Man it's perfectly fine if you just stated that my picture observation is not sufficient, or how different it is from normal burns and why, or that you had historical facts to disprove any Stalin nuke conspiracy.
I am not personally attached to any of this and I honestly have not made my mind completely about it. Neither am I willing to dedicate a lot of time on this topic subject, like all others, there is practically no time for us to research every minute detail of every subject.
He later found out and faked his own "nuke" using the same method of the recent Beirut harbor "nuke".
I want evidence. You stated something which is completely ridiculous as fact.
It was a binary compound, genius. There's absolutely nothing at all to suggest it was a "nuke".
My "theory" about Stalin being the tooth fairy has literally EXACTLY as much evidence to support it that your ignorant assertion does.
You don't get to blurt out any stupid shit without criticism by calling it a "conspiracy". That's what leftist zealots do with everything from russiagate to "algebra being a tool of white supremacists".
So you are suggesting that a binary compound like ammonium nitrate would not make the type of explosions that Stalin did?
The type of explosions produced by ammonium nitrate seems to me at least very similar to "nukes", yes it is not sufficient evidence and I know this but it is at least more credible that a tooth fairy conspiracy.
So you are suggesting that a binary compound like ammonium nitrate would not make the type of explosions that Stalin did?
I didnt make the assertion, you did. That means the onus is on you to prove, first of all that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was "fAke nEwS!" and secondly all the bullshit you purport about Stalin.
ammonium nitrate seems to me at least very similar to "nukes
Oh really? Because "it SeEmS tao mE" Stalin was the tooth fairy.
it is not sufficient evidence a
No. ITS NOT EVIDENCE AT FUCKING ALL
Then my "feelings" prove Stalin was the tooth fairy if you're calling your "feelings" "eViDeNcE!".
Man it's perfectly fine if you just stated that my picture observation is not sufficient, or how different it is from normal burns and why, or that you had historical facts to disprove any Stalin nuke conspiracy.
I am not personally attached to any of this and I honestly have not made my mind completely about it. Neither am I willing to dedicate a lot of time on this topic subject, like all others, there is practically no time for us to research every minute detail of every subject.
But your angry rant was truly uncalled for.
I want evidence. You stated something which is completely ridiculous as fact.
It was a binary compound, genius. There's absolutely nothing at all to suggest it was a "nuke".
My "theory" about Stalin being the tooth fairy has literally EXACTLY as much evidence to support it that your ignorant assertion does.
You don't get to blurt out any stupid shit without criticism by calling it a "conspiracy". That's what leftist zealots do with everything from russiagate to "algebra being a tool of white supremacists".
So you are suggesting that a binary compound like ammonium nitrate would not make the type of explosions that Stalin did?
The type of explosions produced by ammonium nitrate seems to me at least very similar to "nukes", yes it is not sufficient evidence and I know this but it is at least more credible that a tooth fairy conspiracy.
I didnt make the assertion, you did. That means the onus is on you to prove, first of all that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was "fAke nEwS!" and secondly all the bullshit you purport about Stalin.
Oh really? Because "it SeEmS tao mE" Stalin was the tooth fairy.
No. ITS NOT EVIDENCE AT FUCKING ALL
Then my "feelings" prove Stalin was the tooth fairy if you're calling your "feelings" "eViDeNcE!".