Posted on 01/29/2013 1:35:14 PM PST by TXnMA
Reports of an explosion at Iran's Fordow nuclear facility have surfaced and are being both confirmed and denied by multiple sources.
The Jerusalem Post cites a report by Reza Kahlili that says: “The blast shook facilities within a radius of three miles. Security forces have enforced a no-traffic radius of 15 miles, and the Tehran- Qom highway was shut down for several hours after the blast.” Kahlili's report says the Fordow nuclear facility was severely damaged in an explosion and up to 240 workers trapped inside. The explosion was reportedly confined to the plant, suggesting that if it were an airstrike, it was highly localized. But this possibility is no more or less likely than sabotage, or an accident, assuming the explosion occurred at all.
>SNIP<
Iran's official news agency, says the same thing, with the IRNA, promptly denying the explosion, claiming the news was simply the result of the Western media-fueled "propoganda machine." That might have ended the story there, but The Times of London's Israel correspondent Sheera Frenkel is confirming the incident through her own independent sources: An explosion is believed to have damaged Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility, which is being used to enrich uranium, Israeli intelligence officials have told The Times. Sources in Tel Aviv said yesterday that they thought the explosion happened last week. The Israeli Government is investigating reports that it led to extensive structural damage and 200 workers had been trapped inside. One Israeli official said: “We are still in the preliminary stages of understanding what happened and how significant it is.” He did not know, he added, if the explosion was “sabotage or accident”, and refused to comment on reports that Israeli aircraft were seen near the facility at the time of the explosion.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
And deeper, too.
If it were not so deep, the waves could have traveled further.
Maybe the depth reading is incorrect?
-PJ
Bad reading?
If it weren't really so deep, could those waves have been traveling further than reported?
-PJ
No difference between the two images?
The sole difference I see is that it looks as if someone dumped soot all around the north entrances...
Nor do I...
Comparison of the before and after images in #45 shows no change in terrain topography that I could detect.
The sole difference I see is the change in albedo in the area surrounding the north entrances — as if someone blew soot on the whole area.
Do you have a link to the report of explosions in the roof lighting fixtures?
Time will tell...
Thanks! Still no confirmation that the “after” image is authentic evidence of a post-explosion condition, though...
IF it WAS a significant explosion, I would expect that, rather than a single high amplitude, sharp impulse, high VOD explosion like a penetrator bomb, big IED or a nuke, it was small "trigger" explosion(s) that set off something(s) already inside the facility, like you mention.
Instead of the sharp P-wave seismic impulse expected from a high-VOD explosion, I would expect a flame front that spread rapidly through the facility, overpressured it, and vented through the reverse-pressured blast door seals with a prolonged, "Whoosh!" that ejected a cloud of dark ejecta (heavy "soot") onto the surrounding surface. [Blast door seals are designed to keep high pressure OUT, rather than to keep it IN...]
That "flame front" would have produced a low-amplitude, long period seismic signal like a Rayliegh wave -- which would not look like an explosive "event" to short-period seismographs.
DBM no comment....
Must not fit the ozero/axelrod political meme
Why would the darkened area have such a distinct edge? It’s like the ejecta is distributed evenly within the coverage area, then falls off quickly at its outer extent. Assuming the ejecta is powdery sooty stuff, I would expect a more gradual tapering off as it billowed out and settled around the area. Also, wouldn’t there have been a “nozzling” effect if the ejecta had been blown out of the tunnels with any force, and wouldn’t we see some sign of that near the tunnel entrances? Other than the north tunnels being near the center of the darkened area, I don’t see any signs that they were the source of it. I’d be more inclined to go with the cloud shadow theory except that there’s no cloud in the pic. So I don’t know, kind of puzzling.
looks like somebody used Burn tool in photoshop to darken it up. is doesn’t look like additional substance on the ground, it’s simply darker.
none of the roads or structures above ground seem to have been effected
“You must be part of the “vast right wing conspiracy”.
I see a 5.1 on the 25th and a 5.4 on the 12th. Both are near enough and with a reported depth of 10 km. I see nothing listed on Earthquaketrack.com.
I agree.
I use "Canvas", which works with both vector and bitmapped graphics seamlessly -- and can apply bitmap filters to vector objects. I've gotten close to the effect with:
The big problem is that all of the transparency/transfer modes tend to intensify the background color, instead of desaturating (obscuring) it as seen in the original.
"Airbrush" tool could probably replicate the effect, but I prefer to stick to processes with mathematically precise controls for analysis work...
Photoshop users would probably convert RGB to CMYK, and then do "chops" (channel operations) on the K (black) channel. I'll play with that if I feel it's worth further effort.
Yardstick listed most of my serious objections -- specifically, no defined venting source(s) with a "nozzling" effect. (I would expect any air vents to be surrounded by a "black as coal" deposit.)
BTW & FWIW, re the limited and sharply defined (low lying) deposit area: I would expect high molecular weight (uranium containing) "soot" to fall out much closer (vertically and horizontally) to the source than would ordinary carbon soot...
Oh, well, until Google or some other public source releases an overflight AFTER the supposed event date, those of us who are limited to public OHI sources have gone about as far as we can go...
~~~~~~~~~
Understand. I read your feedback in #96. I simply echoed similar thoughts.
Good job of analyzing a photoshopped photo. lol armchair investigator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.