Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: RayRobisonblog

Even a big underground test like the 5MT Cannikin does not produce a huge earthquake (I believe that was a very localized reading of 6.5), it is the signature of the device that is very recognizable. An earthquake is sort of like shaking something, whereas a detonation shows up on seismographs more like a very sharp blow from a hammer. No lead up, a sharp peak that "rings" down to normal very fast.

I know some seismic guys that pinpointed the Russian sub Kursk's explosion underwater, which was non-nuclear, shortly after it happened.

For an extremely small device, it would almost be easier to hide a test above ground than under it.


29 posted on 04/20/2006 12:56:49 PM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: Tijeras_Slim

Independant of the type of "shaking", if the equipment was not in place to detect a 2.7, then can it be discounted based on seismic evidence?


33 posted on 04/20/2006 1:33:56 PM PDT by RayRobisonblog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson