Confirmation Tianjin was Nuked
This was no chemical fire, this was China's 9-11.
…by Ian Greenhalgh, Britain – with Jeff Smith, USA
[ Editor’s Note:
Sometimes we like to move fast on a breaking story to beat mainstream
news with all their money and manpower. And at other times our sixth
sense kicks in, telling us to lay back a bit, study the early reporting
for clues as to what is NOT being reported, and activate one of our
specialty major investigation teams.
We
unfortunately had more activity on our airline crash team in the last
year or so, where those teams are weighted with senior pilots and crash
investigators, mostly through long time contacts. When we get into
mini-nuke investigations the list grows much shorter as there are fewer
of those folks around.
As
you will quickly learn below, if you do not know what to look for and
have some depth in the scary science of what make various things go
boom, and the trail left behind to tell you what it was, then having the
evidence in front of you is of no consequence.
We
have added more technical material than usual for a general audience as
this piece had to also be written for weapons and explosive experts
around the world, as they will catch onto this game very fast.
Fortunately explosives are an intensively studied field with massive
amounts of testing and data collected. The people who look at this stuff
in their profession have to be walking encyclopedias of the past
research so they can spot a tiny clue in a photo of massive destruction.
We
have stepped up to the plate to do this because we have the ability and
for the reason I gave Dr. Jim Walsh of MIT’s Securities Studies
Program. On a recent Press TV The Debate show on the anniversary of the
Nagasaki bombing, I had planned to plug mini-nukes once again as the
elephant in the living room of terror threats that the world now faces.
It
is also one where there is a total security, media and academic
institutional stand down on warning the public about any of this as more
than a few countries have and are using these. That group does not
include Veterans Today and it never will.
We
feel we have a duty to push exposing this threat until the public wakes
up that if they don’t get off their butts and start screaming you are
going to see more of these happening. We have warned that doing nothing
would only embolden those doing this, and we were right.
So
I dedicate this article today to “expert” Mr. Walsh who was upset by my
mention of the mini-nuke threat to the point of attacking it saying,
“I
think this idea that there has been testing of mini-nukes around the
world is crazy conspiracy talk. No serious person believes this… there
is a test ban treaty that has monitoring testing posts all around the
world designed to detect nuclear explosions associated with testing,
they have never turned up any of this. I know of no serious person who
believes that.”
My
context of course, which I am sure Walsh understood, was not in formal
testing, but “live” testing…as in on people and targets to demonstrate
what they can do and to send a message to someone(s)…and yes…to
terrorize people. So Mr. Walsh, excuse me if we don’t consider you and
your buddies “serious people” as with you protecting us we are in sad
shape. And speaking of that, you and your crowd need to shape up or ship
out, sir… Jim W. Dean ]
[ Update: We have a followup article showing a frame by frame analysis of the explosion video. ]
_________________________
Two weeks ago a devastating explosion took place in the port
city of Tianjin, China. Official reports claimed a chemical storage
facility had caught fire and exploded. Mobile phone footage taken by
residents showed an enormous blast and fireball.
Within days, aerial photos revealed the
stunning extent of the damage. A steaming black crater marks ground
zero, while the apocalyptic surrounding landscape is charred and
flattened. Rows of burnt-out cars and twisted shipping containers
stretch into the distance on all sides.
The total burned area spans 20,000 square meters and
continues to be dangerous—more explosions were reported by Chinese
authorities on the 15th of August. Residents within a 3-mile radius have been relocated; at least 85 victims of the accident have been reported dead.
We were immediately suspicious, such huge explosions
have to be viewed with suspicion these days when tactical nuclear
weapons can and are used with alarming frequency – 9-11, The Khobar
Towers, the Haiti Earthquake and most recently, air dropped on Yemen.
The mobile phone as radiation detector
The key clue that allowed us to identify the use of a
nuke in Yemen was the presence of scintillating pixels – white dots
that flashed on and off briefly in the mobile phone videos of the
explosion. The CCD imaging sensor within the camera phone is being
struck by radiation thus causing a pixel to overload and appear white;
in this way a mobile phone can serve double duty as a crude but
effective radiation detector.
When the Tianjin blast occurred I immediately looked
at the mobile phone footage of the blast and tried to find scintillating
pixels; I couldn’t find any, but the huge white hot fireball and sheer
size of the blast effect apparent in the footage (shaken buildings,
breaking windows etc.) certainly didn’t feel like a conventional
explosion to my relatively untrained eyes.
It was actually VT Contributor and expert on all
things nuclear, Jeff Smith who taught us about scintillating pixels and
the use of a mobile phone camera to detect radiation; therefore I
consulted him about the lack of scintillation in the Tianjin footage:
Scintillation is based
on the distance from the blast. The farther you get away from the blast
the less neutron exposure you get. CCD Cameras will detect
scintillation but only at high levels. They are not sensitive to far
field radiation patterns. All CCD cameras were too far away to be
sensitive enough to show scintillation properly.
So you have to look at
the white out in the centre of the photo. This is where the brightness
is so great that it overloads the ccd pickup chip causing a clipping
effect. The fact that the fireball was whited out or clipped indicates
that the colour temperature was over 4,000 degrees C. Only achievable in
a nuclear blast. The cameras auto gain circuit clips the video level
for being too bright so you get a white out on the screen.
No scintillation but a clear piece of evidence
indicating a nuclear explosion in the form of the huge white fireball –
once again, mobile phone footage proves useful in deciphering the truth.
The parking lots full of toasted cars
As reports and images became available, we studied
them carefully for evidence of the use of a nuclear weapon and sadly, it
was not long before we found it – the first big clue coming with the
pictures of the thousands of toasted cars that looked eerily like those
seen on 9-11.
While a layman like myself
can recognise the overall similarity, it takes an expert to fully
analyse the evidence contained in the pictures; luckily, at VT we have
such an expert in the erstwhile Jeff Smith who provided the following
analysis:
Normal people are not
trained in what to look at so they simply ignore the obvious. However,
once you see enough explosions like this you begin to spot the artefacts
in the photos real fast. Unfortunately all of these people that know
this stuff usually work for the government. Just like I did.
The big clue is in the
ash produced and the exploding radiators on the cars. They show the
radiation and the blast patterns the best. All melted rubber, glass, and
aluminium but no melted steel? This tells you it is from radiation and
not from a gasoline fire. Temps between 1500 degrees C for melting
aluminium and less than 3,000 degrees C for melting steel. Everything
organic ashes below 450 degrees C.
This had a plasma
fireball that was over 4,000C! Only a nuke can do that. The clue is in
the white ash leftover from the thermal blast.
A. The fuel tanks did not explode.
B. The rubber tires were ashed not burned see the white powder residue around the cars.
C. The radiators are all gone; indicating Freon explosions.
D. All the glass is ashed or melted; also the the glass was blown out not in.
E. All new white cars
show extreme effects from very high temperature heating. The paint is
badly damaged due to a very high oxidation rate effect.
F. Silicone rubber
tires ash at 500 degrees centigrade. Glass ashes at 1500 degrees
centigrade. Gasoline at 250 degrees centigrade. Tires melted but no gas
tank explosions; just like on 911.
G. Yellow Volkswagen
Beetle cars untouched due to location indicating radiation shielding
from a nearby building. Just like on 911….
H. Finally and most
important is all of the nano particle sized ash on the ground
everywhere. Purple haze in photo is an indication of toxic levels of the
gases fluorine, chlorine and sodium.
Conclusion; The damage
to the cars was produced by neutron radiation damage and not by
conventional explosives or a fuel-air explosion. The distance from
ground zero is too great for a standard blast to melt the glass and
tires. Also the cars fuel tanks were shielded from the heat of the
ignition source.
So there you have it, the
‘smoking gun’ evidence of a nuke is to be found among the smoking
wreckage of those incinerated cars. However, the pictures of burnt out
cars contain more evidence to be analysed before we move on to the other
evidence.
The melted radiators and the role of Freon
As you can clearly see in the picture below, the
radiator of this vehicle has been completely destroyed, incinerated into
ash. Only the steel top plate remains, all of the aluminium and copper
of the radiator core have been turned into a pile of ash. Once again,
our resident expert Jeff Smith was able to provide insight and analysis
of what we are seeing:
All
of the radiators exploded from Freon decomposition into methane,
deuterium fluoride, and phosgene gas; thus causing engine fires – note
the melted hoods and also how overpressure from an air burst explosion
has compressed the hoods of the cars.
The
copper-clad/aluminium automotive radiator is transparent to nuclear
radiation. It acts as a black body hollow-ram neutron reflector and
functions just exactly like its bigger brother the two staged
Teller-Ulman H-bomb. What this means is if you put DT gas or 2HF (Freon)
in a vacuum chamber such as a car radiator, you reduce its density thus
it take less energy to either split it or fuse it when exposed to
neutrons, Gamma-rays or even soft x-rays from a nearby nuclear explosion
– if the blast is large enough or close enough.
This forms the basis
of a micro nuclear explosive device, with ignition temperatures high
enough to melt just about anything that comes in contact with it. The
key is in the lower density of the gas making compression of it a lot
easier. This explains all of the melted car air conditioning radiators
and follow on fires. Also the lack of fallout.
See Appendix A.
The Crater at Ground Zero
Once again, Jeff Smith was able to provide detailed
analyses of the available imagery of the blast crater at ground zero and
the damage to the surrounding area. Jeff along with Jim stone and
others stated that:
This was NOT an
accident, the fracture pattern around the crater proves a to be a
shallow sub ground burst. If it was a sub ground burst, then a small
nuclear weapon is the biggest possibility because once a nuke has to
push dirt, the blinding flash will not be seen. A slightly subsurface
detonation would explain why camera sensors did not get strange
artefacts. And if it was not a nuke, it was something else incredibly
huge, but not a fuel air bomb because fuel air bombs will not leave
craters. They also leave an oily carbide residue on everything.
Even my layman’s eye can
immediately tell that the explosion that caused this level of
devastation was far beyond a mere explosion of stored chemicals. Also,
there were no storage buildings at ground zero, just some stacks of
shipping containers. Also, it is obvious to me that immense heat was
present – look at the gray-white ash everywhere. Jeff was able to
explain what I was seeing in these disturbing images:
A little bit more of a
detailed explanation: If the blast happened at ground level, almost all
of the energy would go upwards and the blast would not have made a
large deep crater, especially one large enough and deep enough to make
that lake. If you look to the right hand side of the lake, you can see
fracture patterns in the earth, which were caused by the earth being
compressed sideways and not downwards. This would only be done with a
sub surface blast. After the blast, the earth bounced back towards the
centre of the lake, which opened up the cracks.
Look closely at the
ground around the lake. Those who claimed it was not a nuke cited the
fact that if it was, everything around the crater would be vaporized and
wiped clean. Now that we have the real crater pic from the big blast,
YEP, it matches that perfectly. Take a look at the containers laying in
the lower left corner of this picture – they have no paint or colour,
which means they had the surfaces incinerated by intense heat only a
nuke or other super weapon would reach. If this was a carbide blast,
they would be black or have their original colours to some degree,
complete colour change to only gray proves this explosion was FREAKING
HOT.
That type and size of
blast crater will only happen if a massive bomb goes off a few feet
underground, such as a tactical nuke in a drain pipe which leaves scant
few alternative options. No chemical blast did that, PERIOD. The
building that is still standing in the upper right hand side of the
frame is a typical example of what is left after a nuclear test,
concrete buildings seldom get levelled, but they do get gutted by
nuclear blasts. Just look through pictures of the soviet nuclear tests
and you will see this. Bottom line? The aftermath is completely
consistent with a nuclear blast.
Even to the untrained eye, the imagery of the aftermath of this awful
event cannot be mistaken as anything other than horriffic; when you
also have expert testimony that explains the true nature of what you are
seeing the imagery becomes even more shocking and disturbing.
Destruction on this scale will become commonplace if the perpetrators
are allowed to get away with this as it will signal to all parties
possessed of tactical nuclear weapons that it is possible to put them to
use without disclosure of that fact by the media. Perhaps more
concerning is China’s silence on the nuclear aspect of this great crime –
they are still sticking to their story of fire setting off explosions
of stored chemicals. As we have shown, this story is about as credible
as the one about hijacking airliners with boxcutters; given state
control of the media in China, it might be a while before people learn
the truth.
Identifying the type of weapon and Seismology of the event
Now we have established that a nuclear explosion took
place, let us examine more closely the nature of that explosion. One
important question is the delivery method – was it a strike by a cruise
missile or was it a bomb hidden inside a shipping container? Or is there
another answer to this question? The crater strongly indicates the
explosion was sub-surface which appears to rule out the bomb having been
smuggled into Tianjin in a shipping container. It does not rule out a
cruise missile strike however – the ground in this area is very soft,
alluvial deposits of soft silts and clays deposited over time by the
nearby river. A cruise missile impacting this soft ground at over 500mph
would surely penetrate to some depth; if a delayed action fuse was
fitted to the warhead, this would create an shallow underground
explosion. Jeff Smith provides further analysis:
Note the crater is
about 400 feet wide as measured by comparison to the standard shipping
container sizes of 40 feet. The crater is a complex crater with a
cardioid shape indicating a very low altitude or surface contact blast.
Side ways compression of the soil indicates some ground penetration.
Penetration depth of ground is based on soil type and burst height.
Horizontal crater size is roughly equal to ( for every 100 feet, 1
Kiloton in size) see charts. This would put the blast size depending on
air burst altitude to be between 3 and 5 kilotons of explosive power.
See Appendix B.
If it was a low
altitude air burst, ground coupling will be less showing a smaller
Richter scale reading than usual. The only question is the fallout
issue. Was there any and of what type. Since it rained after the blast
most of the fallout went out to sea proven by the massive fish kill in
the bay. The safety zone was set at 3 kilometres. This is a correct
value for small tactical nuke fallout range. 1 KM per KT. The only other
question was it a uranium weapon a plutonium based weapon or other
i.e. a fusion weapon? Uranium cannot be traced very well but a PU based
weapon can be traced down to the reactor that made it and the chemical
separation process that was used. Firemen were shown carrying radiation
and poisonous gas detectors.
Given the 3km evacuation zone we can assume an
explosive yield of around 3 kilotons. A typical cruise missile nuclear
warhead such as the Israeli ‘Popeye’ carries 6 kilograms of plutonium;
using the rule of thumb of 1 kiloton yield per kilogram of plutonium,
the size of the explosion correlates with the yield of a typical cruise
missile warhead.
Jeff also noticed that a secondary blast took place;
this is another indicator of the nuclear nature of this event, as Jeff
explains:
Well it looks like
there were two major blasts not just one. There are two sections of the
video where the blast whites out the entire camera. This is the original
neutron burst going off; everything else is a secondary or the
atmosphere heating up and burning.
Note: The reaction
caused, a sustained glowing in the sky which is a well known indicator
of a nuclear explosion. Non-nuclear weapons do not provide a sustained
“Sun-like” illumination because they do not have enough energy to ignite
the oxygen and nitrogen in the atmosphere.
Another aspect that requires study is the seismology readings of the event.. Once again, Jeff provides some insight:
The first blast
registered 2.3 on the Richter scale and the second 2.9. Eyewitnesses
described what felt like a quake. USGS geophysicist John Bellini says
seismographs detect man-made explosions in quarries all the time, but
usually surface explosions are not detected very well because most of
their energy dissipates upward into the air. The fact is that the
Tianjin explosions registered a seismographic event that had as much
energy as a small earthquake. One can reasonably conclude that unlike a
surface explosion of chemicals, this kinetic energy released underground
was caused by a powerful penetration of the surface.
In this article we have tried to provide a thorough
but clear and concise analysis of the available evidence and show that
it is clear that this was no simple fire in a chemical storage depot
that resulted in an explosion but rather it was the detonation of a
nuclear weapon of unknown type by an unknown party. We will examine the
who and why in a follow-up article.
This is a very significant event that will
undoubtedly prove to be of great importance in subsequent world events.
In many ways, this is China’s 9-11.
Let us all hope that unlike 9-11, the Nuking of
Tianjin does not become the cassus belli for a whole series of
unjustified, brutal and bloody conflicts.
One thing is already very clearly illustrated by this
tragic event – the gloves are most definitely off when it comes to the
use of tactical nuclear weapons; we are living in an new nuclear age
where a great number of countries possess the means to create and deploy
tactical nukes and most worrying of all, these low yield weapons can
be used and have already been used without fear of mutually assured
destruction; the doctrine that prevented the Cold War from going
nuclear. This makes the world a much more dangerous place and
undoubtedly means we will see many more nuclear explosions in future.
There is an old Chinese curse – “may you live in
interesting times”; these are certainly ‘interesting’ times for anyone
who is paying attention to events in China.
See Appendix C for further reading and reference materials.
Appendix A:
An introduction to the physical principles of
thermonuclear explosive devices would be incomplete did it not give at
least a cursory overview of the different approaches to igniting
thermonuclear
micro-explosions.
A thermonuclear micro-explosion is an explosive
release of thermonuclear energy many orders of magnitude smaller than
from a thermonuclear weapon. To achieve this goal, the fission trigger
must be replaced by some other means of producing the required ignition
temperature, but in a much smaller volume and without the large energy
release.
The possibility of thermonuclear micro-explosions is
itself a consequence of two facts: first, the fact that the minimum
volume to make a thermonuclear explosion is given by the range of the
charged
fusion products \ 0 , and, second, scaling. At solid
densities and thermonuclear temperatures the range is of the order of a
few centimeters and, is inversely proportional to the density p of the
thermonuclear explosive. We can therefore write for this range.
X0 = a/p, a — const.
For the DT reaction we easily find that the minimum
ignition energy is about 108 Joules. To obtain a useful gain the output
energy should be at least ~ 100 times larger, that is, 1010 Joules = 10 n
erg, which corresponds to the explosive power of approximately 2 tons
of TNT.
The ignition energy can be substantially reduced by
increasing the density of the thermonuclear explosive. However, since
for p > p, the compression to higher densities also requires energy,
the input energy is in reality larger than the value given by Eq. (132).
The time r to deposit the energy in the target is
given by r ^ r/v, where v is the thermal expansion velocity of the
thermonuclear plasma of radius r, which is a function only of the
temperature.
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Related Posts:
You May Like
No comments:
Post a Comment