If it was Nuclear. The Ukrainians, not to mention the Europeans would have started screeching about it.
Large amounts of conventional munitions going off, chemicals igniting, or a power station exploding. Can give off a flash and Mushroom cloud.
People in the West got way to use to blowing the shit outta 3rd World Militias where their most advanced equipment is a Rusting T-55, a beat to shit DSHK ducktaped to the back of a spray painted Toyota Hilux and some Ancient AKs and RPGs.
So we’ve forgotten what conventional styled warfare looks and sounds like. And what it looks like when your enemy can blow up your ammunition dumps and infrastructure just as easily as you can hit theirs.
Them I don't recall seeing. But the Beirut blast was an authentic "Oh, my God! How do I duck and cover?" reaction sitting at my computer. Huge silent detonation, and then the blast wave sweeping over the city to the POV location. Then a localized earthquake. 2.75 kilotons of ammonium nitrate, so it had nuclear-level blast effects. (MOAB had a little over 9 tons of H-6 explosive.)
Citizen Free Press linked to this video saying it was part of Russia's retaliation on Ukraine. As you can see, this is not true as the video is older.
But given that there's over 50 comments and a decent amount of discourse and down votes, which I think is a positive thing, I'm going to leave it up. Learn how to downvote: set community styling to off and come back and tell us what you think.
The lack of white pixelation on the video suggest this was non-nuclear.
Although upon further research I found out that the app that allows you to "see" ionizing radiation such as neutrons with your cell phone's camera is no good on Apple iPhones anymore because Apple tweaked the software to eradicate the (radiation telltale) white speckling that is seen on any Nuke explosion video taken with a digital camera because the ionizing radiation overloads the digital image sensor.
I did a post on this phenomenon to show you guys The indicators of whether an explosion you're looking at on video is producing ionizing radiation (nuclear). You will not, I repeat, WILL NOT understand the following post unless you look at the brief sauce provided. https://greatawakening.win/p/19957ciQar/important-for-anons-to-know-mult/
Neutrons are not a form of ionizing radiation at all. In order to be such, a particle must be charged (alpha or beta particles) or a photon must have greater than ionization energy (gamma rays). Neutrons are deadly through their direct impact with the nuclei of elements in molecules in our body.
The Wikipedia article errs in forgetting that the detonation of a neutron bomb produces the particles and gamma rays (ionizing) IN ADDITION to the neutrons (not ionizing). It is still a nuclear detonation. This is an illustration of the principle not to get your nuclear bomb physics from Wikipedia. I have read Glasstone & Dolan's "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons," and digested several textbooks on nuclear engineering. I do know what I am talking about (and you do not).
Semantics, retard. If you really were a scientist you would know that as a rule of thumb: whenever you fuck with things on the atomic level it releases some amount alpha/beta/gamma (there is no such thing as "being impacted with neutrons" and no radiation being released) in the case of nukes (creating a situation of over a million atmospheres of pressure and over a million degrees of heat on the refined uranium (isotope 235) or plutonium) you are going do it in a VERY big way and that is regardless of if its fusion or fission. Admit it: You're just a shill using IA or copy paste on things you only have a rudimentary academic knowledge of. Why don't you go edit Wikipedia if you know better....OH, that's right, because you are probably already one of the many shills that has been eroding its accuracy for years. (The quality of their articles actually used to be better than Britannica about 16 or so years ago.)
Being "impacted with neutrons" is the whole process of nuclear fission, as well as nuclear transformation. Fission reactions release other radiation---but that does not alter the fact that NEUTRONS are not "ionizing" radiation. You must not know what that means. The damage to human tissue comes from the neutron slamming into a nucleus and dislodging the atom from the molecule it is in. A nucleus must have an absorption spectrum compatible with the neutron energy in order for transmutation to take place. (Just for information, there are some fusion reactions that do not produce neutrons, though we have not reduced these to practice.)
I've mentioned my academic and research background, and you seem to know only Wikipedia. You were not able to identify the error in its description of neutron radiation. I had a Critical Nuclear Weapon Design Information (CNWDI) clearance during my tenure at Boeing. I was on track for a Q clearance, but the purpose behind it went away, so it didn't happen. It is amusing to me that I am the one who has read the basic texts on the subject and you are the one relying on Wikipedia.
In Vietnam we were using WWII munitions that consisted of 20,000lb pounds dropped out of the ass-end of a C-130 and they do make clouds EXACTLY as this. So, this was a GOOD SIZE CONVENTIONAL Munition that was dropped!!!!!!!!
Nah. The FAB 3k vid you linked had a small fire explosion. The x vid was a large fire plume blasting outward. The flame itself was growing. Totally different
Naw. It's just a tit-for-tat bombing against Ukraine. If it were a nuke then ALL of the nightly news shows would be sending reporters over there to report on it. Since the scene looked kinda cloudy I suspect what you saw was some sort of ionization of a low hanging cloud. Sorry to be a naysayer but I don't think Putin would want that type of escalation.
There is a 9 second delay between the flash of the explosion and the sound of the shock wave (light moves faster than sound). That would place the explosion approx. 9 miles from the videographer. That is a big damn explosion at 2 miles away but colossal if you consider it may have been up to 9 miles out.
Any nuke would have been easily detected by neighboring countries, and it would be known. I know that FAEs (Fuel Air Explosives) will make a similar spherical flaming ball and cause traumatic damage, but they are not nuclear.
A thermobaric weapon—also called a fuel-air explosive (FAE) or vacuum bomb—is a type of conventional (non-nuclear) explosive that uses atmospheric oxygen to produce an extremely high-temperature, long-duration blast. Its destructive power comes not from radioactive material, but from its ability to saturate an area with fuel vapor and then ignite it, creating a massive overpressure and thermal wave.
🔧 How It Works
Dispersal Phase:
The bomb releases a cloud of flammable fuel (usually a fine aerosol of hydrocarbons or metal particles) over a wide area.
Ignition Phase:
After a short delay, a second charge ignites the cloud, producing a fireball and massive shockwave.
Vacuum Effect:
As the fireball consumes the oxygen in the air, a vacuum is created, causing powerful inward suction that can collapse lungs, buildings, and bunkers.
💥 Effects and Capabilities
Higher temperatures than traditional explosives (can exceed 3,000°F or 1,650°C).
Longer blast duration: Causes more internal injuries than traditional explosives (especially to lungs, eardrums, and internal organs).
Can flatten buildings, clear caves, or destroy bunkers.
Leaves no radiation or fallout (it’s not nuclear).
Often used in:
Urban warfare
Bunker busting
Cave clearing (e.g., Afghanistan)
Fuel-air bombs in cluster munitions
🔬 Example: Russian ODAB-500 or TOS-1A
Russia is known for fielding thermobaric weapons, including the TOS-1A "Buratino", a multiple rocket launcher system that can devastate several city blocks in seconds.
The U.S. used similar devices in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan (BLU-118/B was a bunker-busting thermobaric bomb).
✅ Summary
A thermobaric weapon is a powerful, non-nuclear explosive that creates a devastating blast using fuel and atmospheric oxygen. Its signature effect is a high-temperature fireball followed by a shockwave and vacuum, capable of destroying structures and incapacitating enemies in enclosed spaces—without radioactive fallout.
So I get why people might think it's a low yield nuke, but:
politically it would be a nonstarter as all of NATO would be chomping at the bit to invade Russia over that
no emp effects at 2 miles is unlikely for a low yield nuclear weapon, given that even ground detonation have a probability to affect devices at that distance
conventional weapons can create large scale explosions like this depending on the target
a modern "low yield nuke" isn't small fry either. It's not like a game of command and conquer. Low yield is in comparison to strategic nukes, and isn't a classification that is universal.
Some years ago a warehouse exploded that engulfed the town or city idk. It was fertilizer or something thing else. Big explosions dont always have to be nukes. Sometimes it's regular shit, and sometimes is Whoopi dropping a gass cloud
Well Ukraine what’d you expect? FAFO when you took 15% of their bombers out. Left them in a difficult position and right now you’re the closest antagonist.
If it was Nuclear. The Ukrainians, not to mention the Europeans would have started screeching about it.
Large amounts of conventional munitions going off, chemicals igniting, or a power station exploding. Can give off a flash and Mushroom cloud.
People in the West got way to use to blowing the shit outta 3rd World Militias where their most advanced equipment is a Rusting T-55, a beat to shit DSHK ducktaped to the back of a spray painted Toyota Hilux and some Ancient AKs and RPGs.
So we’ve forgotten what conventional styled warfare looks and sounds like. And what it looks like when your enemy can blow up your ammunition dumps and infrastructure just as easily as you can hit theirs.
Exactly. Remember the detonation of the ammonium nitrate in the harbor of Beirut?
Or the MOABs in the Gulf War?
Them I don't recall seeing. But the Beirut blast was an authentic "Oh, my God! How do I duck and cover?" reaction sitting at my computer. Huge silent detonation, and then the blast wave sweeping over the city to the POV location. Then a localized earthquake. 2.75 kilotons of ammonium nitrate, so it had nuclear-level blast effects. (MOAB had a little over 9 tons of H-6 explosive.)
Building 7 is no more!
And it’s nuclear and his iPhones still recording (and able to post/upload? ? Is that even possible?
Wouldn’t internet and/or an EMp equivalent from a nuke?
Not nuclear. No distinctive flash. No immediate rising cloud. No strong blast wave.
Citizen Free Press linked to this video saying it was part of Russia's retaliation on Ukraine. As you can see, this is not true as the video is older.
But given that there's over 50 comments and a decent amount of discourse and down votes, which I think is a positive thing, I'm going to leave it up. Learn how to downvote: set community styling to off and come back and tell us what you think.
The lack of white pixelation on the video suggest this was non-nuclear.
Although upon further research I found out that the app that allows you to "see" ionizing radiation such as neutrons with your cell phone's camera is no good on Apple iPhones anymore because Apple tweaked the software to eradicate the (radiation telltale) white speckling that is seen on any Nuke explosion video taken with a digital camera because the ionizing radiation overloads the digital image sensor.
Size and power is absolutely incredible... https://files.catbox.moe/mo6xln.jpeg
https://files.catbox.moe/kx8k27.jpeg
https://files.catbox.moe/kqge2l.jpeg
https://files.catbox.moe/t8j9a9.jpeg
https://files.catbox.moe/sk7gs2.jpeg
I did a post on this phenomenon to show you guys The indicators of whether an explosion you're looking at on video is producing ionizing radiation (nuclear).
You will not, I repeat, WILL NOT understand the following post unless you look at the brief sauce provided.
https://greatawakening.win/p/19957ciQar/important-for-anons-to-know-mult/
The fact that it did not look like a nuclear detonation suggests it was not one. And neutrons are NOT "ionizing radiation."
Neutrons emitted from a neutron bomb, also known as an enhanced radiation weapon, are a form of ionizing radiation.
If you disagree then you need to read more because you do not know wtf you are talking about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb
Neutrons are not a form of ionizing radiation at all. In order to be such, a particle must be charged (alpha or beta particles) or a photon must have greater than ionization energy (gamma rays). Neutrons are deadly through their direct impact with the nuclei of elements in molecules in our body.
The Wikipedia article errs in forgetting that the detonation of a neutron bomb produces the particles and gamma rays (ionizing) IN ADDITION to the neutrons (not ionizing). It is still a nuclear detonation. This is an illustration of the principle not to get your nuclear bomb physics from Wikipedia. I have read Glasstone & Dolan's "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons," and digested several textbooks on nuclear engineering. I do know what I am talking about (and you do not).
Semantics, retard. If you really were a scientist you would know that as a rule of thumb: whenever you fuck with things on the atomic level it releases some amount alpha/beta/gamma (there is no such thing as "being impacted with neutrons" and no radiation being released) in the case of nukes (creating a situation of over a million atmospheres of pressure and over a million degrees of heat on the refined uranium (isotope 235) or plutonium) you are going do it in a VERY big way and that is regardless of if its fusion or fission. Admit it: You're just a shill using IA or copy paste on things you only have a rudimentary academic knowledge of. Why don't you go edit Wikipedia if you know better....OH, that's right, because you are probably already one of the many shills that has been eroding its accuracy for years. (The quality of their articles actually used to be better than Britannica about 16 or so years ago.)
Being "impacted with neutrons" is the whole process of nuclear fission, as well as nuclear transformation. Fission reactions release other radiation---but that does not alter the fact that NEUTRONS are not "ionizing" radiation. You must not know what that means. The damage to human tissue comes from the neutron slamming into a nucleus and dislodging the atom from the molecule it is in. A nucleus must have an absorption spectrum compatible with the neutron energy in order for transmutation to take place. (Just for information, there are some fusion reactions that do not produce neutrons, though we have not reduced these to practice.)
I've mentioned my academic and research background, and you seem to know only Wikipedia. You were not able to identify the error in its description of neutron radiation. I had a Critical Nuclear Weapon Design Information (CNWDI) clearance during my tenure at Boeing. I was on track for a Q clearance, but the purpose behind it went away, so it didn't happen. It is amusing to me that I am the one who has read the basic texts on the subject and you are the one relying on Wikipedia.
In Vietnam we were using WWII munitions that consisted of 20,000lb pounds dropped out of the ass-end of a C-130 and they do make clouds EXACTLY as this. So, this was a GOOD SIZE CONVENTIONAL Munition that was dropped!!!!!!!!
Nah. The FAB 3k vid you linked had a small fire explosion. The x vid was a large fire plume blasting outward. The flame itself was growing. Totally different
Looks like WW3 is back on the menu.
Naw. It's just a tit-for-tat bombing against Ukraine. If it were a nuke then ALL of the nightly news shows would be sending reporters over there to report on it. Since the scene looked kinda cloudy I suspect what you saw was some sort of ionization of a low hanging cloud. Sorry to be a naysayer but I don't think Putin would want that type of escalation.
Nobody minds that this video is not recent? Shared since at least 2023?
Or are people contesting that assertion?
Apparently [June 4] was the "last day" before the coming of Hell.
Or it just ended
There is a 9 second delay between the flash of the explosion and the sound of the shock wave (light moves faster than sound). That would place the explosion approx. 9 miles from the videographer. That is a big damn explosion at 2 miles away but colossal if you consider it may have been up to 9 miles out.
Your formula sounds more convincing than my, one Mississippi, two Mississippi rule. Kek
Your math is correct. I was being conservative @ 2
*343
Not that I believe at first glance but the x comments mentioned it may be from 2023.
Oh boy... any more confirmations? If so I will delete post
It’s from 2024
Any nuke would have been easily detected by neighboring countries, and it would be known. I know that FAEs (Fuel Air Explosives) will make a similar spherical flaming ball and cause traumatic damage, but they are not nuclear.
We got the 40 thousand pound MOAB and it looks like Russia has just introduced the 100 thousand pound BAB! (Big Arse Bomb)
Listen, the penis piano player has got to go. Vladimir is not forking around low nukes are a bad sign.
I wonder if patriots day corresponds to the big military parade on June 14th? Or July 4th. Datefagging
[SCARE] necessary event."
Q521 posted 1/13/18 is exactly June 5 [37] on the clock.
https://files.catbox.moe/ntdy4v.jpeg
Thermobaric bomb make big bada boom. Not a nuke. Primarily a large area people killer.
Article on Zerohedge "Ukraine Capital on Fire After Heavy Russian Missile Strikes". I tried to post but sadly don't know what I'm doing.
I think this is the one you were referring to: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/no-negotiations-terrorists-well-retaliate-time-our-choosing-kremlin
Yes, thank you.
👍
Probably a thermobaric weapon,
This.
A thermobaric weapon—also called a fuel-air explosive (FAE) or vacuum bomb—is a type of conventional (non-nuclear) explosive that uses atmospheric oxygen to produce an extremely high-temperature, long-duration blast. Its destructive power comes not from radioactive material, but from its ability to saturate an area with fuel vapor and then ignite it, creating a massive overpressure and thermal wave.
🔧 How It Works
Dispersal Phase: The bomb releases a cloud of flammable fuel (usually a fine aerosol of hydrocarbons or metal particles) over a wide area.
Ignition Phase: After a short delay, a second charge ignites the cloud, producing a fireball and massive shockwave.
Vacuum Effect: As the fireball consumes the oxygen in the air, a vacuum is created, causing powerful inward suction that can collapse lungs, buildings, and bunkers.
💥 Effects and Capabilities
Higher temperatures than traditional explosives (can exceed 3,000°F or 1,650°C).
Longer blast duration: Causes more internal injuries than traditional explosives (especially to lungs, eardrums, and internal organs).
Can flatten buildings, clear caves, or destroy bunkers.
Leaves no radiation or fallout (it’s not nuclear).
Often used in:
Urban warfare
Bunker busting
Cave clearing (e.g., Afghanistan)
Fuel-air bombs in cluster munitions
🔬 Example: Russian ODAB-500 or TOS-1A
Russia is known for fielding thermobaric weapons, including the TOS-1A "Buratino", a multiple rocket launcher system that can devastate several city blocks in seconds.
The U.S. used similar devices in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan (BLU-118/B was a bunker-busting thermobaric bomb).
✅ Summary
So I get why people might think it's a low yield nuke, but:
Removing, as this video has been around a while. If it were a nuke we'd know by now.
No EMP, so don't believe it's nuke. Probably FAE
Some years ago a warehouse exploded that engulfed the town or city idk. It was fertilizer or something thing else. Big explosions dont always have to be nukes. Sometimes it's regular shit, and sometimes is Whoopi dropping a gass cloud
You may be thinking of the Beirut harbor ammonium nitrate detonation. Much more convincing than this thing.
Yeah, that's the one
Well Ukraine what’d you expect? FAFO when you took 15% of their bombers out. Left them in a difficult position and right now you’re the closest antagonist.
This video is years old though
The streaky stuff on the periphery of the blast looks like they hit a munitions dump.
Maybe M.O.A.B.?