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.

 

This is being called a Nuke! Can someone identify this weapon? Yemen Conflict.

page: 20
28
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:46 AM
link   
For those who think only nuclear weapons make huge explosions, look at the Texas City disaster
en.wikipedia.org...


A 2-short-ton (1.8-metric-ton) anchor of Grandcamp was hurled 1.62 miles (2.61 km) and found in a 10-foot (3 m) crater




posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

They haven't been testing nuclear weapons anywhere. They tested some cores but they were subcritical. If they were testing two or three a day they'd have burned through most of our arsenal by now.
edit on 6/15/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

got the plans if you want them. wasn't just all the details of everyone who works for the us government that got leaked.

no
better not....
edit on 15-6-2015 by devilmoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: devilmoon
a reply to: Bedlam

if you say so.

meanwhile. in the real world. they've been testing 2 or three a day in california for the last 14 years since bush ordered it.

so hardly an unexpected turn of events.


Umm, no. They'd probably like to, given the need to do live testing on some new design twists.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

Where's the seismic data showing all these tests? Where are the warheads coming from? Two a day is over 700 a year. It's been about seven years now. That's over 5000 warheads in that time.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Nickn3

I hate when a conspiracy becomes logic =(



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

not on the us geological survey.
that's how they were found.
been widely talked about since they started. but I'm sure you are well aware of all that. so not sure what you're looking for.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

Proof is what I'm looking for. It's amazing that they've detonated over 5,000 warheads, and not one nation has said anything about the testing moratorium violation.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

wouldn't know anything about that. if you say so.
not really looking to post anything incriminating on a site like this thanks very much.

I'm sure you can find all the leaked documents on your free and open Internet if you wanted. just do a search for california and nuclear.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

That's what I thought. There's no way that Russia and China would keep quiet about massive testing on that scale. And there's no way they could keep it from them. Or for that matter, non governmental seismograph sensors.
edit on 6/15/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: devilmoon

That's what I thought. There's no way that Russia and China would keep quiet about massive testing on that scale. And there's no way they could keep it from them. Or for that matter, non governmental seismograph sensors.


He doesn't know what he's talking about there is 316 stations that do nothing but monitor for nuclear detonations. That's how they knee Pakistan went nuclear and India in the 70s. You can't hide it it's impossible.


(post by devilmoon removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

Then prove it. You keep making extraordinary claims and refuse to show a shred of proof.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: devilmoon

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: devilmoon

That's what I thought. There's no way that Russia and China would keep quiet about massive testing on that scale. And there's no way they could keep it from them. Or for that matter, non governmental seismograph sensors.


He doesn't know what he's talking about there is 316 stations that do nothing but monitor for nuclear detonations. That's how they knee Pakistan went nuclear and India in the 70s. You can't hide it it's impossible.


that's a provable lie.
good as an admission of guilt.


Educate your self 183 countries with the ad it ion of Angola aren't going to agree to a ban that can't be verified.


can-ndc.nrcan.gc.ca...
edit on 6/15/15 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: devilmoon

Where's the seismic data showing all these tests? Where are the warheads coming from? Two a day is over 700 a year. It's been about seven years now. That's over 5000 warheads in that time.

You'd think Someone would have detected few thousand nuclear detonations.If they actually occurred that is..
edit on CDTMonam11061 by TDawg61 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TDawg61
You'd think Someone would have detected few thousand nuclear detonations.If they actually occurred that is..


They must have been the new silent nukes that also do not leave any seismic traces!



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: bharataprobably a daisy cutter. If it was a nuke you'd expect the fireball to be up in the mushroom cloud and stick around much longer



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: TDawg61
You'd think Someone would have detected few thousand nuclear detonations.If they actually occurred that is..


They must have been the new silent nukes that also do not leave any seismic traces!


It's the new "hush-a-boom" formula. Professor Schwartz sold the secret to DOE.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   
plenty of proof already in this very thread.

why don't you start a thread comparing the seizmic profile of this nuke with the siezmagrams of calif events if you want more detail.

burden of proof is on you when you disagree with commonly accepted fact.
edit on 16-6-2015 by devilmoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: devilmoon

Commonly accepted doesn't make it fact. You're the one making the claims, the burden of proof is on you to back it up. So lay the cards on the table and let's see the proof.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join