PDA

View Full Version : Huge Bomb Test in Nevada!

Snow Wolf
04-23-2006, 02:35 PM
Scheduled for June 2nd at the Nevada Test Site. A 700 ton Amonium Nitrate-diesel fuel bomb will be detonated sending up a mushroom cloud of dust. Simulating a nuclear bunker buster bomb...getting ready for Iran I suppose.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/30/AR2006033001735.html
kelly
04-23-2006, 04:44 PM
Why do they test blow stuff up. That's just silly.
alexwithad3
04-23-2006, 04:47 PM
Thats stupid, something like Godzilla or The Hills Have Eyes will happen to the things living in that area that we dont know about
:\
ohwell makes good movies :P
kelly
04-23-2006, 04:49 PM
Yeah... I guess we'd better prepare for giant scorpions or snakes...
username? tim?
10-02-2006, 11:16 AM
lol i don't know about you guys but i can't take anything seriously from a site that ends in .com and tries to sell me dvd's
Mighty Sasquatch
10-21-2006, 07:11 AM
lol i don't know about you guys but i can't take anything seriously from a site that ends in .com and tries to sell me dvd's

uhm... its the washington post... a newspaper... something tells me this might be news. Even though is an Amonium Nitrate radioactive? I don't feel like looking it up, because if its not then big whoop, its just a really big bomb.
DragonUSMC
10-21-2006, 03:28 PM
Ammonium Nitrate is Cow sheit... Its a furtilizer, so no its not radioactive.
NCC-1701
10-22-2006, 01:15 PM
No it was never suggested it was nuclear. It is believed to be a simulated nuclear test of a "bunker buster nuke" I don`t think this thing went off; from what I gather the Governors of Nevada and Utah went apesh!t and raised enough hell to block it. The concern was, that while the bomb itself was not nuclear, it would put hundreds of tons of low level radioactive dust into the atmosphere because it was to be conducted at the contaminated Nevada Test site....it would have been basically a "dirty bomb" low yeild and all, but the people in Utah where this sh!t would drift were`nt too excited about it either.
djstealth
10-25-2006, 04:20 PM
Ammonium Nitrate is Cow sheit... Its a furtilizer, so no its not radioactive.

A SH IT BOMB!!!!!

WE ARE ALL GONNA DIIIIIIEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!........ IIIIIIEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mighty Sasquatch
10-30-2006, 01:32 PM
So what is the big obseesion with bombs the US has? Now they are just finding new ways to make them - heres an idea, instead of makin a cow shet bomb, make a car that runs off it to help save the fuc*in planet, not blow it up.
DragonUSMC
10-30-2006, 01:44 PM
^there was a whole thread on development of different powered transportation.

And the development of more strategic bombs and other weapons help reduce the loss of civilian and other collateral damage while conducting an air strike. Seeing this is what thousands of people scream and yell about, I figure it would be something that people wouldn’t protest. Obviously I was incorrect.
cynicalRider
10-30-2006, 01:48 PM
What do you think was in the first wtc bombing? somethin rather similar. But this seems like it would be a smaller design and bigger boom.
DragonUSMC
10-30-2006, 02:45 PM
^it was a 1500lbs carbamide nitrate bomb... similar effects, much different substance. That substance is much closer to a "clean" bomb such as plastique and other maulable explosive.
cynicalRider
10-30-2006, 03:40 PM
ah i see. yeh that was like in a truck or something right? this has to be made to be small haha all i know about explosives is what i learned in chem
Mighty Sasquatch
11-01-2006, 02:11 PM
^there was a whole thread on development of different powered transportation.

And the development of more strategic bombs and other weapons help reduce the loss of civilian and other collateral damage while conducting an air strike. Seeing this is what thousands of people scream and yell about, I figure it would be something that people wouldn’t protest. Obviously I was incorrect.

I suppose that i am not against making a more human bomb, however the funding that goes into the military VS clean power in the US in dramatially lower then in many european countrys. It really gets me pissed off when our current govermental adminstration worries more about small terrorist groups and making pre-emptive strikes, more then depleting the the earths natural resources.
DragonUSMC
11-01-2006, 02:59 PM
I suppose that i am not against making a more human bomb, however the funding that goes into the military VS clean power in the US in dramatially lower then in many european countrys. It really gets me pissed off when our current govermental adminstration worries more about small terrorist groups and making pre-emptive strikes, more then depleting the the earths natural resources.

Just like stem cell research, different sources of fuels... it’s not the government doing the research. Usually its private organization. But I agree. funding should be spent differently, but because of the war more monies is pushed that way because obviously the deaths of innocents is something that is important and what ever changes that can be made in armament to help that is a good thing.

I would love to see more development in alternative fuels... the problem is the general public still is guzzling gas. Until they REFUSE to use this inelastic product then the push for such development will remain stagnant.

Yeah, kinda off topic... I know, I’m sorry =(
Mighty Sasquatch
11-01-2006, 04:15 PM
Just like stem cell research, different sources of fuels... it’s not the government doing the research. Usually its private organization. But I agree. funding should be spent differently, but because of the war more monies is pushed that way because obviously the deaths of innocents is something that is important and what ever changes that can be made in armament to help that is a good thing.

I would love to see more development in alternative fuels... the problem is the general public still is guzzling gas. Until they REFUSE to use this inelastic product then the push for such development will remain stagnant.

Yeah, kinda off topic... I know, I’m sorry =(

The topic is getting off... but the funding has been this way for longer then the war here on terror... and its not all the governments fault for the fuel useage by all means, at the cape here in mass the 'rich' people are sayin no to a windfarm that would power the entire town and more just because they think that it would be an eyesore, some even put up the BS argument that birds get caught in the blades.
snwbrder3384
11-09-2006, 05:27 PM
not sure if its true or not. but i have heard those wind machines cost more to maintain then they are acually worth.
DragonUSMC
11-09-2006, 06:21 PM
^i'm sure the maintanence on them is costly, but then again Nuclear plants produce huge amounts of energy with a tiny bit of substance, but then again you get the waste on top of that.

So its kinda pick the lesser of two evils...
djstealth
11-09-2006, 07:38 PM
well, I say stay with the nuclear plants and send the nuclear waste into space, I mean we are sending missions to mars that may benefit us in the future why not send the nuclear waste that is affecting us now and will eventually kills us all at the rate is being produced and spilled into space
DragonUSMC
11-09-2006, 07:59 PM
^i kinda have always thought that was a good idea... I mean i KNOW there is more nasty stuff out in space then anything we can produce. it will all freeze and shatter into black holes and stuff...

Honestly it almost seems the smartest thing to do... its not a good choice but do we really have any good choices?
djstealth
11-10-2006, 04:29 PM
why is it not a good choice?
DragonUSMC
11-10-2006, 10:45 PM
^i dont know i guess it's because i feel like we should find a sloution to our massive waste problem rather then find a new dumping spot... but i mean space is pretty big so i've heard so it would probably take us a long time to fill it up =P **** why not shoot trash bins at the sun? it's like a free incinerator! =D
RideTilIDie
11-12-2006, 06:22 PM
*gets a chill*



*Puts gloves on to prepare for nuclear winter*
soxfan2446
11-12-2006, 06:52 PM
Yea there blowing up ground up cow ****t.
ftblplyr46
11-12-2006, 07:42 PM
Maybe, if we send nuclear waste into space, itll create a new lifeform somewhere and then they invade us and wipe us out...?
NCC-1701
11-13-2006, 05:14 PM
Anybody remember the TV show Space 1999? in the show we used the moon as a nuclear or as Bush calls it, 'Nook-you-lar" waste storage dump. It all blew up and sent the moon out of its orbit hurtling through space....I loved that silly show! It was so.............70`s
THeJoNMAN
11-13-2006, 05:16 PM
mayebe the hills have eyes type of thingl happen
djstealth
11-16-2006, 03:39 PM
in the moon?

and that idea of sending nuclear waste, ex gfs and bad politicians to the sun seems the best idea I have heard since sliced bread
DragonUSMC
11-16-2006, 03:56 PM
^oh sheit... i didnt know we could launch politicians and ex-gf's into the sun!?!!

Damn man, where do i sign up?!
djstealth
11-16-2006, 04:31 PM
right here my friend right here (points to some sign up list)...

they also accept dog poop, emo people and crazy bosses
DragonUSMC
11-16-2006, 04:46 PM
^oh man... do they offer a "group discount"? cause i've got a LONG list... =/
djstealth
11-16-2006, 05:38 PM
lol I guess in that case we are gonna have to fill up separate forms my friend.... btw do you have an extra pen cause mine is most likely gonna run outta ink
DragonUSMC
11-16-2006, 05:52 PM
If i have to man... I'll write it in my own blood... call the blood center, cause i'm going to need a transfusion.