Correct.
Actually, no. Underground tests don't send out an EMP and unless the test is too shallow or the shaft isn't sealing properly, there won't be a radiation release. It might not even cause a subsidence crater depending on the geology of the area and/or the yield of the device.
The way you detect an underground test is by the waveform it creates. Underground nuclear tests create a very unique waveform which is different than any naturally occurring event. If this had been an underground test, it would already be known as seismographs around the world would have detected it.
I know. I wasn't referring to the radiation release of his statement being correct. Just that we would be able to detect the difference between a nuke test and an earthquake.
That's right.
The points I made to these others were the magnitude of two of them match the magnitudes we would expect from a nuke test by Iran (expected yield of 10 kiloton). I stated I assume these are earthquakes. You are correct--if sealed properly and a proper depth, there would be no radiation readings.
Until I learn differently, initial reprots from wire services come from the seismographs of research organizations, not the military. I am not sure if their initial readings show the signature of a nuke test, just the initial Richter magnitude. I assume the signature of a nuke test would be made from a more careful reading that would not come out of an initial report. If the signature of a nuke test can be read immediately from a reseach seismograph, that is news to me. It is possible, considering an earthquake can go on for 30 seconds or more and a nuke test should have a distinct jolt. We don't know the how many nukes and at what spacing interval. Pakistan claimed 5 nukes, but analysis believes two spaced .1 second apart. India did three detonations at the same time (or fractional seconds between them).