Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Russia Reveals New Nuclear Super-Missle
#1
According to Russia, this new super missle is capable of wiping out a country in one single shot!   tinysurprised 

[Image: 700_256bab491bb2d524cb0dc2196f90caf4.jpg?v=1477433026]


Quote:The Russian military has unveiled images of their brand new nuclear weapon RS-28 Sarmat which they claim will go into service in 2018. According to one expert, these weapons are state of the art and so devastating that they would make the atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States in the second world war look like ‘popguns’.

The bombs that laid waste to the Japanese cities killed at least 129,000 people, but it is thought that the new Russian weapons are around twenty times as deadly. According to Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, who is the former assistant secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy, these weapons could not only wipe out three-quarters of an area the size of New York state but also make it inhabitable for thousands of years.



Quote:The news of Russia’s revamped nuclear program comes at a time when relations between Russian and the Western powers are at their poorest since the Cold War period after a series of high-level diplomatic spats over Russia’s military aggression in Syria and the disputed territories in Ukraine.
Kremlin watchers have assured the public continually that Russia imagines that this current spate of bad blood could end in a full-scale nuclear conflict. The new weapons are only one manifestation of this fear within the Russian establishment.

Earlier this month, the Russian government began running nuclear drills to ensure that civilians were prepared if their country was to come under nuclear attack from the United States. It has been said that these drills involved 200,000 emergency service workers and forty million Russian civilians.

Source

I have to wonder though, is this just another "illusion" of power to scare the Masses into submission? 

It has already been shown (and told) by the good ETs that they WILL NOT allow a nuclear war because what we do down here also affects them and many other dimensions, and the Elite/Shadow Government know it.

So, is this just propaganda being used to sway the people into thinking Russia is about to strike the US down? 
Is it just another move on the Elite Chess Board as they play their game with our lives?

If they want to, the ETs could probably melt any missle us puny humans have!  So why waste money on this shit when we could be putting it towards cleaning the air, water, and producing free energy? We need to start taking care of the rock we live on, not destroying it!   minusculeredtantrum


#2
Putin Builds and Obama dismantles.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
#3
Quote:these weapons are state of the art and so devastating that they would make the atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States in the second world war look like ‘popguns’.


Absolutely right. It's not to scare the masses, it's to annihilate the masses, even more so if it's bigger than the U.S.' Castle Bravo.


Comparisons of the 15 KT that hit Hiroshima and the 15,000 KT (The one they call the Castle Bravo from the U.S.) the U.S. has now:


[Image: high_yield_vs_low_yield_4_bombs_750.jpg]



While Hiroshima's little pellet gun nuclear blast that sent fire through 4 square miles, the Russian's 550 KT has expanded to 100 square miles...



[Image: 15_kt_vs_550_kt_firestorm_700.jpg]


Can you even imagine what kind of Hell on Earth the 15,000 KT can do? 27 times 100 square miles.


That ought to light up a BBQ or two...


I think I've said the story before but when I was in high school, I think it was in my physics class, the teacher explained to us the repercussions of a nuclear blast, in the early seventies...

Our school was on the south shore of Montreal and so he said :

"Picture this. You are holding a spoon 12 inches above the bottom of your kitchen sink. You hear a blast, you see a flash and you let go of the spoon which then falls towards the bottom of the sink. If the blast zone was the center of Montreal, you would be dead before the spoon hit the bottom of the sink."


That mental picture always stayed with me. Except that nowadays, with what they have, I wouldn't even realize there'd be a blast or a flash...I'd already be cooked solid.


Quote:“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

― Albert Einstein


That quote is outdated. No one will be left to fight with sticks and stones.


.
~ Today is the youngest you'll ever be again ~
#4
@"Sol" , maybe this is what the ETs were talking about when they said there would be a sudden flash, and we would be in a new world. tinybighuh
#5
Yawn.

Been through all this before, in the 80's. Scary old nuke war was used as a control mechanism then, too. Back then it was leftist/ Communist agents planted here to ramp up the fear and convince us silly Yanks that nuclear war was unsurvivable. To that end, they manipulated the data to make scary pictures, which well meaning masses dutifully grabbed up and ran with, force-multiplying the agents' work considerably. They did things like showing a "blast radius" from a dinky nuke, and one from a bigger nuke that was dramatically larger. They neglected to tell us the one from the dinky nuke was the 65 PSI radius (which extends for only a very short radius from the blast center), which can suck the lungs right out of your body, whereas the bigger one was at a far, far weaker 0.5 PSI for the big weapon, which might break half of the windows in a neighborhood and leave everything else intact, including the inhabitants.

They also tried to scare us by pointing out the "destructive effects" of bombs that didn't even exist, and leading us to believe that the enemy had nothing but those giant, but non-existent bombs. For example, the Russians tested the "Tsar Bomba", which they claimed was 100 MT. Actual measurements put it at only around 57 MT... but the agents gleefully informed us of the damage from a 100 MT bomb that "the Russians have", and implied that was ALL they had... when in reality only one was ever built, and it was expended in a test, which was so disappointing that another was never built.

Here's the facts, from actual physics.

The destructive radius of a given bomb goes up as the cube root of the yield, not in a linear manner. That's because the force expands in all directions, in 3D, not just one direction in the flat plane of a paper picture. In that case it would increase as the square root of the yield, because the area of a circle increases as 1/ pi* r^2 (only 2 dimensions), and the volume of an expanding sphere (i.e.  real nuclear blast) is 1/pi*r^3 (because it expands in 3 dimensions). Now, that's a lot of numbers, so to visualize it gut-wise, let's use the example of the 15 KT bomb vs. the 15,000 kt bomb (= 15 MT). 15,000 divided by 15 is a factor of 1000. You'd think it would reach 1000 times farther, right? Scary, huh?

But wait - the cube root of 1000 is just 10, not 1000 . the cube root of 1000>> 10*10*10 = 1000. So a given overpressure, let's use that scary 0.5 PSI that breaks windows, just so we can maximize the scary circle, would increase by 10, not 1000. If the Hiroshima bomb would break windows a mile away, the big bad bomb would break them 10 miles away, not nation-wide. Using the square root of the yield for a flat circle would extend the radius to 100 mile, 10*10, but it would also defy the laws of physics.

Oh, there's more. Because of the limiting effect of the cube root law, bigger bombs deliver less bang for their buck, and are not cost effective, so there aren't many of them left. They are just not militarily efficient. The vast majority of any nuclear arsenal, whether American or Russian, is composed of relatively bitty bombs. Most are "tactical nukes" AKA "battlefield nukes", with damage radii measured in yards. You don't want to toss nuclear artillery shells at an engaged enemy when you'll be vaporizing your own as well - that kinda defeats the purpose.

Of the strategic nukes, the bigger ones were dismantled first in favor of retaining the smaller, more efficient and cost effective ones. that's why most of our nuclear force is 100 kt or less.

But what about fallout? Death raining from above right down on you like dust. That's some scary shit, ain't it? Well, even producing any fallout at all is a trade off. Nuclear bombs have what is called an "optimal burst height". It has to be so far above the ground to achieve maximum damage radius that no fallout is produced at all, since the fireball has to actually contact the ground to vaporize a part of it, which is then sucked up into the fireball and irradiated. In simple terms, you can have fallout, or you can have a big damage radius, but you can't have both. You have to make a choice which one you want. In a "ground burst", where fallout is produced, the damage radius is smaller to begin with, and is made smaller still by obstructions like buildings and mountains absorbing all the energy of the blast wave front. It wears it down quicker, before it can reach even the max for a ground burst.

Optimal burst heights are computed for the desired blast damage radius - if it's too far up, that pressure never even reaches the ground.

The radiation in any fallout particles produced is another thing. it obeys the laws of 7, which are a function of "half life". For a sevenfold passage of time, the radiation is reduced by half. for another sevenfold passage, that half is halved, to 1/4 initial strength, and for another 7 fold passage of time, that quarter is halved to 1/8, and so on. In simple terms, what fallout may come rapidly loses it's punch.

Weather factors into fallout patterns as well. Faster wind spreads it farther, but since the same initial amount has to cover more area, it deposits it more weakly, because it's spread out more thinly. Rain washed it out of the air, creating "hot spots" where more is deposited, leaving less for the rest of the area it covers, making it even weaker there.

Don't get me wrong - nuclear war is a bad, bad, very bad thing. It's just not as bad as the scaremongers want you to believe for their own political ends, and is certainly not "unsurvivable".


.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.

Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’


#6
Dibs on pressing the launch button !!!!!!!  think time give vlad a visit an have few rounds of drinks .....  besides been awhile since chased cute russian girls .....
Better to reign in hell ....
  than serve in heaven .....



#7
The results of Hillarys uranium deal ends up in the Russian weapons used on the US.  Normally Treason is punished by the death penalty.  But the US is sophisticated and PC now...
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)