The Nuclear Hoax: Chernobyl
Thu 10:22 am +00:00, 17 Sep 2026
Source, photos and several more pages here: https://mileswmathis.com/chern.pdf
Miles has already hit the Chernobyl hoax in his paper American Moon, but I am going to hit it
much harder. I thought going into this one that I would have to work hard to expose the truth,
but it fell apart at the least scrutiny. I’m surprised, given the enormity of the con, that they didn’t
expend more resources to make it appear legitimate, but in a way it makes sense. They figure the
more brazen the bluff, the less the public will question it. That’s true in part, but it leaves it vulnerable to folks like us who are going in with eyes wide open.
My way in was a simple Google image search on “Chernobyl disaster”. For some reason it leads
with a bunch of photos of nursery beds and dolls.
It’s like a Modern Art project. They’re obviously trying to play up the fear factor, hoping that
creeping you out will disable your reasoning abilities. But it backfires in a major way, since not
only do these photos prove nothing, they actually make no sense. The two on the right look like a
bomb exploded in or just outside the room, but of course it’s nowhere near the power plant. It’s
in Pripyat, two miles away. There was an explosion at the plant, but it was very localized, not
even affecting most of the building in which the reactors were housed. So how did that doll’s face
in the top right photo get charred like that? And why not the other doll in that same photo?
These have clearly been staged.
But there are bigger problems with the photographs of this event. We are told that “Hundreds of
staff and firefighters tackled a blaze that burned for 10 days” and that on April 29, three days after the explosion, “a U.S. reconnaissance satellite showed the roof of Reactor No. 4 blown off,
and the glowing mass inside still smoking.” But here is a photo taken less than 24 hours after the
explosion:
Do you see any fire? Any signs of firefighters putting out a blaze? Nope. That photo brings up
another problem, which is that the levels of radiation they claim were being released immediately after the explosion would have destroyed any kind of film being used. No photographs or
video footage could have survived that area. And yet we are given not only photographs but long
clips of footage right at ground zero within days of the disaster. See here, for example, where
they film a crew trying to put a hazard flag at the top of the ventilation stack. The fact that this
footage survived completely undamaged proves there was no radiation being emitted.
Confirming that conclusion, look at the faces of the men who are standing on the roof. They look
completely unconcerned, despite the fact that they’re standing there right above ground zero
means they will almost certainly die of radiation poisoning.
C’mon, facemasks block radiation, so those two guys are safe. Fauci said so. Seriously, look at
how happy they are! WTF?! These were high-level managers and directors at the plant who
knew how radiation worked. And yet they are wearing hazmat suites and surgical masks that
provide absolutely zero protection against ionizing radiation. As you can see, they’re
not even bothering to wear the masks. So why dress up in these pointless getups? Because they
knew it would fool the public seeing these images, and it still does, even though they now admit
the suits and masks were worthless and that the workers themselves knew this.
We get more nonsense when we look into how the meltdown happened:
On April 25th, 1986 before a routine shutdown, the crew for the 4th reactor was testing
the quality of its turbines and the amount of supply power that could be transferred to the
main circulating pumps. In order to run through the test, numerous operator actions such
as disabling the automatic shutdown mechanism had to take place. Once the operator
decided to shut down the reactor, Xenon-135 poisoning began to occur on the fuel rods
and the thermal power of the plant continued to decrease. In order to return the thermal
power and fuel rods to safe conditions, the control rods were removed, causing thermo-hydraulic instability in the reactor. After removing the control rods, only 4 of the 8 water pumps that supplied cooling water to the reactor were working. The increase of
steam voids in the cooling water caused increased reactivity. This eventually led to the
burning of the Xenon-135 and an uncontrollable surge in thermal power, which reached
30,000 MW. The nuclear chain reaction caused the entire reactor to explode.
You should find it highly suspicious that this happened during a safety test and wasn’t a
failure during normal operations. How would a safety test lead to more dangerous conditions?
How would turning OFF the reactor increase the chance of an explosion? Why would a decrease
in thermal power make the situation unsafe? How did they miss the fact that half of the water
pumps weren’t functioning? The more you try to scan that paragraph for sense, the more it
sounds like they intentionally tried to get the reactor to explode. Of course, they did-
n’t, because there was no nuclear power to begin with. As the photos of the aftermath suggest,
this looks like a controlled demolition using normal explosives.
Within a few weeks they already had massive cranes set up. What company was willing to send
its workers to a certain death in order to start cleaning up the site? What worker in that region
would have been willing to die? No, they would have stayed as far away from this place as possible. Except that, like with the Twin Towers, they needed to dispose of all the evidence ASAP.
Speaking of deaths, you may be surprised to learn that only 4,000 people are estimated to have
died as a result of radiation exposure, and that includes long-term mortalities from cancer. Only
51 people allegedly died immediately following the meltdown. But that number makes no sense,
since there were 600 workers on site when the meltdown occurred. All 600 should have died
from radiation poisoning. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Chernobyl
explosion put 400 times more radioactive material into the Earth’s atmosphere than the atomic
bomb dropped on Hiroshima. 400 times 0 is still 0. Yet as Wikipedia admits, “Far fewer people
died as an immediate result of the Chernobyl event than the immediate deaths from radiation at
Hiroshima.” They put Hiroshima deaths within the first year at upwards of 100,000. Granted,
they faked those numbers too, but why not at least try to maintain consistency? You’ll say it was
because Chernobyl is in the middle of nowhere, so there weren’t many people to begin with. But
they evacuated 350,000 people from the area, and they also admit that about 600,000 people,
called “liquidators”, were enlisted to help clean up and contain the site within the first few
months, when radiation was still at lethal levels. Remember, to this day they claim there are still
hot spots at Chernobyl that would be lethal after 40 minutes of exposure. We’re told the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone will remain in place for centuries if not thousands of years due to the uranium and plutonium decay, and yet less than 1% of the nearly 1 million residents and workers
who were there during and after the meltdown have died in the last 40 years. Wikipedia even
cites studies confirming all this in no uncertain terms:
Ivanov et al. (2001)[7] studied nearly 66,000 liquidators from Russia, and found no increase in overall mortality from cancer or non-cancer causes.
You’ll argue that’s because survivors were hyper-aware of cancer risk and so were more vigilant
about screening and early treatment, keeping the mortality rate low. They wore Coppertone.
Nice try, but no:
Rahu et al. (2006)[8] studied some 10,000 liquidators from Latvia and Estonia and found
no significant increase in overall cancer rate.
If that’s the case, how can they even attribute the 4,000 deaths to the meltdown? With no increase in overall cancer rate or mortality from any cause, the 4,000 deaths can’t really be attributed to the meltdown, can they? Because they’re no longer excess deaths. So, as with Covid, they
just took 4,000 deaths that would have happened anyway and reassigned them as “nuclear disaster” deaths. Actually, that 4,000 comes from WHO and is their estimate of how many deaths
will eventually be attributable to the disaster. So they really are just making up a number,
having no proof of any actual deaths.
And yet another Wikipedia page offers more evidence:
…a 2005 study of microsatellite mutations found no statistically significant increase in
the frequency of germline mutations, nor an increase in developmental anomalies,
among liquidators’ children or among children living in other contaminated areas.[95][96] A
2021 study using whole-genome sequencing of children of Chernobyl liquidators similarly found no evidence of trans-generational genetic effects.[97]
While we’re on the subject, it should strike you as odd that they called these people “liquidators”.
Liquidation is what you do to a failed business; you sell off assets and try to recoup as much value as you can before permanently shutting down. I suggest you read that exactly how it sounds.
The Chernobyl disaster was a planned “liquidation” of an enterprise that was no longer serving
the needs of its shareholders. More on that later. Compare to the Titanic.
Next we ’re told:
In some areas the liquidators could not remain exposed for more than 40 seconds before the radiation received reached the maximum dose that a human being should have
received throughout his life.
Okay, we get it, no one could safely come anywhere near the plant because there was a shit-ton
of radiation. Now square that with this—an internal photo of a still functioning section of the
Chernobyl nuclear power station taken a few months after the 1986 disaster:
That’s right, a bunch of workers in the control room of the next reactor over, who continued to
keep the plant running—right next to one of the deadliest radiation hotspots in the
world! And they continued to wear—what are those, surgical scrubs? Really? The control room
looks like something from the Death Star, or maybe North Korea’s totally-not-fake nuclear missile center.
But do you really think these guys would continue to work there every day, exposing
themselves to lethal doses of radiation? If the explosion really released 400x the radioactive material of Hiroshima, those workers who stayed around would’ve been dead in, what, a couple of
days? They certainly would’ve been too ill to keep working. The fact that they expect you to believe the other three reactors continued operating, with hundreds of workers staying behind to
keep them going, shows either how stupid they are or how stupid they think YOU are. Or both.
