Probably a mass fart from all the cabbage consumption.
I wouldn't count on it, I say load up the B-2's and F-117's with heavy weapons and take care of this little problem for good.
Not so much as a donkey fart here: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/10/125_40.php
There was a seismic event. Note, however, that it lasts for several minutes (nukes spike hard and then are over pretty fast, in comparison).
http://aslwww.cr.usgs.gov/Seismic_Data/telemetry_data/INCN_24hr.html
Also, NK claims they did it at 10:36.
It would be pretty easy to tell. A nuke test is very obvious on a seismograph.
actually that was my first thought....
but it is a nice break from "Pin the scandal on the Gay" week.......
The 400kt is wrong. That's not a number one could even imagine getting with the first nuke test in one's program. Either the administration official made a mistake to FOX or it's pro-US spin.
Also, military officials wouldn't even be saying that it was a nuke test if they didn't know that it was a nuke test. Again, the seismograph is very characteristic. The USGS has record of a 3.5 from NK. (Not up on the website yet, and according to some here, it may never be.) I'm sure our officials have already analyzed that, as well as other information, to come to the conclusion that NK did conduct a legitimate and successful nuke test.
This does not mean they are anywhere near capable of putting a nuclear warhead on any of their missiles. That said, it's still an important event in the fact that such a device can be put on a ship, taken to a port, and detonated in a major population center.
You know if Iranian "observers" were present for the 4th of July missile tests, they were also around for this. The above scenario is not something I would put past either NK or Iran.
"a 5kt poof?"
Let's not drag Bawney into this.
The idea they would fake a nuke test frankly is preposterous.
Not even Kim would stoop to that.
If they say they did it, they did it.
come on.
Yes according to nancy pelosi, but Folye case is NOT!!!
Well, let's see now. Hiroshima was 15 kt and Nagasaki was 21kt and someone says 400 kt. I don't think so. I'm not yet convinced it was real although we'll know soon enough.
What is it that they are wanting? I don't see what they gain from this if it is true. What am I missing?
It's hugh!!
I'm series!
No this was not a fake. As reported elsewhere, the bomb was provided through the office of karl rove (sshhh). He could ill afford a phoney explosion being exposed--so it was the real thing.
It was probably a very small nuke because they only have a limited supply of plutonium. They wouldn't want to use half of it up on one test.
IBTRYMBP!!!!!
Just some data points for comparison:
The major conventional explosion on board the Russian submarine Kursk back in 2000 measured a 4.2 http://geology.about.com/library/weekly/aa012801a.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/01/010122094229.htm
Likewise, a 4.0 is about what the sonic boom from the Space Shuttle's re-entry makes: http://www.ig.utexas.edu/outreach/cataclysms/earthquakes/key/AnswerEq3.pdf
Here's a natural gas explosion seismogram for comparison: http://dutchman.nmt.edu/Geop/Pipeline/pipeline.html