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.

 

Molecular Nano Weapons: Research in China and Talk in the West

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:10 AM
link   
The reality of danger this project represents is that Molecular Nano Assemblers would change the rules to Mutually Assured Destruction (Global Thermo-Nuclear War).
What keeps the peace is that Nukes arn't sent because the enemy will return fire and annililate the other-MAD(Mutually Assured Destruction). If the Mother Land is destroyed by a nuclear arsenal, bombers in the sky, submarines in the ocean will retaliate and destroy the enemy. The research of Molecular Nano Assemblers is that these devices will track down the bombers and submarines and related vehicles and turn them to dust. So one nation could win a Nuclear War. The US is not ready for this type of conflict.
China has the funding and research to complete this project, where the US believes there is no threat and does not wish to fund its Nano Technology research.

www.newsmax.com...

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by lostinspace]




posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Holy crap man, that sounds serious. Good link. But what if we nuke the enemies nukes?



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 08:41 PM
link   
wow....the US really needs to reconsider where the funding is going...I dont think this is the only problem but with the deficeit, I really dont think there is any "perfect" way to adjust our funding either



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I'm sure the US is working on something as powerful if not more powerful than this. You underestimate the country and the country's black budget. Lots of funding is going towards things we don't even know much about, such as this.

And if it was going on, it would be top secret for sure.

[Edited on 4-3-2004 by Cutwolf]



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by lostinspace
The reality of danger this project represents is that Molecular Nano Assemblers would change the rules to Mutually Assured Destruction (Global Thermo-Nuclear War).
What keeps the peace is that Nukes arn't sent because the enemy will return fire and annililate the other-MAD(Mutually Assured Destruction). If the Mother Land is destroyed by a nuclear arsenal, bombers in the sky, submarines in the ocean will retaliate and destroy the enemy. The research of Molecular Nano Assemblers is that these devices will track down the bombers and submarines and related vehicles and turn them to dust. So one nation could win a Nuclear War. The US is not ready for this type of conflict.
China has the funding and research to complete this project, where the US believes there is no threat and does not wish to fund its Nano Technology research.

www.newsmax.com...

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by lostinspace]


Explain to me how exactly they will just magically find and then turn them into dust.



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

Originally posted by lostinspace
The reality of danger this project represents is that Molecular Nano Assemblers would change the rules to Mutually Assured Destruction (Global Thermo-Nuclear War).
What keeps the peace is that Nukes arn't sent because the enemy will return fire and annililate the other-MAD(Mutually Assured Destruction). If the Mother Land is destroyed by a nuclear arsenal, bombers in the sky, submarines in the ocean will retaliate and destroy the enemy. The research of Molecular Nano Assemblers is that these devices will track down the bombers and submarines and related vehicles and turn them to dust. So one nation could win a Nuclear War. The US is not ready for this type of conflict.
China has the funding and research to complete this project, where the US believes there is no threat and does not wish to fund its Nano Technology research.

www.newsmax.com...

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by lostinspace]


Explain to me how exactly they will just magically find and then turn them into dust.


yes, that also intrigues me as well



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavalSpecWar
But what if we nuke the enemies nukes?


what do you mean?



Originally posted by Agent47
Explain to me how exactly they will just magically find and then turn them into dust.


yeah, i really want to know that as well... and couldn't that backfire? i mean, if these things say go for anything in the water, what's stopping them for going for chinese boats?



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Maybe the U.S isn't spending any money on it because they already figured out how to stop it.



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Yeah why don't we just develop more weapons that will kill even more people......what a great idea....I mean why stop there and develop something as petty as this when we can just go a step further and make something that will blow up the whole damn world in one shot? whoooahhh



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by imreallyagrey
Yeah why don't we just develop more weapons that will kill even more people......what a great idea....I mean why stop there and develop something as petty as this when we can just go a step further and make something that will blow up the whole damn world in one shot? whoooahhh


Sounds good, I will get right on that.

Note to self, build super weapon.



posted on Mar, 4 2004 @ 10:04 PM
link   
the US is comfortable with this because of our impressive advanced technological weapons applications. the particle beam at BNL alone can probably destroy any nuclear warhead that is in flight and headed for the east coast. and it's not like that's the only facility with such a device installed. we have satellites that have the same technology, albeit on a portable level.

so what if someone has nanomachines that can take apart deployed warhead launchers? that would take time anyway. it's not a very practical idea considering the amount of time it would take, and also the fact that they are vulnerable to localized electrostatic discharges.

it's a good weapon for site-to-site sabotage, but an anti-MAD weapon it totally is not. it's not like someone can get a rocket full of these nanomachines to take out the ICBM satellites anyway.

[Edited on 3/4/2004 by AlnilamOmega]



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
For the purposes of proper cataloguing there is a link back to here from the World Tribune supposedly written by the articles author Lev Navrozov.

Seems he reckons this place is/was some sort of CIA cover - but that coast2coast isn't.

It's amazing what you find out when you are looking for something altogether different eh?

-m0r



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join