I find it humorous that if the story of secret nuclear explosions is true, you believe it wouldn't involve people involved with NASA, the media or politics.

reply to post by dave420

---

I think that HAARP is a powerful instrument to tweek the ionosphere and not much more. However, there is conjuncture that HAARP can be used for other purposes. See: Analysis: HAARP which discusses the capabilities of HAARP regarding weather, weapon control, earthquakes and mind control.

Maybe we are at war with the Deep Ones? You know, the things that worship the Bloop.

Deep Ones
en.wikipedia.org...

are they destroying ancient ruined underwater cities?

or maybe they are making strategic damage to the earth's crust so that when a disaster happens it will be worse?

Well, it is a fact that “something” caused a “quake-like” event to be recorded on seismographs. Here they are:
US Geological Survey maps here: neic.usgs.gov...

Just scroll down to the dates of 11/18 and 11/17 and you'll see ALL nine recorded events.

There are other kinds of strong bombs that aren’t necessarily nuclear.

It's not uncommon to have a group of smaller earthquakes in the 2.0 and 3. magnitude along fault lines... I know, I live on top of one in Calif.... but the 4.0+ and 5.0+ magnitudes all at once, that is NOT common. I've experienced quite a few 3.0+ shakes, and one or two 4.0+ quakes in 50+ years, and only one 5.0+ earthquake in my whole lifetime. A 5.0+ quake is quite shakey, I saw pickup trucks bouncing 3 feet off the ground in the one I experienced, and telephone poles swaying 10 feet across in the air. Additionally, that area in the Artic is NOT an active fault line, to my knowledge.

Do I suspect they were inititiated by mankind? Because it's not a normal fault line, and those magnitudes in a pattern are not normal, I kind of think so, YES.

Now, to a "reason". I suppose it could be going after oil. Another theory is that it could be connected to the entrance at the north pole to a hollow earth. It could be a "inner-earth" vs. a "outer-earth" war event. I've been searching for months to find good aerial photos of both poles, and I think our governments don't want us to know what is at the poles. Those nucleur blasts could be an attempt to "close off" the pole openings... to seal them inside. Well... that's one theory.

reply to post by questioningall

---

its complete bunk.
100 kilotonne nuke burried in the ground will vaporise an area to an approximate diameter of 1,600 meters. (anyone who has seen the chinese or american videos of their underground tests would know this)
9 nukes, each one 50 times more powerful, burried at the suppossed depth of 6 miles would create massive shockwaves and tidal waves from the BIG holes that were just punched in the earth and the ocean rushing in.

watch this video for an example
www.maniacworld.com...

Gets worse

This just in from NASA a few hours ago

A Giant Breach in Earth's Magnetic Field
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Right over the Arctic...

Coincidence?

Care to elaborate?

I am curious why I should trust you, (not that I don't)

That this is even reported to begin with, and that the nukes were used in such a critical location, right where the core buldges closer to the surface, means that I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt this happened. It blew the hole in the magnetic shield. It blew holes in the crust and oil is contaminating the ocean there.

It has created seismic activities since Novermber, world wide. If all the volcanoes go, we might as well have been hit by a huge astroid.

In addition, there is speculation and reports of the plates moving. Crustal displacement?

I think its terrifying. I paid attention to these threads, which were passed over by many. I sent them to friends. They're taking it seriously as well. Quite a few are planning escape roots from the coast, and considering what kind of emergencies this could create.



[edit on 7-1-2009 by mystiq]

[edit on 7-1-2009 by mystiq]

If there WAS a bulge in the Earth's crust at that point. wouldn't the 'nukes' vaporise the underlying matter therefore allow the 'swelling' to subside?
Like lancing a boil and letting 'bloop' ( as someone earlier put it - Bloop what a great non-word )

Or where the detonations actually in the water? even if they were set off in the water there'd be hardly any noticable difference in the height of the sea-level would there?