Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

5
Same Guy: Francis Birch gave us not just 'solid Earth geophysics' but ran the team which created the Hiroshima atomic bomb. What are the odds this guy would show up in both those roles? Are both real, both a fake/op, or is one real and the other a coverup? (media.conspiracies.win)
posted 3 years ago by TuaSumusSumpturi 3 years ago by TuaSumusSumpturi +5 / -0
5 comments download share
5 comments share download save hide report block hide replies
Comments (5)
sorted by:
▲ 3 ▼
– WindyJibbz 3 points 3 years ago +3 / -0

Just watch the old footage. Cities getting levelled without a slight shake in the camera, firing nuclear artillery shells. The rest of Japan was fire bombed, why not Hirosh and Nag? All their buildings were made from lumber at the time. One shot of napalm on a windy night and it was goodnight Irene.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Ep0ch 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

That doesn't prove anything. You dumbass. You're speculating. It takes a lot more than one shot, multiple bombs, firebombing. Besides ash leaves a very distinct footprint.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Ep0ch 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

Smart Guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_earth

Seems like solid subjects. It's only you thinking they're fake. Both are real.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

Seems like solid subjects...

...which implies subjected within a liquid process.

thinking they're fake

How do the many think? In words suggested by the few as solid definitions (words) for a liquid reality (sound). Consenting to suggested words (fiction) over perceivable sound (reality) represents "fake".

Both are real.

a) does perceivable reality communicate fiction towards the perceiving senses of those within or can fiction only be suggested by those within perceivable reality?

b) BOTH, adjective - "two". If one can perceive other ones; then that implies each one to exist at a different position from one another. Counting other ones and then suggesting them to other ones as "two" tempts one (perceiving) to ignore oneness (perceivable).

One represents perceivable inspiration; Two represents suggested information. One cannot perceive two; only count other ones as suggested two.

COUNT, verb - "to number" + NUM'BER, noun - "the designation of a unit" = U'NIT, noun [Latin unus; unitas, unity.] - "one"

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

Are both real, both a fake/op, or is one real and the other a coverup?

a) perceivable inspiration represents reality; suggested information represents fiction.

b) ones choice to ignore perceivable (need) for suggested (want) shapes fiction within the minds of those who ignore reality, while giving those who suggest it, the power to define; redefine and contradict it.

c) to ignore perceivable for suggested "covers up" ones comprehension of perceivable.

founders of solid

The foundation of temporary solid (living) represents ongoing fluid (process of dying).

The foundation of temporary solid (words) represents ongoing fluid (sound)...the parasitic few suggest solid words (information) to tempt the many to ignore fluid sound (inspiration). Each one who consents to words over sound; willingly upholds solid state information within memory (mind); while ignoring liquid state reality.

created

The parasitic few suggest creationism (implies out of nothing) to tempt the many to ignore perceivable transmutation (implies out of everything). Living within the process of dying implies being partial (reaction) within whole (enacting). The whole self differentiates into each partial.

As form (life) within flow (inception towards death)...transmutation implies flow to form (inception); form within flow (life) and form to flow (death). That represents ingredient out of base alchemy.

permalink save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No subversion.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
  • Perun
  • Thisisnotanexit
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026.02.01 - w2qgj (status)

Copyright © 2026.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy