Possible DPRK nuclear test.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2004-09-12 03:23pm

salm wrote:couldn´t we meassure an increase of whatever stuff is released when a nuke is exploded in the air pretty quickly? i mean even outsinde of NK?

Wouldnt there be some sort of seismic reading from a nuclear test? I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that there were shockwave patterns or something, maybe it was one of Bill Bryson's books, so it's probably not all that reliable.

Atlan · Post by **Atlan** » 2004-09-12 03:25pm

If it had been a nuke scientists from all over the world would have been able to see it on their seismographs, but the silence is deafening. Unless someone proves to me that every scientist with a seismograph is part of a Global Conspiracy, my vote is for No Nuke.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-09-12 04:49pm

Atlan wrote:If it had been a nuke scientists from all over the world would have been able to see it on their seismographs, but the silence is deafening. Unless someone proves to me that every scientist with a seismograph is part of a Global Conspiracy, my vote is for No Nuke.

That detection is only easy if it is an underground nuclear test. In that case you'd get S-waves without P-waves, which means "not an earthquake". Airbursts and surface tests don't do a whole lot for seismometers out 100 miles or more.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-12 05:04pm

Seggybop wrote:
The Aliens wrote:According to CNN, a White House representative has denied that it's nuclear. Take that for what it's worth.
They also tried to claim it was caused by a forest fire.
...

And why would they say this if it wasn't true? Forest fires do create clouds which spread out horizontally at a certain altitude and might be briefly mistaken for a mushroom cloud from great distance; it's not as if you've seen actual pictures of this cloud.

If it was a subsurface burst, as previously mentioned, people would have picked it up. If it was an airburst, the nuclear fireball should have been detectable if it was indeed seen by satellites as stated in the OP.

dr. what · Post by **dr. what** » 2004-09-12 05:15pm

But didn't they have a fuel or ammo laden train blow up back in april?

Which will be easier to believe--that they set off a nuke very close to the China border AND near one of their bases ('Benevolent Leader' is nuts but I don't think he's THAT nuts) or that they just had a repeat of the april disaster?

Anybody find out how big the crater is? They said that it could be 'seen by a satellite' but they've got satellites that couyld see a license plate from orbit so what does that prove....

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-09-12 05:27pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Seggybop wrote:
The Aliens wrote:According to CNN, a White House representative has denied that it's nuclear. Take that for what it's worth.
They also tried to claim it was caused by a forest fire.
...
And why would they say this if it wasn't true?

The US government BSing is nothing new.

Forest fires do create clouds which spread out horizontally at a certain altitude and might be briefly mistaken for a mushroom cloud from great distance; it's not as if you've seen actual pictures of this cloud.

If it was a subsurface burst, as previously mentioned, people would have picked it up. If it was an airburst, the nuclear fireball should have been detectable if it was indeed seen by satellites as stated in the OP.

Forest fires don't produce massive craters. Nor do they produce seismograph spikes, which have also been reported.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-09-12 05:32pm

Forgive me, but this sounds like it might have been some sort of massive industrial mining accident, or a big fuel/waste dump blowing. That would fit everything I've heard about.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2004-09-12 05:38pm

We need all the evidence we can find on this event (video of the detonation if at all possible, satellite photos of the crater, seismic logs, the works) as well as examples of the above-named data types of known nuclear detonations in the size and power range of the DPRK event. Control data (earthquake records, forest fire pics/videos, and any other phenomena the DPRK event could be possibly explained away as) would be immensely helpful as well for comparison purposes.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2004-09-12 06:01pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: I'd think he'd want to do the exact opposite. If he successfully detonated a nuclear weapon, he'd want to get the news out as much as possible so that he's got a better bargaining position. After all, nuclear devices are more useful as leverage than as actual weapons, especially when you've only got a few of them. Sort of saying "Mess with me and Tokyo gets it, which will ruin the global economy and ruin your shit, along with killing millions of Japanese".

Not really...

Visualize the scenario: Kim Junior calls a press conference in Pyongyang. He makes a big announcement and all about having a nuke, and makes veiled threats.

Within 24 hours, Russia, China, and the US mention in polite (and highly classified) commiques to the Great Leader that unless he stands down as of two hours ago, they've got ICBM's that are perfectly ready to go up his ass if he as much as sneezes... George W. throws in a press conference to that effect, doin' his cowboy thing, while Vlad the Im-- err... Putin just does his whole cold-blooded thing. Who knows what the Chinese would do-- but Beijing isn't that far from North Korea. Somehow I don't think they'd take kindly to such a loose-cannon leader having nuclear weapons.

Really, it's to Kim's best advantage that he keep this under wraps. But then, he's, as I observed, a loose cannon... no saying what he might or might not do.

Macross · Post by **Macross** » 2004-09-12 06:13pm

The article on CNN says:

"The blast coincided with the anniversary of North Korea's founding on Sepember 9 when various military activities are staged."

Seems like the perfect day for a Nuclear Weapons test.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-09-12 06:27pm

According to Korean news agencies, the explosion took place at the Taepodong missile facility. It was said previously that this was a likely location for a nuclear test.

If it isn't a nuke, maybe it was analogous to the US 100-ton test? Or maybe it was a taepodong missile test failure.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-09-12 07:00pm

Atlan wrote:If it had been a nuke scientists from all over the world would have been able to see it on their seismographs, but the silence is deafening. Unless someone proves to me that every scientist with a seismograph is part of a Global Conspiracy, my vote is for No Nuke.

Don't forget isotopic byproducts characteristic of any nuke blast. Those are a clear fingerprint. Monitors should have picked up something by this point.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-09-13 12:01am

So, any ideas on what it was? Missile test failure? Massive ordinance depot explosion?

dr. what · Post by **dr. what** » 2004-09-13 12:15am

All that is being confirmed at this point is that 'it is not nuclear' but then they go on to say 'we don't know the cause'

Check this out http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... plosion_24

Gustav32Vasa · Post by **Gustav32Vasa** » 2004-09-13 04:51am

phongn wrote:So, any ideas on what it was? Missile test failure? Massive ordinance depot explosion?

N Korea blew a mountain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 650702.stm

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2004-09-13 05:33am

Thats insane. But more likely then a Nuke test.