup for decades.

    But it is not provable at this time so I really do not care to much but I will keep it always in the back of my mind as I observe world events – at the ready to launch it into the forefront if the opportunity and or necessity presents itself.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. The twin tower were made of aluminum NOT steel, much lower melting point.
    the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both air bursts, only the dust in the air would have been irradiated by the gamma rays. Chernobyl was a subterranean explosion picking up and irradiating thousands of tons of material. the Alpha and Beta rays only last as long as the explosion and are basically background level within 2 or 3 days.
    as you read this article you are finally having your eyes opened to the massive disinformation efforts of the Nuclear Disarmament groups.


  7. Good job good article and good news. Now we need a similar research on the hiv-aids lie, the moon walk lie, orbiting satellites lie and the holocaust lie. And we need an army of denyers that is able to punish the responsables.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Really?? Cameras placed 100s of FEET away. More like 5-10 miles away using a high zoom lens (Yes those were around then). They placed those cameras in reinforced bunkers as well. These troll websites are too funny. They try so hard to seem like a genuine Hoaxer, but anyone can see this is an ad website. Your troll savegely failed, your just another government stooge trying to use reverse disinformation.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. and the lack of any discernible radiation 75 years later is not present why? or cancer rate increase? or increasingly inhospitable lands?
      your one off comments lack any type of understanding of the post.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Pingback: Nuclear Reality
  10. But, there were trivial amounts of radiation because the bombs were detonated at to high an altitude for there to be much radiation. In this article about how nuke radiation effects were covered up Blake made a counter comments supported by a scientific paper that the radiation level was trivial, “If we take the case of a Hiroshima like blast where the device is detonated at altitude to maximize blast effects and thereby unintentionally minimize fallout effects, we need only consider two sources of radiation on the ground; the prompt gamma / neutron flux of the initial blast itself (which would be irrelevant to soldiers sent into the area after the fact) and the residual gamma background due to neutron activation of structural and other materials.

    Now, the prompt gamma / neutron flux from the blast itself falls to essentially trivial levels (~<10 REM) at a mere 1 mile from the hypocenter. The LD50 dose of ~500 REM is only found within a half mile from the hypocenter. The background gamma flux due to neutron activation is a tiny fraction of the initial radiation field used to induce it, and its half-life is generally very short indeed at hours for most materials.

    I don't want to do the actual calculations, but I am highly certain that if Groves did march troops through an area like the hypocenter of a ~15Kt blast hours after the event, the individual doses to soldiers would've been nowhere near fatal levels, possibly not even at biologically detectable levels with technology of the time. There may have been slightly elevated cancer risks to troops 30 years after the fact, but such a thing would pale in comparison to what I suspect would be the much greater immediate danger of choosing to send troops into a war zone at all.

    Blake says:
    October 19, 2012 at 3:45 am
    Addendum confirming my initial suspicions: The ’69 paper by Tadashi et al. “Estimation of Gamma-ray Dose from Neutron-induced Radioactivity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki” states the following:

    “The dose received by a person who entered the hypocenter area in Hiroshima one day after the bombing and remained there 8 hr would have been 3 rads. The doses at distances of 500 m and 1000 m from the hypocenter in Hiroshima were 18% and 0.07% respectively, of that at the hypocenter.”

    …completely trivial doses ("Who knew about radiation sickness, and when?," ). Also, there is another article saying how people can live in Nagasaki and Hiroshima because only a little amount of the radioactive material was activated, and also that they were detonated at too high of altitude for much radiation (“WHY CAN PEOPLE LIVE IN HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI NOW, BUT NOT CHERNOBYL?” ).

    Liked by 1 person

  11. jwlpeace Sorry, I meant that the threat of radiation exposure was trivial 8 hours after detonation of the atomic bombs as cited by Blake’s scientific comment that was left standing by the science expert Alex Wellerstein who runs the Restricted Data blog and the author of the cited article, “Who knew about radiation sickness, and when?.” And I said Blake’s comment countered the article, but actually his comment complemented the article because the article was about radiation effects immediately after detonation and Blake’s comment was about radiation effects afterwards. To further clarify my point the argument that Hiroshima and Nagasaki don’t have any lingering radiation effects to support the claim that no nukes were dropped is invalid because 8 hours after detonation the nuke bombs posed no threat of radiation.


  12. pls answer me this.why can they build a nuclear power plant but not a nuclear bomb?and one more:was in your opinion the chernobyl accident and all the radiation that followed real or not?and i am asking this just because i am curious.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. All i wanted to point out was how two very powerful exploded nuclear bomb has caused zero increase in radiation 75 years later meanwhile Chernobyl, 30 years on, is still having greatly increased levels of radiation. So much so they have to rebuild a bigger, stronger containment dome. Somethings not right. Fukushima is another strange event where everyone has just forgotten about it, yet they have filled the entire area with toxic water containment bladders. Why would they do this if radiation was not an issue.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. gi Nuclear bombs are real and they were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but the threat of nuclear war was and is now a hoax. Nuclear bomb explosions can only occur in accord with planetary harmonics at select predetermined coordinates and in perfect timing with the sun which basically means they are useless for nuclear warfare. This is like what Bruce Cathie says in many videos (A short clip on Cathie, “Nuclear weapons, the Sun, planetary alignments & Pythagoras,” Chernobyl could also be a hoax because Three Mile Island and Fukishima are radiation scare hoaxes ((1) “Exposing the Misunderstood issues of Nuclear Radiation by Galen Winsor,”; (2) shorter 48 minute video, Galen Winsor – The Grand Nuclear Hoax, The Three Mile Island disaster was a hoax scarcity game for utilities profit (China Syndrome Bunk and Japan’s Over-Hyped Disaster,


  13. jwlpeace The above Youtube channel Redpill with Bruce Cathie’s video made the comment that I also believe, “fallout only comes about when the process is not complete, a dirty bomb. The fact that there is little to no radiation means that they perfected the harmonic detonation. Galen Winsor discusses this also… .”


      1. jwlpeace Your welcome. For clarity the YouTube video I was referring to that has Redpill’s no nuclear fallout comment was “Nuclear weapons, the Sun, planetary alignments & Pythagoras,” in gi’s comment above, and there are a lot more Bruce Cathie YouTubes. Fukushimi is another scare hoax, and so was Three Mile Island, and maybe Chernobly. Please see my replies above to gi for references on those hoaxes.


  14. If it wasn’t for the fact that I was there (as a child, of course), saw the detonation, the mushroom cloud, the mile-wide destruction, the charred bodies (including of my aunt, sadly) and was rewarded with life-long PTSD as a result, I wouldn’t have bothered to comment.

    I would LOVE for your hoax idea to be right. My life would have been very, very different if there would have been no atom bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sadly, it is just another conspiracy theory taken out of the blue, backed up by slightly adjusted views of reality and then handled with completely closed minds.

    I know that believers really prefer to believe. So go be a believer, live your life in your fantasies instead of in the real world that others have to live in. But for those of you who prefer reality: Yes, there were nukes. The nukes put an end to the war, but destroyed a lot of lives. Reality hurts, so some people tend to avoid it. Please be wiser than that, because the weapons may (or may not, that’s not the point of my comment) be out there – if not nukes then other weapons of mass destruction. I wouldn’t want anyone to have to suffer like I did, and like my family did. And I don’t think ignorance and fantasies are the way to avoid it in the future. Stay safe, even you believers…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Can you explain why no radiation increases whatsoever have occurred in 75 years in Nagasaki and Hiroshima? This would be impossible if the plutonium and uranium bombs were detonated directly over those cities
      …and please don’t say the radiation “blew away” with the wind, like some apologists have suggested without knowledge of how an atomic fallout …critical word being “fall” out…actually occurs after explosion.
      thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. What most of the Nukulur weapon apologists are ignoring is the obvious things right in front of them.

    Mushroom clouds are only formed by ground detonations. ONLY.

    Secondly, the technology did not exist in 1945 to detonate a bomb at the specified altitudes. The “radar altimeter fuzes” on the bombs were props. They could not, and did not work.

    The Norden bombsights were not calibrated for the ballistics of the two “Uhtomic Bombs.” Just like shooting a different round out of a scoped rifle, the bombsight had to be zeroed with the new ballistic data for the specific weapon being dropped: coefficient of drag, weight, etc. The crew would have had to make numerous test drops with identical mockups prior to using them. And even then, the CEP (Circular Error Probable) for a single weapon dropped at the stipulated altitude, THROUGH A 50-60 KNOT CROSSWIND, would have been about 2 KM. Which is enough to have missed the entire city. Never mind hitting the exact aimpoint.

    So, let’s review:

    Mushroom clouds means the bombs, if they were real, were ground bursts.

    Ground bursts leave craters, of which there is zero evidence.

    Ground bursts would have left massive amounts of radioisotopes, of which there are NO traces 70+ years on.

    Any sort of blast from the alleged bombs would have caused fragile objects to be knocked over (for an example, look at the Mt. St Helens aftermath photos).

    These are just the unassailable bits of evidence that anyone with a SHRED of intelligence can see. If the “bombs” were airbursts, then there would have been no mushroom clouds. QED. Can’t have it both ways.


    Liked by 3 people

  16. We can also consider the actual, physical mechanism of fission to falsify the project. Sure, fission exists and sure, fusion happens all the time in the sun’s corona at millions of degrees. But the concept of a chain reaction runaway explosion breaks conservation of energy right out the gate.

    If incoming neutrons are to unseat Uranium, for example, they would most likely have to collide at Uranium’s weak point – the central alpha. Uranium is so big it’s basically a molecule, a joining of several possible smaller atoms but most often Barium and Krypton. To break its central alpha (Helium is the alpha), neutrons would have to knock BOTH its alpha neutrons out at the same time, without replacing them in Uranium’s charge field. A mighty trick indeed.

    But even then, if an incoming neutron collides with a Uranium neutron (or proton), it’s only going to impart a certain amount of energy to that neutron which is LESS than it came in with. For a chain reaction, the secondary and tertiary neutrons are supposed to come from that initial hit. But conservation of energy tells us that this is impossible – it’s something from nothing. It’s simple billiard ball mechanics. When you hit the cue ball at a target ball, you lose energy by distance and friction on the felt and air resistance and gravity, and the cue ball never transfers the same amount of energy that it received when you took your shot, to the target ball. It may transfer enough energy to make the shot successful, but that’s not how much energy you put into the cue ball at the point of your pool stick.

    Binding energy is given as the cause of this additional energy, but Uranium is already leaking its binding energy constantly in the form of charge – this is what radioactivity is, in the first place. The instability of a given structure in the charge field.


  17. Radioactivity would not increase in these Japan cities over time. It would decrease over time for 2 main reasons. First, the radioactive isotopes of cesium and iodine have relatively short half lives which means they decay rapidly. Second, the rain and wind of 70 years would act to disperse these radio nucleotides far from the cities.

    There was a work of fiction back in the 1960s or 1970s that assumed that the bombs could not be exploded in the air (as in being dropped from a plane) because of the physics involved. It was a work of fiction, and I think the title was The Jesus Factor.


    1. The Cesium and Iodine would be decaying, sure (30 year half lives). But the alleged Uranium would not be. 700 million years there. Uranium 235 is far more stable, and 238 even more stable than that. It’s not the Cesium and Iodine that anyone would need to worry about, but the “undetonated” Uranium, allegedly, which would have been dispersed radially in the blast. It’s terribly heavy, if you recall, and would not be blowing around in the wind, so you’d have uranium blasting out in a sphere, with all the particles going up then landing relatively directly below the detonation point, so you’d basically have two layers of uranium deposited throughout the blast zone.

      Is this enough Uranium to cause any measurable difference? It is almost as common as tin and silver, remember, just naturally on its own. But there aren’t large deposits in these cities already, so if in fact these bombs did detonate we should see a noticeable amount of radiation from them even now. Most of the uranium didn’t detonate at all allegedly at Hiroshima – only 2 pounds out of 141 pounds. That’s 139 pounds added to the environment, allegedly. A noticeable amount? Maybe. Measurable? One would think so. That’s 139 pounds spread out over roughly 3 square miles, depending on its ejection speed in the alleged detonation, or about .00185 pounds per square foot (on average). That’s .8 grams of uranium per square foot, emitting charge (radiation) photons this entire time. It would not have noticeably decreased naturally in our lifetimes.


  18. Jared, excellent points.

    Essentially, it’s the very basis of nuclear physics that precludes instantaenous, explosive fission.

    Akio Nakatani’s work (HIGHLY recommended) breaks it down using a pinball analogy, but an even simpler description is simply this: without a moderator slowing fast neutrons, there is no possible way to get enough dwell time of enough neutrons in the fissile core to trigger a sustained reaction.

    Smashing metal pieces together won’t do it (mechanical means are still mechanical). “Compressing” an incompressible substance to “half it’s original size and double its density” is going into loony bin territory (but is somehow accepted in scientific circles). Double density, explosively compressed meta-materials would have a legion of uses, but so far I have not seen anyone creating them with this same explosive constriction method.

    Those are the two methods on-record for “initiating” a fission “explosion. That, and “squirting” neutrons (fast, of course) at the core.

    This is the crux of the whole argument- everything else is merely adjunct evidence (and there is a mountain of that). Mr. Nakatani ran the numerical modelling of a simulated device (using a rather powerful computer), and it came back as “not feasible.”

    Game over.

    Jared, you clearly comprehend nuclear physics at a finer grain than a large percentage of the population. Thanks for your contribution.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for the compliment, it’s been a long road studying modern charge physics and it’s terribly fulfilling!

      And thanks for turning me on to Akio Nakatani’s work. I use a pretty powerful, modern array of computers for my CGI and 3D-rendering as well as my personal physics projects, and I’m going to try to replicate his work after reading the book and see if we can get any new insights into it. His book was just published though, so it’s possible he’s working with enough computers to keep up with me already. 🙂


  19. Jared, it really is an excellent book, and needs to be made more popular on Amazon (and would make a great gift for relatives that may not know about this controversy).

    It would be great if you could connect with Dr. Nakatani, but I did not see any contact information (or indeed, which university he works for- likely to protect him from the inevitable backlash). His is the most cogent, lucid collection of information on this matter (which is not a criticism of Anders Bjorkman or Miles Mathis, both of whom have done sterling work).

    This information needs to be presented to a greater audience, and sending emails, links, and notes to sites such as Natural News and other blogs (similar to this one!) is the best way to generate “critical mass” (apropos to the subject matter!).

    Definitely keep us apprised of your progress re: the simulation. Perhaps consider setting up a website (with remote hosting in a country not likely to pull the plug) detailing it, and duplicating/backing up your notes/data to ensure it is not suppressed/destroyed. This information is possibly the biggest revelation in the past century.

    Keep digging, and let us know what you discover!

    Liked by 1 person

  20. It’s funny but nearly everything we were taught at school/universities and by popular science and media is wrong. Everything I touch turns into dust. It started with 9/11 a decade ago…. HIV/AIDS, WWII (winners write history), moon landing, vaccination, now nuclear bombs…. all bullshit. Never trust anyone, be your own lamp. With nukes all it took is this: I’ve easily found a book with plans how to make a nuke. If they did it over 7 decades ago, with the technology they had any half-assed student with basic lab could do this today. There is so much radioactive material unaccounted for, so many “terrorist” groups, whole countries with vast resources working on it, yet they couldn’t make it? It doesn’t make any sense. It’s like with the moon landing. Why aren’t we going for holiday to the moon hotels by now? If they could do this in the 60-ties in some aluminium can like from Verne’s novels, why aren’t they doing it now? Everything is a pile of garbage.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply to jwlpeace Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.