scary, do you know how many times thats been done? anyone hear about the earthquake in the Gulf of Mexico? scary
Heke - October 16, 2006, 07:06
Thats some shitty shit!
(guest) (guest) - October 16, 2006, 10:45
where was this experiment conducted? I don't get it how can someone just put a nuclear bomb under the ground, and let it blow, there were houses and people above it...? :/
stue (guest) - October 16, 2006, 14:48
samn thats was good.. first time I m seeing it :D
shit (guest) - October 16, 2006, 14:50
holy fuck, why did they do that? :D:D
Masterfrog (guest) - October 16, 2006, 14:51
I don't want to be a bore, but I'm actually thinking it might be . I've heard somewhere that a big earthquake is stronger than most atom bombs... and well, as far as I know you don't see the ground jumping aroudn that much during an earthquake...
Enselic - October 16, 2006, 15:22
Masterfrog: The energy of an earthquake is more spread, that's why the landscapes doesn't jump in the same concentrated way as when you use an atombomb, where you release the whole energy simultanously from the same point.
Even if is is fäke, it's well enough done to be cool anyway :)
Pirateboy - October 16, 2006, 19:08
It looks really cool. I think someone may have just played some footage of a demolition backwards though. I could be wrong.
powers (guest) - October 16, 2006, 19:37
these look accurate to me. underground tests are very common. usually they are the first live test a nation/enterprise will use when developing atomic weapons; much as we recently saw with N. Korea (if that was in fact a real atomic explosion). the real "beauty" of an atomic explosion comes from how it works in the atmosphere. these underground tests let you deal with the basics of yield, blast density, etc. and those homes and stuff you may be worrying about are constructs. later on, in the 50's, you'll see "fleets" of ships, all mock-ups/constructs that are scattered out through the bikini islands and nuked to see how they are effected by the blast. unfortunately, sometimes men were in fact used as well at various ranges. but in these pictures, you are looking at empty homes.
minuteman 3 (guest) - October 16, 2006, 21:46
this footage is authentic and the test was conducted in alaska
minuteman 3 (guest) - October 16, 2006, 22:03
this footage is authentic and the test was conducted in alaska
minuteman 3 (guest) - October 16, 2006, 22:42
this footage is authentic and the test was conducted in alaska
pre (guest) - October 17, 2006, 04:12
the thing is, earthquakes may have more energy, but this is concentrated and underground. goodbye plates of the world
just a (guest) always am a (guest) and will remain (guest) - October 17, 2006, 21:12
this is insane! i want one for christmas =P
Gonzales (guest) - October 20, 2006, 08:43
@ Masterfrog: An earthquake is much more powerful but it's not concentrated to one area. Also, the bomb was probably a few hundreds meters down. Earthquakes have there epicentre kilometers down in the earth's crust. If an earthquake whould "go off" 200m from the surface, hell would break loose :)
Draugovininkas - October 22, 2006, 15:24
Since that was said a lot of times, i will no repeat it. But the fact that the earthquake is more powerfull means that it COULD do more damage then one atom bomb. learn more about earhquakes and understand that if the whole power were in the same range as an atom bombsm let's say on new york or another large city, then there would be no evidence of it's previous existence. by the way, i think that was a thermonuclear weapon (more power)
keke (guest) - October 24, 2006, 12:18
north korea did that
The Huggster (guest) - October 24, 2006, 17:33
...and we wonder why we have such global calmaties as the Asian Tsunami of 2004?
Keisari_P - December 5, 2006, 03:43
Impressing. I would like to know how many megaton exlosion was that and how deep it was set off.
^RunQaBalle^ (guest) - December 14, 2006, 15:00
That was really impressing and crazy... I'd like to know that how much do they actually make those tests just below us?! :D
doodle (guest) - December 24, 2006, 22:33
next time do it under the white house !!
Scorpio - February 9, 2007, 02:42
i wish we had a date of this event... i wonder how many people died from the earthquake it (might have)triggered
briggsie421 - March 5, 2007, 19:11
holy shit
wow.. (guest) - June 5, 2007, 06:06
In the earlier years many nations sought underground tests to limit the amount of damage to the atmosphere (and the atmospheric test ban). Nations such as Pakastan, India and North Korea have all recently tested underground tests.
Yes an EQ might be more powerful, but you don't see them that close to the surface. No this test (and most others) do not set off EQ's that kill people because they are tested in remote regions.
CREED (guest) - October 13, 2008, 18:42
THAT IS SOME WEIRD STUFF THEY GOT GOIN THERE I WAS REALLY FREAKED OUT
42
13
Comments