Breaking - Artificial Earthquake Detected in North Korea

page: 3
138
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   
as seen on twitter

@BreakingNews

United Nations Security Council diplomat says there has been a nuclear test in North Korea - @Reuters




posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Past seismic readings from nuke tests from DPRK:

2009 - 4.7
2006 - 3.6


South Korea just raised their military alert status and Japan is going to have emergency meetings. So, yet another nuclear test, despite the UN saying their would be consequences......


Damn,I was playing chess online and you beat me to it.

Here is a map of the historical earthquake data




earthquake.usgs.gov...-seismicity_1990

They have a new testing site now?



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


You probably experienced some reflexes from earthquakes in Japan and close places, there are no earthquakes in the korean peninsula, not meaningful ones at least.
edit on 11-2-2013 by hououinkyouma because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-2-2013 by hououinkyouma because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
First word coming down the pipe on the 'other internet' is that it's probably a nuclear detonation, initial estimate of yield is 4.5kT.

That would be their third fizzle, although it's small enough that it could be a fake done with traditional explosives.
edit on 11-2-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)


Maybe an intentional fizzle. Its the perfect deception in keeping your enemies guessing.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Coming across the wire now, UN Security Council is having an emergency meeting as we speak...



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by solarstorm

Maybe an intentional fizzle. Its the perfect deception in keeping your enemies guessing.


Could be a faked nuke to deceive, but you'd never splat fissiles around in a purposeful fizzle. You don't learn anything, and it costs a huge amount of money and time.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   
The main question is whats his next move...

if i was a psycho dictator i would set the test off, at the same time as
launching a nuke.. distraction, they would be wrapped up in 'if' a test was
done, mean while my rocket would be 1/2 way to its destination before they
realised it was on its way.

but then again, i'm a odd thinker. Probably a good thing i'm not a dictator huh?



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Here is an article on how testing is done underground.
news.bbc.co.uk...







Looks like they will have to add one.

You know they want to recover sunken WW2 subs for their metal because they were forged prior to radiation from nuclear tests. Virgin metal for certain types of instruments.

I have always wondered if the rise in cancer is due to nuclear testing in the past and the release of it in the atmosphere.
edit on 11-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by severdsoul
The main question is whats his next move...

if i was a psycho dictator i would set the test off, at the same time as
launching a nuke.. distraction, they would be wrapped up in 'if' a test was
done, mean while my rocket would be 1/2 way to its destination before they
realised it was on its way.

but then again, i'm a odd thinker. Probably a good thing i'm not a dictator huh?


I was thinking the same thing. There was a report a few days ago where the U.S. was thinking that NKorea could also test their "mobile ICBM" soon. They've already done a couple of head fakes during the last couple of months. Launching a rocket now would definitely have people wondering what the payload is...and because of that, the reaction to the launch would have to be swift.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Wikipedia (ugh, I know) has a good table that shows magnitude equivalents for various events including nuclear explosions.

The way they can tell the difference between a normal earthquake and a nuke is to look at the waveforms.

There are people who frequent these boards who could tell you if a seismic signal were an earthquake or a nuke.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Via Reddit and Twitter


Twitterchicoharlan @chicoharlan
S. Korea's defense ministry says device had yield of at least 10 kilotons. (Comparison: 2006, less than 1 kt; 2009 was between 2-7.)


That's a big explosion.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Reuters are reporting


North Korea quake could be from 10 kiloton or stronger nuclear blast, South Korea defense ministry says



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
Wikipedia (ugh, I know) has a good table that shows magnitude equivalents for various events including nuclear explosions.

The way they can tell the difference between a normal earthquake and a nuke is to look at the waveforms.

There are people who frequent these boards who could tell you if a seismic signal were an earthquake or a nuke.


What I noticed was the depth of it.Pretty shallow and the only seismic activity was about the same depth in the general area.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   
I found an interesting description for how they detect and differentiate nuclear events from normal background things. It's nothing I'd use as a college paper source but it's an interesting read.

How do scientists determine if a nuclear blast has occurred?

Hope that helps with the more technical stuff online.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
For those that asked about the satalite tracking..

n2yo.com...

is the address

KWANGMYONGSONG 3
LOCAL TIME:
20:27:30
UTC:
04:27:30
LATITUDE:
-19.67
LONGITUDE:
64.02
ALTITUDE [km]:
567.94
ALTITUDE [mi]:
352.9
SPEED [km/s]:
7.68
SPEED [mi/s]:
4.77
AZIMUTH:
4

N
ELEVATION:
-75.6
RA:
18h 15m 28s
DEC:
-33° 29' 44''



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Prepare to behold the incompetence of our new state department head, "Long Jawn" Kerry.

Yikes!



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by spark9576
 



I think there's a way to tell by the s or p waves. A nuclear blast differs from a real quake.

The USGS shows it as 4.9

Event Time

2013-02-12 02:57:51 UTC
2013-02-12 11:57:51 UTC+09:00 at epicenter
2013-02-11 18:57:51 UTC-08:00 system time
Location

41.299°N 129.081°E depth=1.0km (0.6mi)



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


I agree, that is a big explosion... the have outdone them self
making one that large.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Oh Noes, the UN!

another strongly worded letter no doubt.

what a joke!

however, who would risk a massive war just because this tinpoint likes playing with firecrackers?

Want to impress me Kim, detonate one above ground so we can see the size of your... test'ies.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Nukemap shows a 10 kiloton nuke would level most buildings within a 1 mile radius.





top topics
 
138
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join