THE NUKE HOAX

Global War deceptions & mass manipulation, fear-mongering terror schemes and propaganda in the Age of the Bomb
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

hoi.polloi wrote:Not seeing your bonus pic, Critical Mass.
Strange... I can see it at my end.

It's on this website.

The picture at the bottom of the page.

It's a strange one... I'm assuming it's meant to be some military fellas looking down on a devastated Hiroshima from the top of a Mountain or building.

However it actually just looks like three guys looking down at a scale model diorama.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Woops. I see the problem. My bad. All my computer was showing me for that page was this:
grab1.JPG
grab1.JPG (18.91 KiB) Viewed 16096 times
The text is invisible and has to be copy-pasted in another program to be seen unless I override the site specific fonts with my own. Could be a Firefox issue.

The images are blocked because of my ad blocker which thinks those things are advertisements. And, hey — it might be right about that! Maybe it doubles as a "propaganda blocker" sometimes.

:lol:

Got it now.
Hiroshima.jpg
Hiroshima.jpg (63.16 KiB) Viewed 16096 times
fbenario
Member
Posts: 2256
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by fbenario »

hoi.polloi wrote:The images are blocked because of my ad blocker which thinks those things are advertisements. And, hey — it might be right about that! Maybe it doubles as a "propaganda blocker" sometimes.
Awesome. Made my day.

Edit: What Firefox ad blocker are you using? My AdBlock Plus did not the image.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Actually, it is Adblock. Not sure why mine would act more finicky than yours, but every system is different I suppose. Spyware? Old Windows?
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

A few minor observations with regards to the 'Atomic cannon' Grable test...

I'm sure you're all familiar with the test footage at 09:27.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehw1QZFLKEU

However perhaps you're less familiar with the Black & White News footage.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEuYkUYdSCU

Finally we have the new & improved HD footage.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BECOQuQC0vQ

There are some interesting differences between these three films.

The HD footage seems to feature fewer clouds in the sky than the original. The black & white footage features a pan lacking in the original. The original also has a waiving plant stem in the immediate foreground missing from all three.

I'm sure this can easily be explained by there being three cameras rolling so it's certainly 'no smoking gun'.

However all three sequences feature objects in the foreground whose shadows are completely unaffected by the intense new light source... that is 'a smoking gun' of course.

Interesting too is how the 'white out' takes place in the original footage. It begins from the bottom of the screen...

Image
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

My guess: Very Disney FX. Composite animation. They perhaps made the 'puff/explosion' layer with blank frames before the explosion so that errors do not show up on the actual explosion.
lux
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by lux »

If you keep your eye on the ring of smoke around the base of the "explosion" you can see that the whole thing is actually a still image with only the rising mushroom portion being animated. Everything else in the frame looks like a postcard.

Image
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

hoi.polloi wrote:My guess: Very Disney FX. Composite animation. They perhaps made the 'puff/explosion' layer with blank frames before the explosion so that errors do not show up on the actual explosion.
Well it is certainly a composite image. That's the only rational explanation for why 'Nuclear blast light' always fails to change any shadows of any foreground objects... and not just in these clips but in many hundreds I have watched.

I'm not too sure about 'animation' though... at least not what I, perhaps mistakenly, think you & Lux mean by the term.


I have my doubts principally for two reasons...

(I) The standard Hollywood procedure for making smaller events look bigger than they actually are is to use forced perspective, optical effects & miniature Pyrotechnics.

(ii) When the nuclear hoaxers did choose to use 'animation' (often for the cloud effects) it looks incredibly poor & obvious to our modern day eyes. Most infamously of course with the British H bomb footage...

Image

By the way it is interesting to note that the 'new & improved' HD footage of that test seems, for some reason, to lack that scene.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b3y_LUfnRA


My own theory is that the explosions are 'real' and possibly quite large in of themselves (many tonnes of tnt) and filmed with high speed cameras... then the explosion sequences were composited into whatever desert or steppe scene that was required, given a fake flash white out & a dramatic soundtrack.

Although individual frames were undoubtedly 'sexed up' I wouldn't, strictly speaking, call these movies 'animations'.


Either way they're fake.
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

Alex Wellerstein the 'Nuclear Historian' retweeted a link to this video at his twitter account...


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESpRFkXon7g

It's a hilarious ping pong ball movie worthy of one of Simon's music videos.

Unfortunately I don't think poor Alex has realized that he has posted a link to a youtube account ran by a Nuclear skeptic!

Either way, as always, the nukes featured have foreground objects whose shadows fail to react to 'Nuclear light'.

Image
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Although individual frames were undoubtedly 'sexed up' I wouldn't, strictly speaking, call these movies 'animations'.
It's an interesting debate, because essentially what you describe is a common debate within animation circles. I recommend reading articles on AWN for some insights into this largely polluted and compromised but still beautiful art form. Some people argue that all movies and videos are animation of some kind because they are described as a limited number of still images played in sequence. Ancient oscilloscopes are even praised in animation history classes for being one of animation's birthplaces. With this view, animation preceded film or at least developed in tandem. By the time common film came along, one could argue that it was just another way of getting the images for putting a sequence together. Instant automatic animators.

This definition of animation could also be distinguished from the color sequences of 1939's The Wizard of Oz being largely an animation because of its hand-tinted frames. The earliest archived films employ some animation or are largely composed of animation and "effects" (another word for animation).

A step up from that level would be called "rotoscoping" or what we might describe today as the "Waking Life" effect (that animated movie with the cartoon of Alex Jones playing the cartoon of the cartoon of Alex Jones) or "Augmented Reality" in which video of people, places and events captured by a camera is drawn on. This can either be digitally drawn with or without the help of computer algorithms, digitally painted/tinted, hand drawn, hand painted or otherwise altered frames. Rotoscoping is the most enormous subject of present day animation techniques and variants. What is done for MOCAP (Motion Capture, like Gollum from The Lord of the Rings or other digital characters) or less complete "augmented reality" can be considered rotoscoping or a relative of rotoscoping. Today, this is still referred to as animation.

It is perfectly conceivable that they filmed a TNT explosion of some size, then went in and altered each frame (rotoscoped) to give it an appearance of extra "power".

I think this is a reasonable theory about the so-called "advancement" of nuclear weapons. It is merely the advancement of animation skills or the advancement of paygrade for the lowest common denominator animator, employed by the government at Laurel Canyon or wherever they process the stuff now. They call the improvement of animation with money "better production value".

You would be surprised how fast and easy it is to rotoscope once you get a technique down. A good animator could finish a rough draft in a day, and then supervisors and eventually military test audiences (sworn to secrecy) could watch it a few times and give feedback for changes until you end up with something as crummy as we see today in the archives.

Everyone's a critic.

I wouldn't be surprised if they had a team of two or three people doing the wrist work on every single nuclear animation in history. Keep it in the family. Just keep hiring the tried and true experts; keep finding the young bright, ambitious, talented and selfish (or even conceited) new animators to take their direction. I've seen it happen.
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

hoi.polloi wrote:It's an interesting debate, because essentially what you describe is a common debate within animation circles.
Perhaps they did 'sex up' every frame... though I find our opponents to be incredibly (perhaps shockingly) lazy.

"Hey guys should we bother to make two separate incoming shockwave sequences... one each for Able & Baker?"

"Nah sod it! Let's just use the exact same sequence for both tests. The different backgrounds will sell it and no-one will notice*."

"Err guys we have a missing mushroom cloud?"

"Pfft who cares... they'll still buy it. The gullible fools."

Or the "I don't know how to start this thing so I'm just going cut to a new scene" style of 'editing'.

Image

It's the same shoddy, lazy work we continue to find right up to today's modern psyops. Mistakes which some believe are golden breadcrumbs designed to awaken the masses :rolleyes:


I tend to think that they kept to the relatively simple visual effects techniques described above.



* Or notice, for that matter, that those sequences break several known & testable rules of physics i.e. a shockwave traveling through water should far outpace the one traveling through air.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

I don't disagree. But like I said, perhaps they get what they can pay for. The best animators might not sell out immediately.

What you are describing, to me, means animation. I do believe that they pore over and approve every frame. They know most people will not care and only a few people will analyze the shit out of it using today's technology. To prevent this they employ lazy countermeasures like half-hearted encryption that can be excused by "military incompetence".

Perhaps it is because of this bureaucracy and inability to control/reconcile these different people in their audience that we see the notion of reducing the quality for the sake of some perceived consistency.

Like Simon has suggested, we don't know any one single technique they keep using, except to get from Point A (samples of reality) to Point B (fakery making up parts of a simulated whole).

Simple shitty animation is still animation. Effects are also animation. Compositing is not what we'd normally argue to be animation, but I do believe they actually think they are combing each frame for error. They just don't know (or don't care, or must enforce the power of previous mistakes by repeating them) that they aren't making their official "film"/"video" releases and official "photo" releases match up very well.

But I kind of think we are saying the same thing in different ways. It's still fake. I just enjoy the discussion of "how".
lux
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by lux »

Critical Mass wrote:
I'm not too sure about 'animation' though... at least not what I, perhaps mistakenly, think you & Lux mean by the term.
When I said ...
"If you keep your eye on the ring of smoke around the base of the "explosion" you can see that the whole thing is actually a still image with only the rising mushroom portion being animated. Everything else in the frame looks like a postcard."

... my intended meaning of the word "animated" was simply that the indicated portion of the image was moving in contrast to the rest of the image which appeared to be a still photograph.

That's all I meant by "animated."

The point is that the footage appears to a a composite of a still image (the general scene) with a moving image (the explosion).
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

Trinitite the atomic glass.

Image

Beautiful & undeniable... a byproduct of a bygone age when men walked on the Moon & burned cities with their fiery will.

So how much of this stuff was there?

Some say there was a layer 1-2cm thick.

Some say there was a crater of glass in the New Mexico desert approximately 10 feet deep and 1100 feet wide.

Some say there was around 7500 tonnes of Trinitite being produced by the 'Atomic explosion'

Geez I can't wait to see the imagery on this... I imagine it'll be most impressive.

Image

Hmmm... I see.

None of these figures can be forensically identified nowadays unfortunately (bulldozers you see). Evidence though who really needs it?

Interestingly in The Nuclear Weapons Journal article about the 'new research' on Trinitite (page 2 onwards) it appears the Scientists chose to use the Historical photos already provided by the US military. Well why bother with new photo's I suppose?

Image

The Trinity 'Ground Zero' site today...

Image

By the way people can buy a piece of Trinitite both then & now.

Image
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Unread post by Critical Mass »

Yet again I must give another hat tip to Alex Wellerstein the ridiculous 'Nuclear Historian'. I don't know about you guys but I seriously think we should make him an honorary Cluesforum member or something.


In this article here Alex, as always, pushes the nonsensical imagery we've all come to know & love.

In particular the RDS-37 imagery aka the Soviet Unions first 'true' H-bomb.

Image
Image

The composite imagery & lack of shadow changes from the 'Nuclear light' are typical of Nuke test movies of course.

More interestingly if you continue to watch the best version of this test you see what happens when the huge blast wave hits the City of Kurchatov.

Image

The camera shakes, people fall in the street, animals run across the street, snow is shaken off the roofs of houses & there's a burst of chimney smoke (?) from another house... impressive I'm sure you'll agree.

As Alex mentions in his article this shockwave even managed to kill a small girl living in the city...
The inhabitants of the town were in a primitive bomb shelter. After the flash, they exited to see the cloud. Inside the shelter, however, was left a two-year-old girl, playing with blocks. The shock wave, arriving well after the flash, collapsed the shelter, killing the child.
There's just one tiny, weeny little problem with all this however.

The 'test site' for RDS-37 is over 65KM away from the City!

Image

Image

Image

An enormous distance which could not possibly be reached by a 'mere' 1.6MT... heck Alex's own 'Nuke Map tool' confirms it.

Image

The largest ring shows the pressure required to break a window (roughly what we see in the movie) at 1.5psi.

How large must an explosion be to actually reach Kurchatov with a 1.5psi blast (which even then you wouldn't expect to be able to collapse bomb shelters & kill little girls)?

Image

About 65MT... making the Russians first H-bomb the largest nuclear test in History... far larger than the 57MT Tsar Bomba.

That ladies & Gentlemen is what we call 'a bit of a plot hole'.

I would suggest to the neutral reader that real historical events don't come with plot holes?




EDITED

Minor spelling correction
Last edited by Critical Mass on Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply