Are the end times near

  • Thread starter Thread starter joyful
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“It appears” according to whom? In a full-scale nuclear war, any weapons not immediately deployable would be destroyed in the initial exchange. Today’s nukes aren’t as powerful as the ones at the height of the Cold War, with militaries preferring accuracy to raw firepower. Both sides have counter-force doctrines, focusing the bulk of the firepower on military targets. Radiation doesn’t have the capacity to kill as many people as you suggest. On what basis do you come to your conclusions? I am a nuclear engineer, and I had to plan a civil defense scenario in order to graduate.
 
“Cities engulfed in massive firestorms,” is an unrealistic assumption. As I said, the bulk of the nuclear arsenals of both countries are aimed at military targets, which are located some distance from city centers and many out in rural areas. Furthermore, a firestorm is unlikely to engulf a typical modern city due to the sort of materials used in its construction. The simulation also makes no allowances for interceptors, nuclear fratricide, or other failure modes. The simulation makes the patently absurd assumption of targeting nuclear power plants to increase fallout (an enemy with such genocidal objectives wouldn’t waste the explosive firepower of a nuke on a power plant, and would instead use it to destroy a population center). Fallout curves are highly eccentric, dissipating rapidly as you move crosswind, and 99.9% of the radioactivity decays away within two weeks.

All tolled, I find that simulation utterly lacking credibility for calculating a realistic scenario.
 
You still have not answered my question.

In your private interpretation does it include or exclude Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
 
I don’t know if the end times are near but …

on the USCCB Bishops’ website I can’t get an audio reading of this Sunday’s scriptures!

What do they know?! 😰😵😱

I usually play for the kids in my Bible Study as they read along. Current iteration ends on June 30. … for the six months previous you can hear the daily readings.

The written pages are up however. 😧 Phew.
 
Last edited:
Remember that the fire bombong of Tokyo killed more people than did the A-bomb at Hiroshima. I don’t think that Isaiah 66:15-16 or Jeremiah 25:32-33 are descibing local events or merely the destruction of just one city. I my opinion, they are predicting a world-wide disaster by fire.
 
It is true that the first strikes of a nuclear exchange will be directed at the opposing country’s ICBMs, SSBNs, and other nuclear weapons delivery systems. However, many of those first strike shots might be ground-bursts or even ground penetrators in an effort to destory enemy missile silos. That type of nuclear explosion would raise a very large amount of dust into the earth’s atmosphere.
If neither side will surrender after that first round, a second round directed at cities might ensue. Both the USA and Russia have many nuclear bombs in storage.
At any rate, the elimination of human life in the northern hemisphere does not require nuclear bomb attacks on cities. A nuclear winter can take place without that.
 
Last edited:
It releases large particles into the atmosphere, which quickly fall back to the ground, which is why fallout is such a big deal for ground bursts. In an air burst, the bulk of the radioactive fallout is launched into the stratosphere and decays before it drops to the surface, where it can harm people. Consequently, the radiation sickness from an air burst is primarily caused by the direct radiation from the blast (i.e. gamma rays and neutrons from the exploding core).

As for the weapons in storage, they won’t survive an initial exchange. Using one nuke to take out a hundred of the enemy’s is a no-brainer once it’s come to fighting a nuclear war. With no way of quickly moving or launching the stored weapons, they’d be sitting ducks for an ICBM.
 
Last edited:
mythbuster1 said:
As for the weapons in storage, they won’t survive an initial exchange. Using one nuke to take out a hundred of the enemy’s is a no-brainer once it’s come to fighting a nuclear war. With no way of quickly moving or launching the stored weapons, they’d be sitting ducks for an ICBM.
Click to expand...
That might be today’s situation. In the next twenty-five years the storage of reserve nuclear weapons could become more diversified and hardened as well.
 
Last edited:
As I was praying for Poland, I heard the words : I bear a special love for Poland, and if she will be obedient to My will, I will exalt her in might and holiness. From her will come forth the spark that will prepare the world for My final coming (Diary, 1732).

St Pope John Paull II was that spark.
 
Our Lady of Akita (Vatican approved apparition) said she can no longer hold back the justice of God on the world, that if mankind do not stop abortion, that most of humanity will he wiped out by fire raining down from Heaven (worse than the Flood in Genesis).
 
Poland are one of the only catholic countries left in the EU! ☺️
 
A LOT of saints have prophecied 3 days of darkness which will wipe out 2/3s of humanity.

Similar to Our Lady of Akita’s warning.

(Just google: ‘The saints and three days of darkness propheies.’)
 
Last edited:
YoungCatholicGuy said:
Our Lady of Akita (Vatican approved apparition) said she can no longer hold back the justice of God on the world, that if mankind do not stop abortion, that most of humanity will he wiped out by fire raining down from Heaven (worse than the Flood in Genesis).
Click to expand...
The “fire” warning I am familiar with. However, I have never noticed a reference to “abortion” in any site about Our Lady of Akita. What is noted is “If men do not repent and better themselves,” and the like. No mention of abortion. If you are not making this up, please provide the reference. TY.

en.wikipedia.org

Our Lady of Akita - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top