Are Nuclear Power & Nuclear Weapons All We've Been Told?
The following post is included, as although not directly about orgone and consciousness, orgone enters a state of excited and different activity when stimulated by radioactivity. Therefore radioactivity is an area of interest to this researcher. Further, because we are in such a critical situation politically the author felt questions needed to be addressed quickly. Due to events happening so fast this essay has been published now but if things need revising in it that will be done as soon as inaccuracies or omissions are brought to my attention. My personal website is no longer up and running so this blog is in use again. My main papers can always be viewed at the Journal of Psychiatric Orgone Therapy at www.psychorgone.com.
In normal times I would wait many months if not years, to digest and assimilate new information before analysing and compiling it, but here I felt I had to share before I have completely made my own mind up about it. Why, will become clear.
We are presently in a situation of conflict between NATO and Russia. Up until recently direct confrontation has apparently been staved off through the prospect of the so-called MAD doctrine - Mutually Assured Destruction. This is based on the idea that nuclear weapons can destroy whole cities in one go and that no one can win a nuclear war, but..
Are Nuclear Weapons What We've Been Told?
Are Nuclear Weapons What We've Been Told?
It was becoming obvious that NATO was not worried about starting a confrontation with Russia. In fact, it seemed like they were doing everything they could to start a war - not supporting the Minsk agreements in Ukraine, assisting an anti-Russian coup in Ukraine, ignoring the internal war against ethnic Russians amongst others. This got the author thinking that they are preparing for a full-scale ground war with NATO troops openly involved and are not bothered about the possible use of nuclear weapons. This could either be because they are happy to sacrifice large areas of Europe and perhaps the US. Or alternatively it could be that they do not themselves fear nuclear weapons. Is this because they do not work as claimed? This does not mean there could not be some other type of catastrophic weapon, perhaps a Directed Energy Weapon or a Tsunami creating device. But perhaps nuclear arms do not work as we have been taught. Certainly, by NATO’s behaviour one would think a nuclear war is the last thing on their minds. Paradoxically, they seem to have deep faith in Putin not to start a nuclear war. Unless of course, nukes are real, and NATO is run by psychopaths.
One can start with the first major event most think of as definitive proof of atomic weapons – Hiroshima. A US Airforce expert working for the government of occupation in Japan found, much to his surprise, that many concrete buildings in central Hiroshima were still standing and even fragile structures were still extant. The damage was not unlike what he had seen in other Japanese cities, many of which had been destroyed. Major Alexander Seversky said, ‘Hiroshima looked exactly like all the other burned out cities in Japan..I saw the buildings structurally intact and what is more topped by undamaged flagpoles..I could find no traces of unusual phenomena.’
Major Seversky Confirms No Unusual Damage
A doctor Cole Sims who was also on the ground in Hiroshima shortly after the bombing stated in a 1979 interview that he was ordered to exaggerate the devastation of the atom bomb by a US government worried about maintaining a deterrent threat.
There are also reports that the number of bomber planes sent out shortly before Hiroshima did not completely tally with official reports - 111 bombers being sent to a relatively small oil refinery and another 66 to attack a small town which then reported relatively low casualties according to the following researcher. Such numbers were in excess of what was needed for the stated missions and left plenty to attack somewhere else. This research was based on extensive reading of book and military reports of the bomber accounts before Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1). Most of the pilots need not have even known where they were attacking, apart from the lead bomber.
Nuclear energy itself, though probably quite real, is also not what we are told. Here is a summary of Galen Windsor, a renowned early nuclear power station scientist who was the leader in his field at the time. He has consistently made several unusual claims which do not tally with the mainstream narrative:
Galen Windsor, Nuclear Power Station Scientist
The claim that the second world war could not have been ended had there not been use of atomic weapons (without massive loss of American military lives and Japanese to an invasion) is contradicted by widespread US intelligence intercepts indicating that even before the huge and repeated carpet bombing of Tokyo (resulting in many tens of thousands of deaths and the levelling of Tokyo). The Japanese military were already prepared to accept surrender under similar conditions to that taken after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were levelled. General Macarthur also had documented surrender overtures from high level Japanese government officials, which he gave to the US President before the Yalta heads of allied states meeting in January and prior to the claimed atomic bombings of August 6th and 9th 1945. See minute 19 approximately for copies of documents (3). Some concrete buildings only a few blocks from Ground Zero survived structurally intact, counter to what we are told about the city being completely incinerated.
Hiroshima Building 1945 and Presently
(5). Hiroshima had normal radiation levels within hours – this was explained by US military as the effects of wind and rain and because the explosion was apparently air detonated. But shouldn’t an air detonation create more damage and after-effects and not less? Rebuilding started right away in Hiroshima. Today it is thriving with normal levels of health for its citizens. Chernobyl is now a sanctuary for wildlife. With all the nuclear tests carried out should not the planet be half-dead and radioactive everywhere? The largest explosion in history was not the super-bombs of the USA and USSR but the Krakatoa Eruption, which was 4 times more powerful than anything even claimed by the superpowers. Certainly there are widespread reports of immune system disorders in children following nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl but perhaps the full story is yet to come out. Even early nuclear tests did not create lasting radiological evidence.
Regarding the Fukushima accident in March 2011, this author was in touch with the orgone scientist Dr Demeo who confirmed that no unusual radioactivity was picked up on the West coast of the USA where he has his research station. Fukushima was the only power station (out of the many that is said to supply Japan with a third of its power) that was not immediately shut down following the earthquake. Despite this shutdown and the loss of power from Fukushima there was no power outages in Tokyo that year. Fukushima power station area is being reinhabited and the power station is now reopened with tourism recommencing and residents moving back. Does this all add up? Weren’t we told that radioactivity contaminates for centuries?
The author of this last video referenced (5) believes that nuclear energy is also faked. This author does not concur with this for several reasons. Geiger counts react to radioactivity which certainly seems real – radioactivity can be recorded easily. The oranur effects of radioactivity can be felt in the body and recognised. The author has measured various environments and materials which correspond normally to their expected radioactivity counts. Radioactivity is just charged, excited particles leaving matter and converted into something we can hear or count - hence radio-activity. A geiger counter tube reacts to the charged particles hitting it from uranium or other radioactive material or from a concentration of excited orgone energy (oranur). Wilhelm Reich experienced very high Geiger counts. This was in his orgone versus nuclear energy experiments (oranur). He did this without lasting ill effect. The nuclear scientist Galen Windsor also experienced very high Geiger counts without negative effect. Some of the Geiger counts Reich experienced could be expected theoretically only in the core of a nuclear plant. Yet he was fine.
Perhaps nuclear energy production works but in a more orgonomic way than we are told. The author does not think there is unlimited power in a nucleus or in matter as the equation E = mc2 might imply. Rather the power might come from the surrounding aether/orgone field around the matter. If nuclear bombs can be made to work then the author now thinks it is likely they are an explosion/ignition of the aether/orgone itself. Something that is likely to be incredibly difficult to produce. In a sense conventional theory aligns with this to some degree, stating that a chain reaction occurs within the atoms of the plutonium or uranium spreading out until it reaches a criticality resulting in an expansive explosion. The author believes that Windsor is honest. He believed that nuclear energy was real, and although he said he had handled nuclear rods with his bare hands once they were cool, he contended that there was nothing remarkable about nuclear energy, it was just a cheap and ‘good way to boil water’ (6). Which is essentially correct this author believes (also a very effective way to excite orgone energy or life-force). Uranium and plutonium are very reactive, radioactive and in the right concentrations, explosive materials. But gunpowder is also explosive and very reactive, that doesn’t mean that Krakatoa can be copied using just gunpowder. Galen says he walked around with sub-critical quantities of plutonium in his lab coat pockets - but he never detonated the research facilities. In the 1980s we were told that minute amounts of plutonium could kill everyone on Earth – this is obviously false. The Nagasaki bomb was said to have pounds of the stuff in its core, today the city is fine.
Perhaps the huge nuclear power plants do not make the amount of energy claimed. James Demeo, a research scientist, worked out that conventional nuclear power plants cost more to run than they might output in energy once all the conventional energy inputs and disposal are accounted. Galen was convinced that nuclear energy has ability to be downscaled to a more decentralised structure. He thought used uranium and plutonium, as long as it is kept at below the fissile concentration (about 5% for plutonium), can be stored above ground if kept dry and can be simply air-cooled in warehouses. It is also a lot more reusable than we are told – there is really no such thing as high-level nuclear waste as the metals therein are highly valuable. Low level waste Galen believes is a complete scam and isn't actually dangerous but presently can be used to dispose of anything that powerful entities would want to hide. So to keep the social power structures the way they are, decentralised, cheap nuclear power could not be allowed. Galen believed that mass produced mini nuclear plants could allow for energy independence of cities and towns – our capitalo-communist masters could never allow this. Uranium that was reusable was reclassified as high-level nuclear waste in 1982 by Congress. President Carter would not allow plutonium to be shipped to India but did allow uranium – which could make a better fissile source in any case according to Galen. None of it appears to make sense. Having expensive, centralised power stations is hugely profitable and an endless source of taxpayer largesse to a criminal energy cartel. The nuclear waste disposal systems, apart from being a gravy train financially, could be used nefariously too he thought – no one is going to examine low level nuclear waste too closely to see what it really contains.
The other thing that does not quite add up is the reports of the Manhatten Project’s fantastic success. In all the development of the uranium bomb, plutonium bomb and the hydrogen bomb (the size of a warehouse) only one person got seriously affected and virtually all the tests and then the early usage went ahead perfectly. This is just unbelievable if the claims made are true. As for the claims that it cannot be faked because people worked on it and have direct experience it must be remembered that everything was compartmentalised, one group had no idea what the others were doing. During bomb tests most looked at the ground or through thick goggles and had no way of directly judging what was going on. Unedited footage is rare or unavailable. Those that happened to dismiss protocol and look at the tests suffered no ill effects. Plutonium core pieces were secretly carried to construction sites near Japan in ordinary backpacks according to the scientists involved such as Raemer Schrieber – see reference below. The actual bombs themselves were incredibly crude. A uranium or atom bomb is just a tube with two pieces of enriched uranium fired at each other. A plutonium bomb, such as said to be used at Nagasaki, is just a sphere of plutonium surrounded by explosives designed to implode upon the sphere. Virtually all tests and all usage of the devices went perfectly we are told. This is just not believable. Real science does not run without problems like a fairy tale (7). Others have noted that comparative explosions of huge amounts of conventional materials were stacked near the early atom bomb test sites, the soldiers being told they were for comparative analysis (8).
Certainly, plutonium and enriched uranium are fissile and explosive when at a critical mass, but below that mass can be safely stored. Galen states he used to walk around with half a critical mass of plutonium in each pocket. He says the huge shielding walls were originally put in place when the critical mass was not yet known – not for radiation protection as such. Galen recounts that according to Los Alamos document 36/11, plutonium criticality has accidentally been reached 34 times in early US nuclear power plants with explosions that cost 8 lives (9). Explosions are preceded by the air turning an orgonotic blue. But levelling a city with 2 and half kilos of plutonium would be fantastically expensive (if it is possible). It is obvious that the same effects occurred in Tokyo where similar numbers died using a few hundred B52 bombers and conventional, much cheaper munitions. Tokyo was devastated and looked similar to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Economically the atomic bomb does not stack up well – 8 early nuclear reactors and tens of millions of dollars to produce the same effects as a squadron of B52s can achieve?
Galen also thought that the Three Mile Island (TMI) incident did not occur as stated and that the reactor could have been switched back on almost immediately. This was done to maintain the fear status of nuclear power and thus justify the huge spends on it, However, the effects of radioactivity leaks from large plants and the effects or reality of nuclear weapons are separate issues, whatever the situation with TMI.
Slow motion replay of the 1950s test reels shows buildings that do look like models if seen closely. Also, we are repeatedly shown, to emotive music and solemn voice-overs, buildings, cars and trees being swept away – but where were the cameras? How come there is no camera wobble? Were super reinforced concrete bunkers made for the filming? On one 1950s movie reel the scientists are shown on the other side of a bunker watching a blast. But the camera shot was taken from just outside the bunker! Even if the cameras were shielded and fully automated the film itself would likely be damaged. If a moon landing can be faked in 1969 then bomb footage can certainly be faked in the 1940s.
Models in 1950s Movie Reels
In the above pictures model use can be seen. The first shows a farmhouse which is swept away in one go by the atom blast – but where is the camera? Why is it not swept away too? The second shows a clip from a series of angles taken of different trees which are said to be the same set of trees. These are then swept and blasted away. But again where is the camera? Also this particular shot apparently uses model trees interspersed with real trees (10). The author has seen other footage which shows warehouse type buildings with perfectly similar windows and edges, looking, in slow motion much like a model. The US military had its own Hollywood style film production studios called Lookout Mountain. There are images that appear composite, like two bomb plumes combined into one mushroom cloud, or the use of the sun as a background as the explosion, even an apparently cardboard cut-out can be seen as the background of a test explosion. It should also be noted that mushroom clouds are not unique to atomic explosions and huge explosions have been created with hyperbaric or thermobaric vacuum bombs. Some aerial videos of Hiroshima appear to show two mushroom clouds that are seen as one from the main angle.
Comparative explosions before the claimed nuclear tests were carried out using tonnes of explosives in the early part of May 1945 – an orange fireball could be seen 60 miles away. Radioactive isotopes were mixed in with the explosion to test the effects of radioactivity spread. As the procedure was already in place it would not be hard to have a huge explosion created by conventional munitions in place at a nuclear test without raising suspicions. Curiously, there was also only limited reports of radioactivity following the actual nuclear test explosions. Fermi, one of the leading scientists of the Manhatten Project did not get to see Ground Zero of the test site – his tank broke down apparently. Perhaps Fermi could not be trusted not to disclose what he would see (11).
The author tried to find definitive evidence that nuclear weapons are real. However, even seismic evidence for assessing whether test ban treaties are adhered to are not always reliable. Underground testing was instigated from the 1960s onwards. When a bomb is detonated underground it can have specific effects on seismic readings however distinguishing seismic bomb data from natural activity in the 1950s data might be somewhat difficult if it is available.
There was an extensive report by doctors and scientists on the fall-out from the Marshall Island nuclear tests (12). The fall-out victims from the Marshall Island nuclear tests were fewer in number than the author expected. Thyroid nodules did develop in inhabitants but not until many years after the explosions. However, a significantly higher incidence of thyroid cancers was found, 40% higher than a comparative population. The report concluded that food ingestion was the main source of radioactive contamination, and that skin exposure was not significant due to washing.
Levels of radioactive isotopes such as Carbon14 have been thought to have risen sharply for some years worldwide at the peak of nuclear testing and then fallen again to normal levels since the peak in the 1950s (13). Geological stations reported seismic evidence in the range of a small earthquake after a North Korean bomb test (5.6 magnitude). Kim Jong Un is pictured below with a device claimed to be a hydrogen bomb warhead. In the 1950s, the USA needed a whole warehouse to house one of these but now it is claimed to be in a clean, missile mountable small steel unit which looks a little like a takeaway vent-shaft (14).
North Korean Hydrogen Bomb Warhead
It is recognised that smaller nuclear detonations below ground are not always easy to monitor (15). The difference between earthquakes and explosions has been studied in recent years but using conventional explosives (16). Seismology, hydroacoustics, radionucleotide monitoring and GPS monitoring of particle densities are methods used to help detect nuclear explosions now. But large explosions above ground ceased by the early 1960s so confirmation data from back then is limited (17). The US is said to have attempted making large craters for mining with a nuclear device and the USSR was said to have had an extensive programme of using similar devices for creating lakes (18) (19). However huge explosions are possible by other means than nuclear. Nuclear Electro-Magnetic pulses are reported to occur after large nuclear explosions in the atmosphere and EMP weapons have been claimed to be tested by both the US and USSR. The evidence for EMP effects however are themselves fairly limited (20). Perhaps nuclear explosions are possible but are not as easy to produce as we are told. It could be that nuclear explosions occur but are exceedingly expensive and difficult to produce at will. As far as the definitive evidence that nuclear weapons are real and just as we are told the author has not yet been able to identify it.
A Fullfact article that claimed to debunk the notions that nuclear weapons are not real offered nothing in terms of actual scientific evidence for nuclear explosions but instead pointed to an article about survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In contradiction to their claims, the historical page they linked to points out that the US officials not only confiscated medical records of the survivors but completely censored any data and accounts of the people in the immediate aftermath of the terrible destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Complete control of information in Japan, including medical data, continued until the early 1950s (21). One survivor interview conducted when in his 80s is indeed a traumatic account. The injuries recounted are horrific but it is not indisputable from his account that it was an atomic bomb rather than napalm, a fire-storm blast or another type of bomb that caused the injuries. A sudden blast of fire-wind can be created by large incendiary fires in bombed cities.
James Demeo recounts evidence by Gould and Goldman that all-cause mortality rates increase after nuclear accidents and points to evidence that earthquakes might be linked to nuclear testing (22). However, the rises in mortality were relatively modest by today’s ‘health warfare’ standards and could be due to multiple environmental and living factors. Demeo also reviews the Petkau Effect by Graub and notes that low level nuclear radiation leaks have been associated with rises in various mortality causing diseases and likely damages plants and animals. However, low level nuclear radiation effects, whatever their reality, do not prove that nuclear weapons are real.
Certainly, if a nuclear explosion is really an orgone/aether explosion, the author would expect it to be, at the very least, very hard to produce such an effect. It seems strange that a global criminal cabal that has used Directed Energy Weapons without a shadow of doubt on 9/11 in my view (see Dr Judy Woods), confirmed use of biological weapons on their own populations (biological spread tests and biological injections experiments on US and UK citizens), chemical weapons (confirmed in Vietnam unlike the fake claims in Syria against Russia), depleted uranium use (Iraq, elsewhere, tankbusting incendiarys existing since the late 1970s) and every kind of explosive is somehow going to refrain from using all but the lowest yield nukes and nothing since the end of WW2 out of the goodness of it's heart. No way. Either they can't use them or they're waiting to use them in a false flag shortly and don't want to preempt themselves. A third but unlikely option is they are already using low yield nukes - there is claims of atomic looking explosions perhaps in Syria. In a video, an explosion lights up the night sky as daytime then two mushroom clouds are seen and then lastly the classic single nuclear looking mushroom cloud. However this could be pictures of a MOAB - a huge conventional bomb or a fuel air bomb or the images could be manipulated.
A last cautionary note would be that it may not be that hard to produce a fake nuclear explosion in a city and blame it on the enemy of choice – Orwell predicted that a single atomic bomb in a Western city preceded the imposition of the dystopian Ingsoc regime he prophetically described in the novel 1984. So if nuclear weapons are not real, they are not stopping a confrontation between NATO and Russia. Something else might be however. Or a ground war might be imminent.
*There does not appear to be indisputable evidence nuclear bombs are real.
*Nuclear power may not work in the way the public is told.
*It is possible it could be harnessed much more cheaply.
*The evidence of nuclear explosions is much more limited than one would expect.
*There is however evidence of low-level nuclear radiation causing health problems.
*Information on Hiroshima, Nagasaki and other claimed atomic detonations are tightly controlled and censored.
*Models were likely used in the movie reels from the 1950s.
*Governments and corporations have much to gain from the present narrative as a dangerous energy source and as a super weapon: reasons for secrecy, intelligence operations legitimised, militarisation, endless budgets, intimidation of other countries, balance of power, maintainance of energy cartel, acquisition of materials falsely labelled 'waste', stop cheap energy.
*The project to create nuclear weapons went way too smoothly to be credible as told.
*The MAD doctrine has been successfully sold as keeping a world war from erupting - whether it actually has or not is unclear.
*It has also created enormous income streams for weapons manufacturers, energy companies and governments.
*The nuclear industry and nuclear waste industries have consumed spectacular amounts of resources dues to its perceived dangers whilst confiscating valuable product as ‘waste’.
*Nuclear weapons may work not on the principles we are told or perhaps not work at all.
*If they do work they might work on aether/orgone principles and be much bigger and/or harder to use.
*Governments recently seem to centre their entire policies on creating fear in their populations as means of coercion and control, nuclear power and weapons fits into this narrative well.
*Nuclear power and weapons have been a readily available and constant source of fear for populations. As long as smaller governments and people in general believe the weapons are real the effects are beneficial to the criminals.
*Belief in nuclear weapons helps keep the nuclear power industry expensive due to the public’s fear – an energy cartel is hugely profitable to the cartel and to centralised government.
*The perceived danger of radioactive materials prevents low-cost decentralised power supply from nuclear energy being harnessed.
*Suppressing the true facts on nuclear power keeps the public away from knowledge of oranur (which is created through nuclear interaction with life-force) and the aether (the banned medium from which particles arise - known to the Victorians and to Reich, Tesla and others but withheld from public knowledge since Einstein).
*Low level nuclear waste disposal could be used to get rid of the cartel’s criminal evidence.
*Run off from nuclear rods could be harnessed beneficially as a low level heat source.
Since writing this article I came across a first hand account, by the first Western journalist to go to Hiroshima, just under a month after the destruction - Wilfred Burchett (23). He sidelined the strict army censorship and restriction on movement imposed by General MacArthur and whilst a ceremony for the surrender was taking place elsewhere Burchett went off alone on the 2nd September 1945. He ignored reports that no railways were working and managed to travel to Hiroshima by train from Tokyo. Tokyo had mile after mile of complete devestation, concrete reduced to rubble, buildings gone in the smouldering ruins. He interviewed a Japanese journalist in Hiroshima, Mr Nakamura, who was in communication with Tokyo via morse code, presumably via radio. He reported that he was cycling to work as normal on the day of the attack - so this would counter arguments that Hiroshima had merely been firebombed. Burchett also reported that he was shown a river where many fish were dying due, it was thought, to radiation poisoning. He was shown many civilians in hospital who appeared to have radiation sickness and were dying, hair falling out, burns and immune problems according to Burchett's reports from the doctors. He was told that those who had dug in the rubble were worst affected. He also was surprised to find that concrete structures in the centre of the city had survived. He was told that this was because at the centre of the blast there was a cushioned zone (though this appears to be just a theory). The army contradicted his reports of fallout illness saying that radiation dispersed to normal quickly due to the airburst delivery of the bomb, however radiation levels at early test sites also dispersed to low levels quite quickly apparently, even when they were ground detonated.
The US had a double propaganda interest in the narrative: on the one hand they would want to exxagerate the blast effects to increase deterrence and awe but also to downplay the after effects to minimise public criticism. The Soviet Union had told the US that Japan was ready to surrender prior to the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki of 6th and 9th August. The USSR had also warned Japan directly that it would enter the war against it, 3 months prior, and did so on the 8th of August 1945 - a situation Japan would know would be impossible for it to counter effectively.
Radiation is reported to have dispersed to normal in the city, within weeks vegetation started returning and the rebuild process got underway. Many in the city who were there that day survived and went on to live normal healthy lives. However, many people in the city were likely malnourished and their immune systems would not be working normally, so the destruction of the city by whatever means would have polluted all nearby rivers with industrial and household toxins. The people would have been affected by burns, toxins and by smoke. It is also noted that most of Japan was kept off limits for journalists and this included Hiroshima. Burchett found a loophole that was closed immediately that the army heard of his travels (he got permission to go from the US Navy with which Burkett travelled to Japan). Tokyo, which suffered a similarly high level of loss to Nagasaki and Hiroshima through huge firebombing, the biggest ever in history, was also mostly off limits - journalists would not be able to compare damage to Hiroshima or interview survivors in the cities. Medical information was completely censored from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was reported to Burchett that there were two aircraft flying over the city of Hiroshima that morning of the 6th but they were assumed to be reconnasiance and not much attention was paid to them. Perhaps both planes carried super MOAB (Mother of All Bombs - a huge conventional ordinance bomb) or large air fuel bombs (can create enormous devastation). Some reel footage appears to show two mushroom clouds from some angles. Or it could have been as stated by the conventional history.
It is a strange fact that thanks to the work of Dr Judy Wood in her groundbreaking forensic analysis (24) complete with thousands of unequivocal pictures and graph after graph that Directed Energy Weapons are actually better evidenced than nuclear weapons. There is no doubt whatsoever that DEWs are real and were used against the whole complex on 9/11 - not just Building 7 and the Towers. The whole complex was vapourised/dustified from above - this is outstandingly clear from photos and scientific evidence. On the other hand nuclear weapons are hard to find undeniable evidence for their reality, at least evidence that cannot be argued against in some way. For example the destruction of Hiroshima was equalled by Tokyo, horrific burns and poor healing, poisoned environments would have been common to all the cities attacked in WW2 in Japan. The US evidence for nuclear weapons, the movie reels and test data from the 1950s is not completely transparent nor is the seismic or medical evidence that I could find. It is possible to disperse radiological contamination or release deadly orgone energies without using an actual atomic bomb.
There are reports of possible ancient nuclear warfare in the Mahbarata, Bible and elsewhere.
Some say high technology existed in ancient times. They point to the 'pillars of salt' story in the Bible (Lot's wife turning to ash) and the instant destruction of whole cities, 'Sodom and Gomorroh'. There is also evidence in deserts and some castles across Europe of the vitrification of sand and stone. City destroying weapons are described in the Mahabarata. Some of the examples pointed to, such as vitrication of stones on the outside of forts across Europe indicate a localised device, such as a mobile DEW might create. Large scale vitrifications of sand in the Middle East could again evidence a natural effect creating intense heat or DEWs or nuclear weapons. So the ancient evidence and description are not definitive either.
But what does all this mean?
For a start we are definitely not being told the whole picture about nuclear energy and weapons. How could this be so? There is definitely an aether/orgone that interacts with nuclear energy to create new forms of energy, Reich called this resultant powerful motor and healing force, Oranur. This is most certainly real and suppressed and connected to nuclear energy. Reich evidenced this oranur energy beyond much doubt and I have personally repeated this evidence on a smaller scale (25).
LENR - or Low Energy Nuclear Reactions are quite likely real too - so the physics we are told that nuclear reactions can only take place in conventional situations is not set in stone further evidencing an aether like medium interacting with matter. Galen's account that conventional nuclear energy could be utilised without centralisation and with huge benefits to people costwise could well be true too. There are so many benefits to the elite of the current nuclear narrative both economically, militarily and politically. Unlimited budgets, need for secrecy, centralised power supply, fear in the population, initimidation of other countries to name but a few. So we have the motive, we have unquestionable background of lying about aspects of nuclear energy and its interaction with the underlying continuum (aether/orgone) and we have doubts as to the veracity of what we are told.
I am not certain that nuclear weapons are not real in some way, I do not yet know enough about it to make up my mind for sure but it certainly is not crystal clear like the evidence for DEWs is in my view. Nuclear weapons could be real but much harder to use than we are told or they could be entirely fake, I do not know. The political certainties that nuclear weapons supplied - that one superpower would not attack another directly is also now questionable.
Bear in mind too George Orwell, who was privy to insider knowledge through his friend Aldous Huxley, wrote in his prophetic book '1984' that one of the West's cities was attacked with a nuclear weapon before the imposition of the tyranical Ingsoc regime (25). We are on the verge of tyranny now and a false flag attack could be carried out. We can't trust anything we are told - nuclear or unclear - it is a fitting anagram.
(3) https://rumble.com/vwywjj-nukes-are-fake-just-like-covid-19.html 19:00 mins.
(4) https://rumble.com/vwywjj-nukes-are-fake-just-like-covid-19.html 22:33 mins.
(5) https://rumble.com/vwywjj-nukes-are-fake-just-like-covid-19.html 22:40 mins.
(6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMJO6dVTdP0 Galen Windsor: Early Nuclear Scientists - nuke stations are not functioning as we are told
(7) ‘The Half Life of Genius’ (Raemer Schreiber) (TV Documentary 2017).
(9) https://rumble.com/vx96gt-the-nuclear-hoax-nukes-do-not-exist.html See Galen clips last hour.
(10) https://rumble.com/v15aepf-nuclear-hoax-nukes-do-not-exist.html 9:00 mins approx.
(22) Demeo, J (1993) Deadly Deceit – Book Review, Pulse of the Planet 4, pp 132
(23) Pilger, J (2005) Tell Me No Lies, Chap 2.
(24) Wood, J. (2010) Where Did The Towers Go, The New Investigation, US.
(25) Southgate, L. Preliminary Experiments with Electrical Capacitance, Temperature, Radioactivity, Luminesence and Other Observations associated with Controlled Oranur in a Strong Orgone Device | The Journal of Psychiatric Orgone Therapy (psychorgone.com) https://www.psychorgone.com/orgone-biophysics/preliminary-experiments-with-electrical-capacitance-temperature-radioactivity-luminesence-and-other-observations-associated-with-controlled-oranur-in-a-strong-orgone-device
(26) Orwell, G. (1975) Nineteen Eighty Four, Penguin, UK (first pub 1949).