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.
Originally posted by soficrow
Please read at least some of the research.
df1
pretty well documented that oil/gas drilling has caused earthquakes in the past.
Originally posted by Nygdan
Thats like saying that dust, settling out of the air, can, over time, even if its brushed away, pull the trigger of a gun.
Nukes are just too weak to 'trigger' a movement like that, there is no data suggesting that it can be done.
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
If if there were nukes present to start such a thing, it still leaves out a few things...
1.) Why was there only one epicenter?
B.) Where did all of these nuclear weapons come from?
III.) And why would some country to willing for their stockpile to take such a substantial hit when actually dropping the bombs on the countries they wanted gone would have been much more effective?
̉
The earthquake that struck the Indian Ocean on December 26, triggering a series of huge waves called tsunami, "was possibly" caused by an Indian nuclear experiment in which "Israeli and American nuclear experts participated," an Egyptian weekly magazine reported Thursday.
... Since 1992, the magazine argued, leading geological centers in Britain, Turkey and other countries, warned of the need "not to hold nuclear experiments in the region of the Indian Ocean known as 'the Fire Belt,' in which the epicenter of the earthquake lies.
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
Why have you been avoiding questions and comments on the seismologic and radioactive components of a nuclear testing?
Originally posted by soficrow
FYI - time is NOT a critical factor in initiating a cascade, nor is geography.
Hypothetically, a nuclear test in Nevada in 1992 could have triggered a slow cascade impacting the Fire Belt in 2004.
You seem confident that someone somewhere with some international agency not only has the means to monitor but also, is committed to informing the world the moment any radiation or evidence of nuclear testing might be found.
Exactly what agency do you think has the resources and commitment to public awareness? ...Greenpeace, perchance? Or the UN?
Originally posted by Nygdan
Originally posted by soficrow
Please read at least some of the research.
df1
pretty well documented that oil/gas drilling has caused earthquakes in the past.
Ok, to clarify, man can't cause earthquakes like the christmas tsunami maker, etc. And of course, I should've noted, a nuke can move the earth, indeed, thats how nuke testing is detected, by detecting seismic waves that move through the earth.
All of that is a far, far, FAR cry from a nuke causing 9.0 earthquakes, creating tsunamis, pushing plates, etc.
If there is some evidence that I am unaware of, by all means, present it.
Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Perhaps its the evidence itself that you are aware of that is the problem. They say these people are dying over there by disease. Who says they are not dying from radiation sickness?
2 Tsunami's in 2 years is rare, and India does a whole lot of Nuke testing. More than the news tells you for sure.
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
No other countries would report on this testing when they detected it? Why wouldn't they?