On 18/05/2021 17:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/05/2021 16:30, Robin wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/05/2021 11:49, Robin wrote:

I know the basics of atom bomb making.Â* But a plutonium RDD avoids
all that.Â* Use it above a major city centre.Â* Then sit back to watch
to the panic over hours & days, the economic impact over months and
years, and the health impact over decades.

Why would there be ANY?. Plutonium is so un-radioactive that there is
more danger from e.g. inhaling lead dust than plutonium dust., Its
very heavy, so it hits the ground early.



Can you cite research to show a government could truthfully say after
plutonium has been dispersed in a city it will cause /no/ deaths?

Well of course it wouldn't causes any deaths!

I haven't read a single article suggesting your fallacy.

Not unless you collected
it all up and swallowed it, and that would be *chemical* poisoning

No, the plutonium would migrate to bones and being an alpha, beta and
gamma emitter would cause damage and cancers over the subject's lifetime.

Â* And
that's what's needed.Â* If all you can truthfully tell the public is
that the excess deaths will be lost in the noise of the usual deaths
from cancer many (if not most) of the public will stay away until you
decontaminate.Â* And some (possibly many) will stay away even after
decontamination.


The public will believe anything they are told if it is told them long
enough and loud enough

Of course you won't recognise you've been conned into believing that?