I have read your post, but from a theoretical standpoint if I can use the energy of nuclear fission in a reactor, I might be also able to use it in a bomb. It is not like I am a Professor on the topic though.
This would consequently mean that many physicians are complicit in the hoax and while I would not put my hand in the fire for all of them I think the physical science community has still some people who are very interested in truth and those would uncover the hoax.
I'm going to be picky here and repeat:
Can you name one nuclear bomb detonation and provide authentic photo proof, or any subsequent cancer records of the area?
OK, I can't. Therefore I am giving you a 0.5% chance of nuclear energy being a hoax. It is a rather big increase from 0%
Wow, thanks, got you wondering then!
That's an infinite percent increase, are you sure it isn't a bit over generous?
😉
I know, it might be more around 0.1 tbh, however the seed of doubt has been planted.
Did you mean to switch from nuclear bomb back to nuclear energy in that comment?
a 0.5% chance of nuclear energy being a hoax.
Good question, I think I will go with 0.5% for the bomb and 0.1% for nuclear energy. I have learned the basics of how nuclear fission works, but it was all a little confusing and I would be lying if I said: "Yup this makes 100% sense, can't be false"
I'm running with 100% bombs are fake, and at least some part of power is fake...certainly over 50% and maybe 100%
It's a somewhat alluring concept for sure.
A nukeless world is a safer world, and who doesn't want to live in a safer world?
Even that minute mote of bias may be considerably influential.
Much luck to you.