Sup, /x/, what info do you have on tsunami weapons, was Fukushima

>>18858279
well in 1977 the U.N. passed a resolution against using environmental modification as weapons.

http://www.un-documents.net/enmod.htm

>>18858289
nice info fag

>>18858279
>tsunami attack
do u know how dumb that sounds?

>>18858279
To make a tsunami you just need something that releases a metric fucktonne of energy. If you had such a means, why not just use that directly on the city.

>>18858279
I read a conspiracy theory relating the boxing day tsunami being caused by an underwater explosion but that's hardly credible, just like this thread.

>>18858279
War has changed.

>>18858578
>Why would you want to attack a country with a massive destructive force that can't be blamed on your government without discrediting the victim nation's entire science community?

Ftfy

>>18858557

Ok captain bluepill these things don't exist

>>18859005

So do you think maybe Japan stepped out of line some way and got ass blasted back inline?

File: sacharov scenario.jpg (2MB, 1280x1800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x1800px

>>18858279

>>18859038
While that makes for a very cool concept for a story, I'm fairly certain that particular disaster was natural.

I'm not writing off the idea of a tsunami weapon though.

File: 1488068671338.jpg (68KB, 599x449px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 599x449px

>>18859043
get ready to live under the sea boys

>>18859038
I have no idea. I'm just saying that if there was the technology for weaponized weather and natural disaster manipulation, it'd be infinitely more valuable to the US government than direct weapons for incredibly obvious reasons.

File: 1489426338667.jpg (16KB, 200x303px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 200x303px

>>18859043

File: 1484669426657.png (537KB, 692x577px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 692x577px

>>18859084
>>if there was the technology for weaponized weather and natural disaster manipulation

>if

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,686,605.PN.&OS=PN/4,686,605&RS=PN/4,686,605

My guess is that the bomb would have to be planted hundreds of meters of not a few kilometers beneath the sea bed for that to be viable. Not implausible tho. If they just merely drop the bomb in the ocean they would just vaporize the water souroundig it.

>>18858289
>UN resolution
Who gives a fuck? The Fukushima tsunami weapon is child's birthday against the sonic bombs that China already planted in Yellowstone.

>>18859084

You should look into Philip Schneider. Interesting guy who worked in black budget projects, mentioned earthquake machines, this was back in the 70's. He was a structural engineer working on DUMB's, unfortunately got suicided rip.

File: 90quakeElisaLam.jpg (1MB, 1443x1265px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1443x1265px

>>18858557
>>18858279

>tsunami attack
>do u know how dumb that sounds?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdOBjf33K5I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD5XRZBm13w

>>18859103
I was using "if" as a rhetorical device, as a term relative to the beliefs of someone who may not believe they exist. Check the context.

t. Autism