Skip to comments.3 strong quakes kill at least 66 in western Iran
Posted on 03/31/2006 4:19:24 AM PST by rightwingintelligentsia
click here to read article
This is an interesting story since last week someone posted here that after the last soar eclipse there was an earthquake and now, after the eclipse this week, they had another earthquake.
Click on an earthquake for more information.
Click on blue arrows around map to see more in that direction.
"If it was a nuke test, it would have been reported as such right? I mean we'd be able to detect the radiation or the EMP blast or something, even underground right?"
all wrong. it is not nuke test. Allah get fed up. Mullah always use Allah name for rape, kill innocent, crush hand for stolen bread, scream Allah coz' he got 4 wives and abuse them, NUKE is Allah punishment to Non-Muslim and many more. So, allah shake Iran to call for repent and live, rather sin and die!
Average magnitude of the Indian nuclear tests:....... 5.0
Average magnitude of the Pakistani nuclear tests:..... 4.9
The magnitudes are similar for two of them, except the 6.0 would equate to about a 45 kilo-ton bomb which seems too high. One would expect their first tests to be in the 10 kilo-ton range. Of course, they could always buy nukes from a nuke member and test it for the hell of it during their military exercises they are conducting now. You never know what crazies are going to do.
My guess is these were just earthquakes, even though the magnitude is similar to a nuke.
Look for Bush to give Iran more taxpayer money to build more IEDs to kill troops with or to build their nukes. Bush gave them taxpayer money after the Bam earthquake and after the other earthquake that followed Bam.
Truman never gave Japan money, now did he.
Nuclear testing has it's own "signature" and is easily distguishable from an earthquake. (so I have been told by people in the know)
It is also distinguishable
Actually, no. Underground tests don't send out an EMP and unless the test is too shallow or the shaft isn't sealing properly, there won't be a radiation release. It might not even cause a subsidence crater depending on the geology of the area and/or the yield of the device.
The way you detect an underground test is by the waveform it creates. Underground nuclear tests create a very unique waveform which is different than any naturally occurring event. If this had been an underground test, it would already be known as seismographs around the world would have detected it.
I know. I wasn't referring to the radiation release of his statement being correct. Just that we would be able to detect the difference between a nuke test and an earthquake.
I never implied they didn't.
The first to record/report seismograph readings are the schools and research centers. Any military analysis comes later.
The military would never be the first to report a seismograph jolt from Iran.
Try looking at the depths of earthquakes too. It doesn't take a whole lot of analysis in many cases to distinguish the difference between the 2 events.
The points I made to these others were the magnitude of two of them match the magnitudes we would expect from a nuke test by Iran (expected yield of 10 kiloton). I stated I assume these are earthquakes. You are correct--if sealed properly and a proper depth, there would be no radiation readings.
Until I learn differently, initial reprots from wire services come from the seismographs of research organizations, not the military. I am not sure if their initial readings show the signature of a nuke test, just the initial Richter magnitude. I assume the signature of a nuke test would be made from a more careful reading that would not come out of an initial report. If the signature of a nuke test can be read immediately from a reseach seismograph, that is news to me. It is possible, considering an earthquake can go on for 30 seconds or more and a nuke test should have a distinct jolt. We don't know the how many nukes and at what spacing interval. Pakistan claimed 5 nukes, but analysis believes two spaced .1 second apart. India did three detonations at the same time (or fractional seconds between them).
So a volcano's infasonic waves can be similar to a nuke test.
I also heard meteor strikes can give false alarms to the International Monitoring System's seismographs monitoring nuclear tests.
Would you care to explain what infrasonic waves from a volcano or atmospheric nuclear test (or anything else) have to do with 5.7 Richter scale readings from an earthquake?
You didn't read what I wrote. Check the last two sentences. If meteors give false alarms for nuclear watchdogs, and if volcanoes can emit nuke test type waves, it gets right back to what I said--I don't believe you can dismiss an INITIAL report (possible nuke test) if it is based off seismograph readings. After the physical damage of a quake is witnessed and after a more thorough look is done at seismograph readings, then you can tell the difference between the distinct signature of a quake, a nuke test, glacier ice braking, meteors, volcanoes, . . .
Instead of spending time researching infrasonic waves from volcanoes and atmospheric tests, your time would be better spent researching the differences and similarities of nuclear testing vs earthquakes. There are some obvious differences that can be assessed by amateurs. Occasionally, some in depth analysis might be necessary to distinguish the 2.
IOW - you can usually tell the difference between an egg and a golf ball without in depth analysis.
Your arguments and reasoning are odd.
Latest Earthquakes in Iran
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.