JMS Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Did anybody else catch the Military channel yesterday on Hittler's secret weapons? What they said runs counter to everything I knew about WWII history. It seems that the Germans were much closer to deploying nuclear weapons than we had believed. The Military Channel show came out and said Himmler the head of the SS, sucessfully test fired two nuclear bombs during WWII. The first on an island in the baltic sea, October 10, 1944 and a second one in western Germany March 3, 1945. Both before the Manhattan Project sucessfully test fired it's bomb at the trinnity tests July 16th 1945. They said the Nazi's gave up on Hiesenburg, their most brilliant physisist because they decided he wasn't really trying to develop a bomb. The SS put their financial support behind a parrellel effort headed up by Kurt Diebner, who suceeded in building two devices as well as a rough prototype nuclear reactor. For those of you who don't know, Heimler the head of the SS was also in charge of the V-2 rocket production and the Nazi's were in the process of fitting their nuclear warhead into the V-2 when they lost the war... The limiting factor was the Uranium 234. Germany never had enough to deploy operational weapons. Amaizing, and scary stuff. The only thing that seemed to be lacking on this would be soil samples proving a nuclear device was detinated. I didn't see the program confirm any such tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Not sure you can totally trust the History Channel. Everything I've read says that the Nazi's were no where near developing a nuke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Not sure you can totally trust the History Channel. Agreed, they and Nat Geo are more about sensationalism than they are about quality research, I found this out when Dan Brown's tin foil hat stuff started making the rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 This seems wrong to me. They were said to be ahead of us in the science behind it but they never got to detonating one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 There's some speculation that the Nazis may have detonated a test "dirty bomb" or two, which would require zero knowledge of atomic fission. To grossly oversimplify: just wrap a giant conventional bomb with anything substantially radioactive; light fuse; and get away. But I really doubt that any fully realized fission device was detonated. Where would the fuel have come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 The movie might have been lying, but I want to know how close either side was to having an army of rocket men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 The quality of the stuff on the History Channel is very uneven, and you pretty much have to know the people in the shows and their credibility before deciding what to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 People need to realize that the History Channel does not exercise any editorial or factual control over the programs it shows. Each individual program has its own producers, who then try to sell it to stations like the History Channel. A completely factual program about the Korean War might be followed by a completely made up gobbledeegooker about Nostradamus riding on the Loch Ness Monster. Anyhow, the Nazis did not have the atomic bomb. This is nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 I'd be very, very skeptical. A key factor in the success of the Manhattan Project was the resources that were applied to produce the fissile material. No evidence has ever been presented that the Germans had any real success, and they certainly had no infrastructure on anything approaching the the scale of the facilities Oak Ridge, Richland, Los Alamos. Oak Ridge had more than 75,000 residents during the war in support of the project. Richland was almost as large. And Los Alamos had thousands working on research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 The quality of the stuff on the History Channel is very uneven, and you pretty much have to know the people in the shows and their credibility before deciding what to believe. Yep this is what I've found as well, and I really had my eyes opened to it with Dan Brown and then with all the "Lost Gospel" nonsense, when you actually know a particular field of study and then see it on History and Nat Geo you get to see how bad they really are butchering the subject at hand. Once I realized that I just couldn't trust what they were saying on just about anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 That was one of my fav movies growing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 It was real. The Jew-Bear stopped it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Once I realized that I just couldn't trust what they were saying on just about anything else. Well, I don't think it's that bad, and I'd say that 99% of the time the information they present jibes with the facts in those areas I am at least passingly familiar with. Where they get sketchy is when they try to get edgy. A good rule of thumb is that if it's "controversial", "shocking", or just not what one would expect, it needs to be checked out. Of course, that's generally ture anyway. Conventional wisdom and standard beliefs, despite being boring, are generally such for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted November 12, 2009 Author Share Posted November 12, 2009 Not sure you can totally trust the History Channel. Everything I've read says that the Nazi's were no where near developing a nuke. Not the History Channel, but the Military Channel. Sounds like a German Historian wrote a book in 2005 on this subject and claims Diebner did in fact produce two atom bombs. Whether they reached critical mass or were just dirty bombs seems to be controversial. They have documents and eye witneses to support the claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Not the History Channel, but the Military Channel. They're a branch of Discovery, and have the same problems when they try to get shocking. I have no idea about this particular story, but it's different enough from the standard understanding that I'd want to read about in in reliable publications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 They're a branch of Discovery, and have the same problems when they try to get shocking. Yeah, it's all the same company. Discovery, History, Military, Animal Planet, TLC, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Well, I don't think it's that bad, and I'd say that 99% of the time the information they present jibes with the facts in those areas I am at least passingly familiar with. I don't distrust everything they say, just the stuff they say when they try to come up with something new and controversial. Of course, that's generally true anyway. Conventional wisdom and standard beliefs, despite being boring, are generally such for a reason. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Agreed. I like that you edited my typo when you quoted me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted November 12, 2009 Author Share Posted November 12, 2009 There's some speculation that the Nazis may have detonated a test "dirty bomb" or two, which would require zero knowledge of atomic fission. To grossly oversimplify: just wrap a giant conventional bomb with anything substantially radioactive; light fuse; and get away.But I really doubt that any fully realized fission device was detonated. Where would the fuel have come from? You know when Germany surrendered we captured a german U-boat headed to Japan with prototypes and plans of Germany's secret weapons program. Hittler was trying to pass it all off to the Japanese before he got over run. The crew of the Uboat surrendered when they heard Germany was Kaput, the two Japanese offercers accompanying them killed themselves. That ship had about 1000lbs (560kg) of Uranium 234 on it. http://wrightmuseum.org/U234_Web.pdf Now that's more Uranium 234 than the Manhattan Project produced. Let me see if I can get more info on the German Sub, cause That same discredited company which runs History, Discovery, and Millitary channels might have been my primary source on that too.. Looking for a reliable source.. Here is another Source from 1997... Health Physis Magazine.. http://www.orau.org/PTP/articlesstories/u234.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shredmojo Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 It's been awhile since I saw this, but I remember the Germans were working with the Japanese on how to launch a plane from a submarine that could drop an atomic bomb on San Fransisco, Don't remember any of the details though...I know i saw it on one of those channels, I think they found a prototype sub or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shredmojo Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 damn, you beat me to it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 This is how the History/Military Channel does its analysis. Borderline work safe - I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 I like that you edited my typo when you quoted me. LoL, no problem its one of those things that firefox helps me with and I try to help others out, unless they are being trollish then I leave their typos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Whether they reached critical mass or were just dirty bombs seems to be controversial.They have documents and eye witneses to support the claim. A dirty radiological bomb and a fission device are so far apart that anyone confused on the matter hasn't a clue. What documents and what did the eyewitnesses see, measure, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 This is how the History/Military Channel does its analysis. LOL!! Classic line "Isn't it possible that a pervert with a neurotic fixation on hot licking flames could have started this fire?" Beware of anyone who begins a line of questioning with "Isn't it possible..." "Isn't it possible that Obama is a Kenyan?" "Isn't it possible that Bush is the anti-Christ?" "Isn't it possible that Hannity is a woman?" "Isn't it possible that the Pope is a porn addict?" --------------------------------------------------------- "I suppose that's possible....." translation..."Good god this guy is a douche." Oh my goodness tell me please that this video is a joke! lol aahhhhh the onion strikes again. LOL :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.