The effects of nuclear weapons. Credible nuclear deterrence, debunking "disarm or be annihilated". Realistic effects and credible nuclear weapon capabilities for deterring or stopping aggressive invasions and attacks which could escalate into major conventional or nuclear wars.

Wednesday, July 25, 2018

New data on the Hiroshima firestorm on fallout effects from Japanese researchers

First, the Hiroshima Study Group on Re-Construction of Local Fallout from A-Bomb in 1945, a team of Japanese researchers on nuclear weapon effects, has published a series of excellent reports online here:  Unlike the propaganda from Russian "anti-war" (anti-deterrence) politicians during the Cold War, this new research is scientific and objective.  They have studied the time dependent and geography dependent spread of the Hiroshima fire storm here:  As shown on page 4 of volume 2 of the multi-volume originally Secret classified American SBS report on Hiroshima, the firestorm was not instantly ignited over the entire area by the thermal flash, but mainly - especially at greater ranges - by the delayed effects from blast overturning paper screens on the charcoal stoves being used for cooking breakfast in wooden homes at 8:15am when the bomb exploded.  Examples of some of the time-sequence of Hiroshima firestorm development maps:

Hiroshima firestorm development in 2018 Japanese scientific database. Later tests proved that you can't even film the fireball when a 110 kiloton nuclear weapon is fired during a downpour and heavy cloud cover at Bikini Atoll on 7 April 1954 (Castle-Koon).

Hiroshima firestorm was caused by overturned charcoal braziers in (now obsolete) city centre wooden houses, having GREAT RELEVANCE to fears of collateral damage by fires and "nuclear winter" from firestorm soot to make nuclear deterrence credible today.

This myth still used in fake American assumptions which correlate the firestorm radius to thermal flash intensity, not with the blast pressure which overturned the indoor charcoal braziers in wooden homes!  The honest Japanese report proves how the firestorm developed over a period of hours, so Hiroshima was not "instantly vaporised by the thermal flash", contrary to populist mythology.  These honest Japanese reports also include a study of the fallout and neutron induced activity in Hiroshima, showing in Figure 7 how the rapid Hiroshima fallout dose rate decay reached the natural background radiation level in January 1946 in a location where 40 micro R/hr was measured on 6 October 1945 (the level at ground zero was about 100 micro R/hr - i.e. 10 times Hiroshima's natural background radiation, in October, according to Figure 9).

Hiroshima fallout radiation levels map and decay rate graph:  Again, this is relevant for 1 kiloton neutron bombs which could be detonated at a similar altitude (500-600 m) to Hiroshima and Nagasak, without significant fallout even if fires produce hydroscopic black rain afterwards (by the time the firestorm is producing black rain, most of the fallout in the mushroom cloud has been blown far downwind, out of firestorm area).  Trying to get TV documentary channels to debunk deliberately lying nuclear mythology is a thankless task, despite all the hard proof.

As shown in the previous post, U.S. Department of Energy (which incorporated the former U.S. Atomic Energy Commission) has declassified previously "Secret - Restricted Data" documents on Opennet which debunk popular mythology that persists today for political "anti-war" (actually pro-war appeasement) propaganda purposes by Marxist and pseudo-socialist dictatorships.  One of these is a review of some of the original mass media scare stories on radiation, within RAND Corp Administrative Report AR-563-DASA, classified originally "Secret - Restricted Data", in 1971 (PDF is on Opennet as document NV07547729), Appendix XIV, "Comments on the Sternglass Controversy" by Dr H. H. Mitchell:

Sternglass falsely assumed that the decrease in childhood mortality from TB and other infections, due to antibiotics, was a mathematical law of nature which would have continued forever, and he claims that this assumed fake law was interrupted by nuclear weapons testing as shown on his graph (above).  These complacent and dangerous assumptions which still undermine the nuclear deterrence of conventional war today, killing millions of people needlessly, are complete pseudo-science, but they are the way the more authority dogma driven "scientists" still operate in radiation effects propaganda studies, superstring theory, etc.  They assume their conclusions in advance and fiddle their "theory" to fit what they want to "show", deliberately in such a way the media will be more likely to report it on the front page (and not bother reporting a retraction on the front page when it fails).  They gain publicity.  If they write the facts, they are hated by media proponents of Marxism.

What's more interesting than the delusional "theory" that the decline in childhood mortality is a law of nature which asymptotically proves the crazy idea of 100% childhood mortality in the past and the idea of 0% in the future without any consideration for understanding WHY this equation should be there or how anyone exists if there were 100% childhood mortality in the past, is that the media was able to hype up the scare story, and then not hype up the repudiation.

Here is the real law of human nature: people are always left with the impression that the various scares are not really debunked.  It doesn't help that a good summary of how the errors are debunked is placed in a "Secret - Restricted Data" classified RAND Corp Administrative Report, either.  The government scientists who know the facts can usually be relied upon to keep important reports secret to the public, while they are leaked to foreign spies and known to enemies, so that only poor old Joe Public in the democracy is kept in ignorance of the essential data needed for democracy to function properly.  We have covered radiation scare mongering before in many posts such as here, here, here, here and here.

I've updated the previous post with the latest news of the Novichok delivery to the UK: victim Charlie Rowley, 45, who discovered the Novichok A234 disguised as a perfume bottle, and was poisoned by it, says he found it actually looking new and unopened in a 3 x 3 inch x 1/2 inch thick box, wrapped in a cellophane wrapper, containing a separate spray dispenser top which had to be inserted.  He accidentally spilled some of the oily, unscented liquid on his hand while inserting the spray top on the bottle, but he washed it off his hands and so received only a small, survivable dose (the oily liquid is only slowly absorbed through skin).  His partner Dawn Sturgess, 44, sprayed it on one wrist and then rubbed her wrists together, but did not wash it off.  She fell ill just 15 minutes later due to that lethal dose, which required so much atropine to counter muscular contraction that it led to lethal heart failure, despite artificial ventilation (Charlie took longer to fall ill, due to his smaller dose).  She died on 8 July.  If this was a "spare" unused Novichok poisoned "perfume" pack, then Russian assassin unit had more than one smuggled into the UK.

UPDATE: 3 August 2018 on Novichok perfume bottle location and fascism by Corbyn

It has been reported that Novichok victim Charley Rowley believes he found the discarded Russian assassin's Novichok perfume bottle pack that killed Dawn Sturgess in Salisbury in two industrial waste containers by The Cloisters Pub in the city centre, which have now been taken to the chemical and biological defence establishment at Porton for analysis and testing.  Normal bins are emptied weekly by the council, but industrial waste containers can be left to fill up for months before removal.  In other news, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, who alleged that Russia did not make the Novichok attack on Britain, has now released an Iranian TV interview video praising as his "brothers" the Hamas terrorists who murdered 600 innocent people.  Corbyn continues claiming that his support for the USSR and Warsaw Pact human rights abusers in the 1980s, Hamas, the IRA and other terrorists is in the name of peace or freedom of speech, but mainstream Jews have complained that he is a hater of the Jewish homeland of Israel and that his words are the opposite of his actions.  His disgusting CND lies on nuclear weapons and civil defence prevent peace and freedom of speech.

UPDATE: 5 August 2018 on Novichok assassination breakthrough

Police have discovered that the Novichok nerve agent used in a perfume spray bottle to spray the door handle of the home of Sergei and Yulia Skripal on Saturday 3 March 2018 may have been prepared in a toilet block in the Queen Elizabeth Gardens, Salisbury, where low level Novichok contamination has now been discovered.  A spare spray bottle discarded in containers near The Cloisters Pub contaminated Charlie Rowley and killed Dawn Sturgess on 8 July.  From these pin-pointed locations on a map, in relation to the Skripal's house, the police will be able to deduce the route taken by assassins, and then use this route for data reduction, to help focus attention on appropriate CCTV footage to identify the attackers.

UPDATE: 17 August 2018 on CND anti-nuclear Corbyn's continued fascist/racist agenda of rejecting IHRA definition of anti-Semitism

New Stateman's political editor, Patrick McGuire, "Labour adopting the full IHRA definition now looks like too little, too late", New Statesman, 16 August 2018:

"On anti-Semitism, Jeremy Corbyn looks set to snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat. Sources close to the Labour leader have briefed the Guardian – as they are increasingly wont to do at times like this – that the party could adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism after all. The change in tone is a pronounced one. The leader’s office and its allies are no longer claiming Labour is seeking to somehow “enhance” the IHRA definition. Instead, the rhetoric is more cautious. The leadership says it just wants to “make sure” that IHRA cannot stifle legitimate criticism of Israel. Gone is the implicit assumption that it precludes it. ... Many will say it is too little, too late. Add to that the increasing likelihood that Labour’s National Executive Committee would have voted for full IHRA in defiance of the leadership next month – Momentum’s Jon Lansman has said he would support it, as have several trades unions, as I wrote over the weekend – then the overwhelming feeling is that this is a tactical concession for the sake of political expediency. It’s far too late to be anything else. ... Adopting full IHRA would head off the immediate prospect of a Labour split, but the perception of institutional indifference on anti-Semitism would remain. And as the interminable row over Corbyn’s wreath underlines, the party’s problems are now much greater than definitions and examples."

Vice chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, current Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn and his anti-Israel fan base Momentum, is still battling against the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-Semitism.  As reported in previous two posts, Corbyn has falsely attacked civil defence and exaggerated nuclear collateral damage for political pro-war aims against the West, capitalism and Israel, and he is continuing to oppose adopting the IHRA anti-racism guidelines.  His idea is to instead issue Orwellian "doublethink" lies about "opposing racism in all its forms" while actually trying to start Race Wars, Class Wars, Religious Wars, etc for "divide and rule" (the old Marxist trade union agenda of trying to smash up capitalism with trade union strikes, strife, etc., in the hope of discrediting capitalism and getting a socialist or Marxist government into power).  Basically, Corbyn states that wars end by peace treaties so why not cut out the fighting, the expense of war, the deterrence of attacks, and the slaughter, and jump straight to the peace deal?

This is obviously what Chamberlain did on 30 September 1938, when he signed a peace deal with Hitler.  The problem with Corbyn/Chamberlain here is that you have not defeated, deterred or disarmed the aggressor, so they can simply do what they want and either lie about it (e.g. attack you with Novichok and then claim your complaints are unfounded and you really attacked yourself with Novichok), or say: "we had to change our plans, sorry".  So while Corbyn, like Chamberlain in 1938, shakes hands with terrorists in the name of "peace" we note that all his "peace work" is a load of bunk.  His efforts to get Britain out of Northern Ireland to end IRA bombings failed, and it was the SAS who disarmed the IRA in the early 1990s and drove their left wing political party Sinn Fein to the negotiating table for power sharing.  It was not Corbyn who did that.  Similarly, his support for Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists (calling both groups "brothers") comes close to Chamberlain's hand holding with Hitler in return for the fake promise of "peace in our time".

Virginia Blackburn, "The BBC's Today is shamed by this bias", Daily Express, 16 August 2018, page 14: "Transport Secretary Chris Grayling was invited on to talk about the hike in rail fares but, as soon as she possibly could, presenter Mishal Husain got the subject on to Boris and the burka. Grayling responded courteously ... that a rather larger area of concern was Jeremy Corbyn laying wreaths on the graves of terrorists. Husain, literally (listen to it) began to splutter.  Then she said that the Labour Party denied it, that Jeremy denied it and that she wasn't going to talk about it, launching back into Boris and the burka. Grayling, as well he might, brought up again the fact that the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition has been pictured holding a wreath at the monument to people who tortured and maimed athletes at the Munich Olympics before murdering them. And Husain literally (listen to it) cut him off, ended the interview and the mic was closed down.

"Today has been haemorrhaging listeners since the latest editor took over: 800,000 down since last year. And if it wants to understand why, that interview totally sums it up. Not only was the political bias about as blatant as it has ever been on the BBC, which is saying something, but the programme's emphasis was the complete opposite of what most of the listeners concerns' would be. Most people don't care about Boris and the burka (in fact polls show a majority agree with him) but the BBC chose instead to stifle debate about the fact that the Labour leader spent time with terrorists and murderers."

Now the fact is that Corbyn was photographed with a wreath at a cemetery containing a monument to murdering terrorists.  He also invited racist Raed Salah, who makes false claims about Jews drinking the blood of Christian children, to the House of Commons for tea.  Whenever criticised for trying to swing terrorists behind his Marxist cause, he reverts to Orwellian "big brother" propaganda tactics, of claiming he is trying to achieve the exact opposite of his actions.  ("War is peace, freedom is slavery...", you get the idea.)  Gullible and Marxist orientated "journalists" peddle the propaganda.

UPDATE 18 August 2018:

Anti-nuclear fake news propagandarist and Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has now been photographed in the media with another hate spewing insane terrorist "who attempted to blow up a cinema in Jerusalem". It's useful to document the fascist/terrorist associations of so-called "peace seeking" anti-nuclear propaganda lunatics.


At 4:57 am, Anonymous Ben Haas said...

Hi, Nige, I have another question concerning shockwave phenomena. Do you have an article that thoroughly explains the differences between overpressure, reflected pressure, and dynamic pressure/blast wind loading as they relate to damage to aboveground structures? The reason I'm confused is because I am under the impression that blast wind loading and reflected overpressures can be vastly higher than the overpressure data provided by most testing reports and sources outside your website. For example, often 25 psi overpressure is taken as a threshold for destruction of modern concrete buildings, but is that for 25 psi REFLECTED overpressure, or...? I don't know. I know there is generally a crossover point where dynamic pressure begins to exceed overpressure (I think around 70 psi?), but for buildings close to ground zero, I would like to have a methodology for calculating the dynamic pressure. For example, when reading about missile silo hardness, survivability is often related to overpressure alone, but is that reflected overpressure, dynamic pressure...?

I haven't been able to find a document that clearly explains how overpressure, reflected overpressure, and dynamic pressure are related to each other, and how they get related to structure survivability in terms of a single psi figure.

Let me know if I have laid out my question clearly enough! :) Keep up the great reporting!


Post a Comment

<< Home