Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

878

Did flat-earthers get bored with "space is fake"?

Did flat-earthers get bored with "space is fake"?

(post is archived)

[–] • 8 pts

These kinds of posts are designed to create confusion and uncertainty over topics that we have all more or less agreed upon, as a people. In this way what we assume to be fact is undermined, making it easier for the minions of Satan (Democrats) to sow disinformation and have it accepted, or at least not vigorously denied. The goal is to make the average person uncertain about the difference between what is real and what is unreal; what is true and what is false, what is fact and what is lies.

[–] • 2 pts

Deliberately muddying the waters spreading bullshit, to then make one look like a nutjob to ask similar but legitimate questions, is a tactic of the fuckwits.

[–] • 7 pts

I work for one. There isn't enough physical space inside containment to fit all the fossil fuel required to produce steam if "nukes aren't real"

Either nukes are real, or we use some sort of satanic black magic to boil water.

[–] [deleted] • 6 pts

boiling water is very easy so that explanation makes no sense

[–] • 5 pts

Let's do the math...

Average Nuclear Generating station is 1 Gigawatt, which is 1,000,000,000 Joules per second. Even assuming no thermodynamic losses, you would need 245lbs of coal (at 4,068,000 Joules per pound) per second to sustain that. So, just to feed the fire you would need 245 lbs. x 60 seconds x 60 minutes = 884,955 lbs of coal per hour 24/7 to sustain it.

That is actually a doable number, but not in the footprint of a nuclear reactor. The amount of coal for an hour of running would be a pile of 10,171 ft3 or 10' wide x 10' high x 101' long. So, whatever is inside that containment building has an energy density many times that of coal.

[–] • 2 pts

Your math is ballpark correct but you're using globalist units :)

The large nuclear units evaporate about 8 million lbm/hr of water at around 1000 psia. Enthalpy of evaporation at that pressure is 650.4 Btu/lbm, so the unit is using 5,203,200,000 Btu/hr to evaporate that water.

Now coal has varying heating values depending on the grade. Hard anthracite is around 13,700 Btu/lbm. Bituminous is around 14,300 (higher because it has more volatiles - flammable gases). Lignite (which the Krauts love to burn) is only 7200 due to all the water in it. Let's be generous and use the highest value - bituminous - which will result in the smallest weight of coal to burn. This comes out to 363,900 lbm/hr or 101 lbm/sec.

This big difference is due to your assumption of 4.1 MJ/lb. It's off by a factor of three as far as good U.S. coal is concerned (4.1 MJ/lb --> 3856 Btu/lb).

But to the main point, now determine the volume of coal for 18 months of operation. Won't fit in containment :)

[–] • -1 pt

Good grief you guys and your 'math' ... and if any idiots don't understand what we're saying then you're stoopid and we win the argument. LOL.

[–] [deleted] • -2 pt

those maths don't add up. Takes way less to boil water. The main problem though is no proof, it'd be cool if you took video from inside showing this steam and the generators. I am guessing you don't actually have access to it, you're a janitor at best. Or yeah you're probably afraid you'd lose your job by showing proof. But they keep nuke plants secret for a reason.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

Dude, he's going to murder you.

It takes a lot of energy to boil water. Nuclear power plants are real. Nukes are real. If you don't understand the math behind it, read up about it. There's no way you can boil the amount of water a nuclear reactor does in the limited amount of space if it wasn't a real form of energy. There would have to be constant coal shipments to the plants. I used to live near one, there aren't constant coal shipments.

The "nukes aren't real" people are glowies and a flock of useful idiots. It's the same playbook as flat earth.

[–] • 2 pts

We don't shut the reactor off for 18 months. Where would we keep the fuel if nukes aren't real? Try running your grill for that long without refueling.

[–] • 3 pts

Easy. Electricity. They are hiding an electric lines from you.

[–] • 1 pt

Joke's on you, my grill runs on pure water, next to my water-powered car.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

18 months? maybe they refuel with the tiny amount needed every 18 months? Why are they shutting it down?

[–] • 0 pt

Getting the energy put into boiling the water back out ..actually transformed into a usable form ..like electricity..is the hard part

[–] • 0 pt

Boiling water IS easy. Boiling water to the point of 0 moisture (100% gas) is extremely difficult. This "superheated steam" (industry term) uses a lot of energy to get to this level of energy. You see this on steam ships and power plants. Temperatures are north of 900 F and Pressures exceed 600 psi.

[–] [deleted] • 3 pts

I think you are confused.

No one is saying that radioactive material isn’t real or that it doesn’t react.

What they are saying is that fission bombs are not real.

[–] • 4 pts

No one is saying that radioactive material isn’t real or that it doesn’t react.

Actually some make exactly that argument. Frequently linking to old videos of people eating uranium.

Don't underestimate the power of stupid people.

[–] • 5 pts

people eating uranium.

but it's yellow cake.

[–] • 1 pt

Just have all the dumbasses eat uranium. Problem solved

[–] • 0 pt

thats the crazy people.

"NUKES" Fission bombs are not real. Just a jewish lie to control.

[–] • 0 pt

That's a silly position for them to take, it's the same physical phenomenon.

[–] • 0 pt

Tell that to the people in Hiroshima

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Who rebuilt immediately and never suffered “fallout”?

Hiroshima was fuel bombed, just like Tokyo. Brick buildings were left standing.

[–] • 0 pt

Hiroshima was 15,000 tons of TNT with some radioactive materials, put into a train car and then white phosphurus bombs were dropped on the city, setting it off.

Faking a nuke is EASY

[–] • 2 pts

They'll just retreat to nuclear bombs aren't real.

[–] • 0 pt

But you haven't given any reason we should believe they are real....

[–] • 0 pt

Reactors =/= nooks. Radiation is real, muh nooks are not. There is literally no evidence of nuclear bombs existing

[–] • 0 pt

That's a good question, do they include the powerplant segment of the tech, or just the weapons?

[–] • 0 pt

NUCLEAR REACTORS ARE NOT ONLY REAL BUT OCCUR NATURALLY IN NATURE

Fission bombs are not real, they violate the law of conservation of energy

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Nuke lies dot org explained this one. Nuclear reactors are nothing more than electric load dumps. The site explains electricity is not produced on demand it's approximated. For example if a city averages 100 gigawatts of power consumption a day then electricity companies would make that amount per day. On a day when only 90 gigawatts is used up by the city, that means 10 gigawatts of power have to be dumped somewhere. That somewhere is a nuclear power plant. The site gets more technical. One user Revisionist I believe makes the claim every Nuclear Power plant is protected by Israeli soldiers or security. I claim I was not able to verify.

[–] • 0 pt

So what does that mean for an electrical circuit or for electrical generation, that a nuke plant is a load dump?

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

I believe generation and yes. I will find the direct video link if interested. He goes into details.

[–] • 0 pt

Good news schlomo, you're partially correct. Site security is almost exclusively ex-military, meaning ex-ZOGbots.

[–] • 4 pts

A good way to discredit and distract your enemies is to get them to concentrate on spreading BS amongst themselves. Must be another amazing fuel source to keep those submarines going in almost unlimited voyage times eh.

[–] • 0 pt

How many nuclear subs have exploded?

[–] • 0 pt

Zero,in the U.S. Fleet. We do have (2)two of them on the Ocean floor.

[–] • 0 pt

so therefore nuclear bombs must be "armed" first before going nuclear.

I call bull fucking shit

[–] • 0 pt

Isn't it obvious. Nuclear subs aren't real. They are just used to dominate other countries while actually having no presence near them at all.

[–] • 2 pts

Nukes aren't real is another one of those conspiracies. Proponents of the theory allege that it's a con, and nukes are actually really big fuel/air bombs.

[–] • 6 pts

Why are the Marshall islands irradiated then?

[–] • 3 pts

How come the wildlife in Chernobyl isn't horribly irradiated mutants? Fukushima? Maybe you misunderstand what radiation actually is. How it actually affects you, and why this information is kept secret. Do you have any idea how much nuclear material is worth? Do you know that so called nuclear waste is the only way to make these materials? Plutonium for example is a byproduct of uranium fission, is plutonium cheap and easy to produce? What would you do to protect that plutonium since it's worth a nice chunk of cash? Or that cesium that's used in smoke detectors, or cobalt 60 that's used irradiate and sterilize your Chiquita bananas?.

[–] • 3 pts (edited )

The natural life cycle of many animals is too short to significantly have issues. Contrary to comics, most mutations effect embryos which are aborted. Those that live past birth are usually quickly consumed by predators or simply die shortly after birth.

Most (all?) smoke detectors no longer use cesium; see nuclear boy scout.

Humans currently live there too. So long as they are not consuming food (some are) from the contaminated areas, they shouldn't have issues.

Long term tumor risks over an 80-100 human lifespan is not the same as a 3-8 year lifespan common to many wild animals. Predation is an important aspect of natural wildlife life cycles.

All of which ignores, there are multiple radiation exposure models. We use the zero threshold model even though it's completely wrong. It's used because it's extremely conservative. Additionally, the other models require refinement, which requires human subjects.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

And Chernobyl isn't a nuclear bomb. Nuclear reactors only have a 2% ~ 5% mix of U235/238 (might have the order wrong; less than 5% of the radioactive isotope). Bombs are near 95%, or "highly enriched uranium" .. which would likely have less radiation in the aftermath than a nuclear plan since everything would be consumed in the detonation ... but everything would be dead for obviously other reasons.

[–] • 1 pt

I'm not able to answer any of the many, reasonable questions the theory raises.

[–] • 0 pt

Dirty bomb testing.

[–] • 0 pt

Dirty bombs don't remove island chains.

[–] • 0 pt

They aren't, lol.

Why did the Japs rebuild Hiroshima and Nagasaki IMMEDIATELY after the war? No radiation, that's why. Millions live there today, none have three heads or green skin.

[–] • 0 pt

to what end though?

[–] • 8 pts

It serves two purposes.

  1. Discredit white technological accomplishments

  2. Discredit "conspiracies" and facilitate gas lighting

Examples:

Whites never did anything but steal technology from everyone. Space is fake and gay and nukes are not real.

And

You flat earth retard, there are no nazis in Ukraine

[–] • 3 pts

So just another cointelpro special.

[–] • 0 pt

No nazis in Ukraine... why do you think they call them "not sees". There everywhere, just ask anyone who criticizes israhell.

[–] • 0 pt

Whites are the master race but you need to understand that the federal government had a plan to fake nuclear weapons in the event that they could not get it to work there was never a plan to fake the moon landing.

[–] • 2 pts

They claim it was to put the world in fear, usher in the cold war era, and as a cash cow for military spending because it would help justify over spending when the stakes are so high. Also to grant Israel deterrence from its surrounding enemies thanks to their fake nukes.

[–] • 0 pt

I guess that is not totally unreasonable. But i think the evidence available lends itself to probability that they actually exist now.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Why do frogs jump? Why do birds fly?

[–] • 1 pt

>Why do frogs jump?

No one wants to be turned gay, man, didn't you know?

[–] • 0 pt

retards gonna shitpost, got it.

[–] • 0 pt

Frogs are gay

[–] • 1 pt

I don't know.

Same end as the space is fake and gay people

Same as flat earth, or Moon hoax.

They don't believe, and work backwards from there

[–] • 1 pt

Not true. Everyone I know, including myself believed the moon landings were real for pretty much our entire lives. Once we opened our minds to the evidence, we all concluded the whole moon thing is fake as fuck. Anyone who OBJECTIVELY looks at the evidence will come to the conclusion it’s not real. So after looking at the evidence those who claim we went to the moon must do mental gymnastics of epic proportions to cling to the propaganda and psychological warfare they have succumbed too. It is far easier to fool a man than to convince him he has been fooled. The earths not flat.

[–] • 2 pts

Lol they’ve never been real. Apparently you just like to let the pedophile oligarchs scare you into submission. I’m not saying large bombs don’t exist but yeah nukes are fake as fuck.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Of course. Obviously they use the vaccine to scare you into submission.

[–] • 2 pts

"Nukes aren't real, so stop asking about how many we have you filthy goyim!"

[–] • 0 pt

It really doesn't matter if nukes are real or not.

You will die.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

True, but not from nukes. Old age is the real killer!

[–] • 1 pt

Old age is a social construct

[–] • 0 pt

old age is fake and gay. I'm over 9,000 years old.

[–] • 0 pt

The Flat Earth Society tards got bored with their material, and decided to expand their denial to new frontiers?

[–] • 0 pt

They aren't real.

[–] • 0 pt

Nukes are fake and gay, I often say

[–] • 0 pt

Jewish Tricks , sow uncertainty , doubt and confusion , to weaken the dim witted goyim

Load more (3 replies)