It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
ction of the facility is so severe it could only have been accomplished with nuclear weapons. Hydrogen gas produces a non-ideal subsonic explosion. It cannot turn concrete into dust. It can produce high pressures if sealed off, but the metal roof on all the reactor containments should have provided the relief and been the only thing destroyed. It takes a high intensity explosive to strip concrete off rebar, a blast wave many times faster than supersonic
I challenge ANYONE to send me pictures of this quake showing me devastation in an area not hit by the tsunami.
Try to find a photo of seismic damage in Sendai. I challenge you. Try to find it in any of the coastal cities, as little as 25 miles from the "epicenter". I looked for 5 hours, and except for some tanks that fell at a brewery not a single one exists. No pictures of collapsed skyscrapers or high rises equals NO 9.0. You will not find a single skyscraper photo where the windows got broken either. You will find no downed power poles, no flipped over cars, no uprooted trees, no derailed trains (except for one the tsunami hit), and the road damage is typical of even a 5.0. You will not find pictures of a single damaged multi story building or even a structurally damaged wood framed house outside the tsunami zone. In Sendai the quake messed up grocery stores and kitchens and that really is about it.
Originally posted by purplemer
Stone goes on to claim the quake 9 did not occur and supplies data ...
Which means...they weren't trying to kill people. But that's against terrorist policy, right? This makes no sense.
For the Japanese earthquake, this means EVERY seismometer on the whole planet detects the earthquake.
This quake was initially asessed a 6.8, and the seismic data will show anyone the epicenter was inland, not at sea. So it started a 6.8, then got upgraded to a 7.9, then got upgraded to an 8.4, then got upgraded to an 8.8, then got upgraded to a 9.0, and had the epicenter put out in the ocean. Now many are saying it was a 9.1 which would bump up MYG011's number to 1200 from 1070, and it is all based on tsunami effects, not seismic data
Originally posted by purplemer
If you look at the data provided. It states that the earthquake data was updated several times.
Originally posted by purplemer
As i said I am out of remit on this. I would like someone to explain it to me that understands it and more to the point how did a reactor that was out of serivice blow up..?
Originally posted by msdesertrat
I don't know much about seismic readings, but was wondering if the following type of thing is possible...
A nuclear device is detonated 24 miles off the coast of Japan in a trench creating a seismic reading of 9.0. The coastal stations pick up the actual seismic effect at their stations (multiple) of 6.3 or whatever. In other words, can a false seismic reading be created that has less energy transfer to the coast?
The reason I'm wondering is because the supposed 9.0 clearly did not have an impact 100 times worse than the Kobe 6.9 in terms of surface damage. Look at the Kobe damage and compare to the damage to buildings just prior to the arrival of the tsunami. There is NO damage to any buildings. How can that be when both quakes were in the 20-25 km depth range? The damage should have been more than 100 times worse!
Yes, the unit was down for maintenance, but the fuel rods *were still in the building*, on the upper floor, in the cooling pond. Hydrogen explosion.
Overheated open fuel pools cannot produce hydrogen because in an open fuel pool the water boils off at 100 Celsius, and won't be present in pressurized form at 2,000 degrees Celsius to liberate it's hydrogen by losing it's oxygen to the zircon cladding in the fuel rods. The rods will prefer the free oxygen in the air and burn long before attempting to claim the oxygen in whatever humidity there might b
From what little I've seen of the subject, it would be hard because an earthquake has a sound fingerprint if you will and so does a bomb. A bomb goes from 0-100 mph in a fraction of a second and dies down quickly. The earthquake graphs I saw often had slow build-ups, stops and starts and after shocks. It's possibly not impossible but I don't think it would be easy.