My Analysis is Complete: Beirut Explosion was approx 10 Kilotons

Amazing. Keep up the good work.

thanks. I'm not an expert but know a little about explosives
and was quite skeptical that 2700 tons could detonate in
such a homogeneous fashion. There's air gaps and erratic
distances between bags, etc. It would most likely have
been a set of smaller explosions, one after another.

.

Amazing. Keep up the good work.

This military manual says that a surface explosion of 1 kiloton of TNT in wet sand (softest scenario) should be about 450 ft in diameter.

The Beirut crater is about 420 ft in diameter.

Considering the 2700 tons of ammonium nitrate and the ratio of something like .4 to 1 for an vs. tnt... this sounds about right.


Thread: Crater dimensions for 1-kt TNT or nuclear In wet sand soil type



[link to ibb.co (secure)]


[link to apps.dtic.mil (secure)]

You'd also need a fuel source - hence why diesel or kerosene.

How about a missile?

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that obviously fake videos were quick.y release, where you could see an obviously fake missile. It was done to discredit the videos showing the real missile.

lol do you know how a nuke works? shoe box? you need a huge amount of control to detonate it and that is large.

Before I detail my conclusion, I will explain some facts regarding Ammonium Nitrate.

Ammonium nitrate(AN) does not burn on its own. Instead, it acts as a source of oxygen that can accelerate the combustion (buring) of other materials. For combustion to occur, oxygen must be present. Ammonium nitrate prills (industrial term synonymous with pellets) provide a much more concentrated supply of oxygen than the air around us. This is why it is effective in mining explosives, where it's mixed with oil and other fuels.

Those bags of AN prills sitting in the Beirut warehouse could not have been mixed with any kind of fuel because the ratio required for an explosive is 94 parts AN and six parts fuel and it needs to be mixed quite thoroughly and homogeneously in order to maximize the explosion.

It's relatively difficult for a fire to trigger an ammonium nitrate explosion. The fire would need to be sustained and confined within the same area as the ammonium nitrate prills.

Also, the prills themselves are not fuel for the fire, so they would need to be contaminated with, or packaged in, some other combustible material.

What some shills have suggested here on GLP is that ammonium nitrate by ITSELF can chemically decompose, which releases the oxygen molecules bound up in the little pellets...this is true, and this release is very energetic...and, under the right circumstances, can be something like an "explosion"...in the same way you can use ordinary compressed air to "blow up" your bicycle tire if you insist on putting 100 psi into it.

But this is NOT an explosion...an explosion means that a fuel BURNS...there must be COMBUSTION. AN by itself cannot burn.

BUT if you take some AN and pack it into a SEALED container like a pipe, and then heat it up until the material starts decomposing, the release of the oxygen gas inside will cause a massive increase in pressure until the pipe bursts...just like the bicycle tire…

Obviously there was no huge pipe in that Beirut warehouse for the AN to be packed into and then heated with the world's biggest blowtorch until the thing exploded.

There was also no mixing of all those hundreds of tons of AN bags with any kind of fuel in order to create a HOMOGENOUS combustible mixture…

These are the basic PHYSICAL FACTS.

Satellite photos online show the devastation for several kilometers from the blast center.

Buildings have simply been flattened for literally many hundreds of meters in every direction...that requires a HUGE explosion...in fact even if that entire 3,000 tons of AN was professionally mixed with fuel to make a bomb, it would not be nearly powerful enough to cause the damage seen.

I will link to a blast calculator on the UN website where anyone can enter one million or two million or whatever amount of TNT and see immediately how far that kind of blast will cause a destructive OVERPRESSURE:

[link to www.un.org (secure)]

Also, I will link to a FEMA publication that on page 4-19 has an important Explosive Blast Damage Approximation Chart, which gives estimates of damage relative to destructive overpressure calculated from the UN Blast Calculator: [link to www.fema.gov (secure)]

From the photos of the devastation, combined with the blast calculator info, it is clear that the explosion was absolutely huge. By increasing the amount of high explosives in that blast calculator we can see how far such a massive bomb would wreak building damage

When I enter 10 million kg of TNT into the Blast Calculator, we see that at a distance [range] of 1000 meters [1 km, about two thirds of a mile] we have about 50 kilopascals of incident pressure, which is about 7 psi...just enough to knock down buildings (according to the FEMA Chart I linked to above.

It's pretty obvious from the pictures that the explosion was even bigger than that...the sat photo shows buildings RAZED to the ground for many hundreds of meters.

How big was the bomb then?

The ten million kg of TNT we entered above is 10 kilotons. Hiroshima was 12 to 15 kilotons.

Lebanon port explosion,
Looks like a MOAB bomb but using something more explosive, the MOAB releases a large quantity of propane gas that forms a shell of gas then smaller explosions set off the propane cloud.

that's right. i said "the size of a shoe-box".

I'm not privy to any classified info, but it's pretty obvious that the nuclear powers have been working on trying to create pure fusion or near pure fusion devices for the last 70 years. If they did perfect such a thing, they'd never tell if they could help it. There is no hard lower limit on size for a fusion device like there is for fission devices, so small tactical units are a possibility. The radiation signatures would be minimal and mostly prompt radiation without residual. No lingering crap as fallout.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure this out. I'm not convinced that the blast was nuclear, but I do think it's a likely possibility. Those that wanted Lebanon out of the game are most likely to have the means.

You'd also need a fuel source - hence why diesel or kerosene.

that white bubble (shock wave?) is interesting.
i've never see that before.

No way is 10 kilotons.

The death count is too low for that.

And look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Flattened to nothing for like miles...

that's right. i said "the size of a shoe-box".

Well, they're lying when they say it was ammonium nitrate, which would have left a whitish grey mushroom cloud and not a rust red one.

I think the fertilizer was used as a plausible explanation where the the government could be blamed, and the target was destabalising Lebanon and destroying a large portion of thier food stores.



. I wonder who did it?

"On April 17, 2013, an ammonium nitrate explosion occurred at the West Fertilizer Company storage and distribution facility in West, Texas, eighteen miles (29 km) north of Waco, while emergency services personnel were responding to a fire at the facility.[7] Fifteen people were killed, more than 160 were injured, and more than 150 buildings were damaged or destroyed. Investigators confirmed that ammonium nitrate was the material that exploded."

None of that was mixed with fuel oil.

"On September 21, 2001, an explosion occurred at the AZF (French initialism for AZote Fertilisant, i.e. nitrogen fertiliser) fertiliser factory in Toulouse, France, belonging to the Grande Paroisse branch of the Total group."

"Three hundred tonnes of ammonium nitrate was stored (the maximum capacity was 2,000 tonnes) in hangar #221. The entire factory was destroyed, making a crater with a depth of about 7 metres (23 ft) and a diameter of 40 metres (130 ft). Steel girders were found 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) away from the explosion. The blast measured 3.4 on the Richter scale, with an estimated power equivalent to 20-40 tons of TNT"

No fuel oil mixed either.

Maybe you should have said cannonball sized. We had that nearly 70 years ago...

Bet we have nukes that use plutonium (better than plutonium likely) the size of a BB. Micro nukes that could fit on a very small drone, or better.

70 years ago we had stuff that would shock this guy. This guy and his kind are the reason we have to live in fairytale land, with suppressed technologies that if released would usher in a new Golden age of humanity. He'd rather the NWO globalist put on a sick show for him, one where the majority of the world population is murdered so our rulers can roll out new tech while remaining in complete control.

Tech is knowledge, and knowledge is freedom.

Have you ever actually seen photos of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki devastation, and if so, you’re telling me this incident was within that range, sans a few kilotons? Please. I think your calculator is broken.

if it were a nuke, with a cloud that size,
i'ld say more like 2.5kt (2,500 tons of TNT equivalent).

and, even at that, you're still missing the unmistakable
signature of a Nuke: the momentary blinding flash of white light. (no matter how small the nuke)

I'm not privy to any classified info, but it's pretty obvious that the nuclear powers have been working on trying to create pure fusion or near pure fusion devices for the last 70 years. If they did perfect such a thing, they'd never tell if they could help it. There is no hard lower limit on size for a fusion device like there is for fission devices, so small tactical units are a possibility. The radiation signatures would be minimal and mostly prompt radiation without residual. No lingering crap as fallout.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure this out. I'm not convinced that the blast was nuclear, but I do think it's a likely possibility. Those that wanted Lebanon out of the game are most likely to have the means.

Why isn't anyone mentioning Netanyahu's Speech to the United Nations in 2018 where he pointed out the exact blast site on a map saying this is worth a thousand missiles.