>What do you think about nukes? I'm leaning on the side that they could be fake too. If nukes are fake, then nuclear energy is also fake. The processes that happen in a fission reactor are the same as those that happen in an atomic bomb, just much, much slower. Atomic bombs make good physics sense. Nuclear bombs are less sensical but I can see a path to them given the potency of the fission reaction's energy output. I know someone who has a great deal of knowledge and real world experience in fission reactors and he explains the process down to incredible minutia which passes the tests with my solid state physics background. Hiroshima and Nagasaki definitely got bombed by atomic weapons of rather low yield. They are real. I'm not so convinced that our ancient ICBM fleet is up to task on mutually assured destruction though. I'm also never going to be convinced that the total atomic/nuclear capability of the entire world's stockpile could ever destroy the world. It can seriously disrupt life on this planet but it will never fully destroy that life or the rock we live on. It's a paltry amount of energy compared to what the Earth itself is capable of unleashing. We suck at creating and controlling energy at low levels so we have no chance with very high levels. We're mere infants in the energy game.