Topic: Great minds required. Uncovering what REALLY happened at Chelyabinsk... (Read 603 times)
February 18, 2013, 10:51:35 PM
reptile men from Sirius crash landed saw it on a yt vid
February 18, 2013, 07:37:15 PM
Due to popular demand from incredulous mainstream Beliebers, I'm starting this thread so we can put our minds together and uncover the TRUTH behind the mysterious technology that was cleverly disguised as a meteorite.
I'll go first. Key points:
It was clearly an ICBM.
~30km/s seems a bit fast for a plausible re-entry speed, but it's the Russians so it seems legit.
10 kiloton estimated explosive force seems way off the mark for conventional explosives unless they somehow fired a 10 thousand tonne warhead. I'm sure someone would have noticed a rocket the size of the Great Pyramid lifting off, so it couldn't have been conventional explosives. This leaves a couple of other options like fuel-air and nuclear.
Was it a Fuel-Air bomb?
This seems far more efficient than carrying chemicals where the necessary oxygen is already present. How about a solid shell of magnesium? I was wondering whether it might contain metallic powder inside but why bother when at such high speeds the whole thing could become an aerosol. I'm not sure about magnesium's high-speed behaviour, but I hear that tungsten and uranium are pretty good. Presumably they went for a staballoy with optimised shattering properties for the job: high surface area, while maintaining enough solidity to pass by and release as much energy as possible from the ambient oxygen and nitrogen.
Was it nuclear?
Atmospheric testing over a place like Chelybinsk seems like the perfect smokescreen (pun intended). According to some reputable YT videos, the place practically glows in the dark anyway so who would notice a few extra milli-Rad? And don't give me that BS about detecting traces of radio-isotopes in the atmosphere. Everyone's instruments are already gummed up and malfunctioning with wet Fukushima Dai-ichi dust.
What about the "moving spotlight" effect? Or the glowing embers coming out the other end of the fireball?
Some of the YT videos clearly show the shadows of cars and buildings smoothly rolling across the terrain, like a time-lapse video of a sun dial. I'm just not convinced that a nuke could be made to give such a reliable point-source of light. And you certainly wouldn't get anything solid coming out the other end.
Conclusion: the so-called "meteorite" was really a fuel-air kinetic penetrator, likely consisting of a secret blend of heavy metals in an inefficient "roundish" shape. How did I do?
I'll go first. Key points:
It was clearly an ICBM.
~30km/s seems a bit fast for a plausible re-entry speed, but it's the Russians so it seems legit.
10 kiloton estimated explosive force seems way off the mark for conventional explosives unless they somehow fired a 10 thousand tonne warhead. I'm sure someone would have noticed a rocket the size of the Great Pyramid lifting off, so it couldn't have been conventional explosives. This leaves a couple of other options like fuel-air and nuclear.
Was it a Fuel-Air bomb?
This seems far more efficient than carrying chemicals where the necessary oxygen is already present. How about a solid shell of magnesium? I was wondering whether it might contain metallic powder inside but why bother when at such high speeds the whole thing could become an aerosol. I'm not sure about magnesium's high-speed behaviour, but I hear that tungsten and uranium are pretty good. Presumably they went for a staballoy with optimised shattering properties for the job: high surface area, while maintaining enough solidity to pass by and release as much energy as possible from the ambient oxygen and nitrogen.
Was it nuclear?
Atmospheric testing over a place like Chelybinsk seems like the perfect smokescreen (pun intended). According to some reputable YT videos, the place practically glows in the dark anyway so who would notice a few extra milli-Rad? And don't give me that BS about detecting traces of radio-isotopes in the atmosphere. Everyone's instruments are already gummed up and malfunctioning with wet Fukushima Dai-ichi dust.
What about the "moving spotlight" effect? Or the glowing embers coming out the other end of the fireball?
Some of the YT videos clearly show the shadows of cars and buildings smoothly rolling across the terrain, like a time-lapse video of a sun dial. I'm just not convinced that a nuke could be made to give such a reliable point-source of light. And you certainly wouldn't get anything solid coming out the other end.
Conclusion: the so-called "meteorite" was really a fuel-air kinetic penetrator, likely consisting of a secret blend of heavy metals in an inefficient "roundish" shape. How did I do?
Jump to: