Debunked: Tianjin explosion was caused by a nuke

Bruno D.

Senior Member.
Master Claim: Tianjin explosion was a Nuke.

Subclaims:

Claim #1: crater size is evidence of nuke

Some sources claim that the crater size is as big as 400m, which is completely wrong. Best estimates are between 85m and 100m as seen in the image below.

[compare]
upload_2015-10-7_17-22-42.png upload_2015-10-7_17-22-55.png
[/compare]

By using google maps at https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0399576,117.7363527,575m/data=!3m1!1e3 you can see and calculate that.

It's quite clear after a lot of discussion that there is no correct way to calculate the explosion yield based only on the crater width. In order to calculate that we would need to know:
- exact parameters of the soil
- approximate depth of the crater
- approximate depth of the explosion

Even with this information this would be quite tricky and possibly wrong.

- Users in Metabunk tried to calculate the explosion yield with the available info and the values started at 5kt up to 525kt.

- Users in Metabunk also tried to calculate craters size for other craters with a known bomb yield, and the sizes were wrong by 2 to 6 times.

Conclusion: crater size is not enough to calculate yield.

Some other interesting points below.

This is the scary crater photo filled with water:

upload_2015-10-7_17-23-11.png

This is as seen from above:
crater water 2.jpg


This is the same crater before the fire-fighters filled that with water. Not so scary, is it?

upload_2015-10-7_17-23-32.png

This is what the crater looks like today, 1 month after the explosion. It's basically the same.

upload_2015-10-7_17-23-37.png

crater no water 3.jpg


This explosion was very very shallow, and any claim that this was an underground nuke is debunked. According to this diagram and by the looks of the crater, I would even say that the nuke explosion would need to be near surface, not even on the surface itself.

upload_2015-10-7_17-23-47.png



Claim #2: seismic numbers are evidence of nuke

The first important point is to remember that there were actually more than 20 explosions in Tianjin over more than 10h. Of course that when compared to the 2 big ones, they are not as important.

Regarding the two big ones, we are going to ignore the claims that the first explosion was a nuke and the second explosion was aftermath explosion. The second one was seven to eight times bigger than the first one. If a regular industrial accidental explosion can yield enough energy to create that kind of explosion, there would be no reason at all to believe that the same regular industrial chemicals aren't enough to create an explosion seven times weaker.

With that said, let's focus only on the second explosion.

Estimating an explosion yield is very tricky and it's not an exact science. They use a lot of other information together with seismographs. On the other hand, CTBTO does a pretty good job at identifying secret nuclear test. That's why they were created 20 years ago.

https://www.ctbto.org/specials/who-we-are/

Other common effects from a nuclear bomb as EMP, Radar Blackout, Ionizing Radiation and fallout were not detected by any international agency.

It's easier to identify and estimate yield when the explosion is subterranean as little to no energy is lost outside the soil. As we know that the explosion in Tianjin was at the surface level, the 21T estimated explosion energy is related only to the amount of energy that penetrated the soil. A nuclear bomb or a chemical explosion on the surface level would yield much more than that.

The seismographic number in this case cannot be used as evidence of anything.


Claim #3: burnt cars and white ash

Melted or burnt cars are not, and never were, evidence of a nuke explosion. This is evidence of fire.

Specifically in Tianjin what most people forget is that the fire burnt for several hours. The explosion happened at 11:30 PM local time. In next day's morning there was still fire there:

upload_2015-10-7_17-24-11.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-24-16.png

And the fires got to the cars:
upload_2015-10-7_17-24-39.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-24-51.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-24-56.png


Pictures of rows and rows of cars are shown, sometimes as evidence to something:

upload_2015-10-7_17-25-11.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-25-20.png


This is a regular parking lot fire. Looks similar?

upload_2015-10-7_17-25-30.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-25-40.png

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/photo/2014-03/13/content_17345699.htm

Melted wheel alloys in regular fires:

upload_2015-10-7_17-25-57.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-26-4.png


A “scary white ash" photo from Tianjin:

upload_2015-10-7_17-26-14.png


Now, let's look at the explosion area from above:

upload_2015-10-7_17-26-38.png


Are you wandering why can you see that only at some points, and not everywhere? They are actually dry chemical fire extinguisher.

upload_2015-10-7_17-26-52.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-26-56.png


Being used by the fire fighters as they became just a little concerned about water, because, you know, it raised hell couple hours earlier when they used water on top of containers:

upload_2015-10-7_17-27-5.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-27-15.png

Claim #4: fireball size is evidence of nuke

This was debunked here:
https://www.metabunk.org/the-tianjin-explosion-and-the-scaling-laws-of-nuclear-weapons.t6750/

Another important point is that tianjin is not even the biggest industrial explosion in the history.

Halifax explosion in Canada, 1917. Estimated equivalent energy: 2.9KT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion

Texas City disaster, 1947. Estimated equivalent energy: 2.7KT to 3.2KT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_disaster

Tianjin was kind of small when compared to that.

More interestingly is that even after Tianjin China went through similar industrial accidents again.


upload_2015-10-7_17-28-1.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-28-4.png

No, this is not Tianjin, this is Shandong.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-34029202

Fireball size is an evidence only of an explosion. The characteristics of the Tianjin explosions are much similar to a regular explosion than those of a nuclear explosion.

Claim #5: fireball color is evidence of nuke

Some claim that the white color in the middle of the fireball in Tianjin is proof of a nuclear explosion because the only way to create this color is if the temperature exceeds thousands of degrees and that it lasts for too long.

The white color is not a sign of the temperature; the white color is a sign of the color of the explosion. You can find several examples of white colored explosions:

Slow-Mo guys (around 6:15)


Burning Man (around 0:11)


Sparkler bomb from a kid (2:35)


Even a lighter or a light bulb will show the same white color.

Claim #6: dead fish is evidence of nuke

The huge amount of dead fish is scary.

upload_2015-10-7_17-29-23.png

But unfortunately it’s not something new in China. It’s even common. There is a possibility that it’s even not related to the explosion itself.

The chemicals were high but not conclusive:

But they also say (bold emphasis are mine):

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/9...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The search below show tons and tons of dead fish before the Tianjin explosion all over china.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dead+fish+china&safe=off&biw=1366&bih=667&espv=2&source=lnt&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:7/31/2010,cd_max:7/31/2015&tbm=isch#imgrc=OPqukO53TqA3vM:

Including more specifically Tianjin:

http://www.ecns.cn/visual/hd/2011/07-22/758.shtml

Claim #7: 3km evacuation zone is evidence of nuke

This claim has no substance at all. The 3KM evacuation zone is much more useful in case of a chemical accident. In Fukushima the first evacuation zone of 2km lasted for 40min when it was extended to 3km. 8h later it was extended to 10km and less than 24 hours later, 20km.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Safety-and-Security/Safety-of-Plants/Fukushima-Accident/

To protect the people from the fallout of a nuclear bomb, they would need a much bigger evacuation zone. It would also depend on the wind:

http://www.ready.gov/nuclear-blast

Claim #9: Suits are evidence of nuke

As expected in a disaster this size, there were a lot of different suits being used by Tianjin workers:

upload_2015-10-7_17-30-39.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-30-45.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-30-49.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-30-53.png


These are examples of Chemical Protection suits:

upload_2015-10-7_17-31-5.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-31-13.png


These are examples of Anti-Radiation Suits:

upload_2015-10-7_17-31-24.png

upload_2015-10-7_17-31-31.png

Even though the ones used in Tianjin resemble much more the anti-chemical suits, I’ll say that it’s simply inconclusive because they could have sent everything they got to the explosion site to help anyway they could.

Claim #8: Absence of EMP is not an evidence of non-nuke

Actually, as the explosion was a surface explosion, the presence of an EMP is expected. The only way to avoid that is by having an underground explosion, what we know didn't happen.

No power lines were affected in Tianjin, as well as there were no witness testimonies talking about that.

Two examples:


No EMP is evidence of non-nuke.

Claim #10: Xi's investigation of alternative explanations are evidence of nuke

President Xi declared several times that his government is suspicious of foul play, of a political conspiracy to hurt them and to make the opposition stronger. They are investigating the origin of the fire (arson or accident) and the strength of the explosion (chemicals or illegal ammunition).

There are two possible interpretations to these allegations:

1) Xi is trying to shift part of the blame to a third party. He would do that because otherwise his administration would be guilty of yet one more industrial accident, as has been happening over and over.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/22/opinion/tianjin-and-chinas-industrial-calamities.html?_r=0

2) China knows that they were attacked by a foreigner country, and president Xi is covering this up because he wants to retaliate it later using another disguised secret attack against his attackers.

It's speculation against speculation. Pick your side.

Claim #11: 911, Yemem, Bombai, etc, are evidence of nuke
Using other Conspiracy Theories as a proof of yet another Conspiracy Theory does not even make sense. I'll not even entertain this one.

PS: edited to add 2 more crater photos.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2015-10-7_17-23-21.png
    upload_2015-10-7_17-23-21.png
    452.7 KB · Views: 277
Last edited:
Gee, supposedly FaceBook is getting a dislike button, but MetaBunk can't get a Winner-Winner-Chicken-Dinner button? Gosh, my faith in the Interwebs is sooo diminished! ;)
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mythic Suns [Debunked] Viral internet meme indirectly claiming that Greenland has already fully melted. Science and Pseudoscience 6
T AiG Debunked: Fossils Fail to Find Major Transition From Dinosaurs to Birds Science and Pseudoscience 10
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 7
Marc Powell Debunked: 9/11 truth experts are knowledgeable professionals and their judgments are to be trusted 9/11 195
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosions preparatory to demolition of the WTC North Tower are visible as Flight 175 crashes into the South Tower 9/11 7
Mick West Debunked: Pfizer Developing a Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill, Taken Alongside Vaccines Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition “squib” is visible at top of WTC North Tower before Flight 11 crash 9/11 67
Marc Powell Debunked: Construction worker Philip Morelli experienced an explosion in the sub-basement of the North Tower 9/11 0
Marc Powell Debunked: ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported an explosion in the subway 9/11 1
Marc Powell Debunked: Debris from twin towers was projected upward by explosives 9/11 13
Marc Powell Debunked: Government officials revealed having foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse 9/11 58
Marc Powell Debunked: NIST computer simulation of Building 7 collapse is inaccurate 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Marc Powell Debunked: VP Dick Cheney ordered a standdown of jet fighters on 9/11 9/11 16
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: World Trade Center should not have collapsed due to 9/11 fires 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Firefighter reports of secondary explosions 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Steel was hurled hundreds of feet by explosives 9/11 4
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition Explosion Before Collapse of South Tower 9/11 8
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosion in South Tower Lobby 9/11 7
Marc Powell Debunked: Mysterious Explosion Before the Flight 11 Crash 9/11 48
J.d.K Debunked: Marx: "The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions must give way... They must perish in the revolutionary Holocaust" Quotes Debunked 0
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
Mick West Debunked: Diving Triangle UFO Photos from Reddit [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 37
Theferäl [Debunked] Object Seen From Airplane Above Canberra: 04 Apr 2012 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 5
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 9
bird_up Debunked: "Interdimensional being" caught on CCTV in Neza, Mexico Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
M Debunked: Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 9 PSI, not 0.09 PSI as claimed by NASA Science and Pseudoscience 76
Patrick Gonzalez Debunked: missing cable on Perseverance landing footage proves it is fake. General Discussion 3
TEEJ Debunked: Biden's Oval Office "Coming Apart at the Seams" [It's a Door] Election 2020 19
derrick06 Debunked: UFO over California Highway (TMZ) UFOs and Aliens 1
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs and Aliens 9
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 27
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top