Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Where have we been?
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:24 pm

Correct, Bobbo.
Oleg Is indulging in wishful thinking, in suggesting it cannot be done. But a well funded and expert organisation like the CIA, or KGB, or Mossad, or equivalent in any nuclear armed state could do that quite easily.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:55 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Oleg..... when it comes to smuggling contraband into a country...why or what makes Nukes any different from drugs on the point of them being subject to such clandestine movement?


Nuclear weapons have unique fingerprints in the ratios of their isotopes, as a result of being made into weapons grade material. This means, unlike drugs, that if I seize a nuclear device in transport, a team can determine exactly where the material was first made. Therefore, although a rogue state may replace the triggers and detonation mechanism to look like another country's work, it cannot hide the origin of the actual bomb. This is why North Korea does not drive a nuke "made to look like a USA nuke" into Seoul.

The other issue is shielding. Weapons grade uranium radiates gamma and neutrons for about five metres. Most nukes are shielded to protect the users. Therefore there is a three way trade off. The smuggler can either reduce the size of the nuke's payload (to reduce radiation) or increase shielding (making for a very heavy weapon) or reduce shielding and attempt to smuggle the weapon faster through no monitored distribution points. Thankfully, rogue terrorists would use dirty bombs which generally are poorly shielded and impurities make for more radiation.

When there was, supposedly, Russian nuclear weapons grade material floating around Africa in the early 90s, all major nations simply co operated to obtain a tiny sample of the material to determine who was really the manufacturer. It was that manufacturer who was going to get "whumped" if it was real.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10648
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:18 am

Matt---I won't bother to detail any correction of your post as it is IRRELEVANT to the issue of whether or not a nuke "CAN BE" placed in a country without using missiles. Your failure to address the actual issue amounts to a tacit admission of its truth. For that, we tally your vote.

Thank you.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 20, 2016 4:47 am

There was an article on nuclear weapons a few years back in Scientific American. One thing that stuck in my mind was the statement that a minor nuclear explosion could be obtained by having two pieces of fissionable material, each a little below critical mass, and smashing them together in your hands. Of course, that would kill the person doing it, and the explosion would be very small by nuke standards. But it shows how easy a nuke is to make if you only have access to good quality fissionables. Also it shows that a bomb can be broken down into smaller parts, and each smuggled in separately, for reassembly on site.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 20, 2016 7:48 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Matt---I won't bother to detail any correction of your post as it is IRRELEVANT to the issue of whether or not a nuke "CAN BE" placed in a country without using missiles.
I specifically talked about shielding for transport and smuggling. Didn't you read my post at all?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Your failure to address the actual issue.......
You're an idiot Bobbo. :D

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 20, 2016 7:56 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:There was an article on nuclear weapons a few years back in Scientific American. One thing that stuck in my mind was the statement that a minor nuclear explosion could be obtained by having two pieces of fissionable material, each a little below critical mass, and smashing them together in your hands.


You would have to have very strong and fast hands to reach critical mass.

You are referring to the scene in a fictional TV movie called "Edge of Darkness" where Darius Jedburg does exactly that to contaminate the audience at a pro-nuclear conference. Here he is doing it.
jedburgh.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 20, 2016 6:17 pm

Matthew

It helps if you actually read what I write. I was referring to a SciAm article. I have never seen that movie, and I certainly do not take as fact what I see in fiction.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:19 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew

It helps if you actually read what I write. I was referring to a SciAm article. I have never seen that movie, and I certainly do not take as fact what I see in fiction.


I actually read Scientific American and have for thirty years. If you had read the article you would remember that Uranium has phosphorescent properties when it strike another metal. That's why Depleted Uranium bullets spark when they hit armoured vehicles. When you strike two bits of Uranium together, using your hands, you get a phosphorescent flash. You do not start a nuclear chain reaction and create a nuclear explosion.

Do you have any understanding on the pressure required to start a nuclear reaction?
fat-man-atomic-bomb-cross-section-neutron-initiator-trigger-lg.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Oct 21, 2016 12:08 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Do you have any understanding on the pressure required to start a nuclear reaction?


No, I do not.
THat is why I rely on the experts who write in SciAm and ignore things said by lawyers.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 21, 2016 12:22 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:Do you have any understanding on the pressure required to start a nuclear reaction?
Lance Kennedy wrote:No, I do not. THat is why I rely on the experts who write in SciAm and ignore things said by lawyers.


...or you could simply look it up Lance.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10648
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:10 am

You two might connect on what Lance did actually post on two points: Lance IS referencing an article in a respected magazine AND the summary of "... each a little below critical mass, and smashing them together ..." the key being to define a little below and what smash means? THAT does not define standard issue Military grade nuke weapons........that are designed to be well below (sic!) critical mass so they don't go off on a bumpy ride.

Matt: why you bring in the phosphorescent reaction is beyond me. You do love to dally in the irrelevant....and then harp on it when your central theme is dispatched.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You two might connect on what Lance did actually post on two points: Lance IS referencing an article in a respected magazine
Which I read, and at no point did it say you can obtain critical mass and a nuclear chain reaction by slamming two pieces of Uranium together with your hands.

Lance is most welcome to link the article


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Matt: why you bring in the phosphorescent reaction is beyond me.
.....because that is what does happens when you slam two pieces of Uranium together with your hands. Same as when you shoot a DU bullet at a tank.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Oct 21, 2016 8:08 am

Yes, but when the two masses are subcritical, the combination is enough to set off a minimal detonation. The force of the explosion, of course, drives the two masses apart, causing the explosion to be limited. But it is still enough to devastate a city block (and kill the person who does this).

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10648
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Oct 21, 2016 10:09 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:You two might connect on what Lance did actually post on two points: Lance IS referencing an article in a respected magazine
[color=#000080]Which I read, and at no point did it say you can obtain critical mass and a nuclear chain reaction by slamming two pieces of Uranium together with your hands.
Nothing to read other than Lance's memory of reading it and his recounting of it. Ummmmmm....by definition, if you slam two pieces of Uranium together and you get a nuclear reation then you achieved the critical mass required for that reaction. What 1 plus 1 = 2 equation here are you failing to negate? Weird as you even attached that excellent movie picture to pretty much the same issue: crictical mass: achieved by the addition of sufficient energy. A neat tautology for your consideration. NOTE: I don't personally believe it outside the confines of the hypothetical most dealing with just how far off critical mass the pieces are just sitting there. PRAGMATISM: not letting it interfere with a good hypothetical that will never occur.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Oct 22, 2016 3:44 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Ummmmmm....by definition, if you slam two pieces of Uranium together and you get a nuclear reation then you achieved the critical mass required for that reaction. What 1 plus 1 = 2 equation here are you failing to negate?
Firstly, you can slam bigger and bigger bits of Uranium together and that will not create critical mass. You two guys think that a nuclear chain reaction in a nuke has something to do with an explosion. It's not. It's about creating enough free neutrons to bang into other Uranium or Plutonium nucleus to make them split and create further neutrons. It's about compression of specific isotopes as the prime neutron release event.

Go back to the illustration I posted of a A- Bomb internal sphere surrounded by normal chemical explosions. The explosions are arranged and timed to compress the middle of the sphere to such a heat that it releases neutrons that radiate outwards and hit all the surrounding Uranium or Plutonium nucleus. Simply hitting the uranium or plutonium together on one side simply, cannot start a neutron release event.

What you two are saying is that a human can crush an atom by simply slamming two bits of metal together with their bare hands.....which is very silly. :D

I think you two have got gamma and alpha wave radiation confused with neutron release. One kills you through radiation poisoning, the latter is a nuclear explosion,
fatman.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 22, 2016 6:19 pm

No, Matthew.
It is you who are not reading our posts, and failing to understand.
The information came from SciAm, and they use professional scientists in their field to generate articles. If their writer (a professional in the field) says it can be done, then it can be done, regardless of your scoffing. I have specified that it would be a minimal explosion, and it is minimal because the two subcritical fissionable masses would be forced apart again by the resulting explosion. But it is still an explosion, even if small, and would devastate the immediate area. Your diagram of a bomb is for one that totally undergoes fission and generates a massive explosion. Different.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby OlegTheBatty » Sat Oct 22, 2016 7:23 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:No, Matthew.
It is you who are not reading our posts, and failing to understand.
The information came from SciAm, and they use professional scientists in their field to generate articles. If their writer (a professional in the field) says it can be done, then it can be done, regardless of your scoffing. I have specified that it would be a minimal explosion, and it is minimal because the two subcritical fissionable masses would be forced apart again by the resulting explosion. But it is still an explosion, even if small, and would devastate the immediate area. Your diagram of a bomb is for one that totally undergoes fission and generates a massive explosion. Different.


The masses would not stick together, they would bounce apart, no matter how strong the person was. It is doubtful that they would be in contact long enough for anything more than some heating. Where is your data?


Spoiler:
It's a good thing no professional scientist has ever been wrong when predicting an event without doing the experiments.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:28 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:No, Matthew. It is you who are not reading our posts, and failing to understand.
The information came from SciAm, and they use professional scientists in their field to generate articles.

It's time for you to put up or shut up. I also read scientific American and there was no such article saying a person could start a nuclear explosion by merely slamming two bits of Uranium together with their hands.

Look up an article
http://www.scientificamerican.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ0P7R9CfCY
Last edited by Matthew Ellard on Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:34 am

It was years ago, and I have given away all my old issues. I tried to find it using google, and when I typed in scientific american nuclear fission, I got no result. Ditto a number of other key words. The reference Matthew gave is nothing more than a hook to get people to subscribe. Not so easy.

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Aaron Richards » Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:10 am

You did a fine job providing a rebuttal to the first incident, Matthew, but just one observation: you initially said "The old Soviet nuclear torpedoes were for destroying naval bases, coastal facilities and not other seagoing vessels, simply because the torpedoes were very very slow and the shock wave would destroy the soviet submarine if it was in a five kilometer radius of the blast." but then went on to say "The Russians didn't have underwater launched missiles in 1962." Which one is it?


Also, do you have a similar rebuttal for the second story in my OP or is it more credible?
"...we had the duty towards our Volk (the German people) to kill this Volk (the Jewish people) that wanted to kill us." - Himmler in his 1943 Posen speech reminding any future holocaust denier how absurd their beliefs really are.
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:22 pm

Matthew's rebuttel is based on Matthews's emotions. He simply does not want to believe that the M.A.D. policy was insanely risky, and came close to causing nuclear war. The rest are rationalisations.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:11 pm

Aaron Richards wrote:You did a fine job providing a rebuttal to the first incident, Matthew, but just one observation: you initially said "The old Soviet nuclear torpedoes were for destroying naval bases, coastal facilities and not other seagoing vessels, simply because the torpedoes were very very slow and the shock wave would destroy the soviet submarine if it was in a five kilometer radius of the blast." but then went on to say "The Russians didn't have underwater launched missiles in 1962." Which one is it?

Lance initially stated that a nuclear missile was going to be launched from the Russian submarine at the American fleet. I knew that was not true as the Soviets could not launch missile from submerged submarines in 1962. The story was actually about a nuclear torpedo and not a missile. The actual submarine in the story carried one nuclear torpedo.

Aaron Richards wrote:Also, do you have a similar rebuttal for the second story in my OP or is it more credible?
Well the second story is about one bloke not responding to a false satellite alarm, concerning one, then four, USA ICBMs heading towards Russia. He "knows" this is not a real attack as a first strike involves many many missiles to reduce the Soviet nuclear retaliation. That's called training. The bloke did what he was trained to do.

"Recognise that 4 ICBMs was probably a false positive and thus double check his data."


I wasn't in the room at the time, but it does seem very unlikely that this bloke made all these decisions himself. For a start, he have to communicate with other information services to double check his own data. Was the GRU aware of any increase in USA military activity or levels of alert in the USA? Stuff like that.

I would also imagine that there is a very well rehearsed check list of things, that must be done, before one bloke phones Yuri Andropov, and suggesting he launch a full retaliation against the USA. :D

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:23 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew's rebuttel is based on Matthews's emotions. He simply does not want to believe that the M.A.D. policy was insanely risky, and came close to causing nuclear war. The rest are rationalisations.


No Lance. That was you. You made technical error after error in your initial claim. (missile VS torpedo) (torpedo could not hit the fleet as it was unguided) I simply made the effort to look up the correct information in Janes and other sources and then quickly realised you were reading publicity stories from promotion of a movie. That's why you ran away and never answered any of my direct questions.

To whom did Vasili Arkhipov's wife confirm the story to? She confirmed the story to the movie's publicist. In fact the only place the story appears is in Military Parade, which is a propaganda paper for Russian servicemen. The story does not exist anywhere else.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:02 am

Matthew

I made one mistake (count it, one). Apart from that, all that is happening is that you are making assertions with no real backing.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:14 am

Doing what you are trained to do, does not make you a hero.

The Russian bloke in 1983 who identified that four ICBM's were a false positive and not a first strike attack from the USA was simply working through his check list that he was trained to follow. I'm returning to this concept because I have a gripe concerning Rommel.

In the Western Desert campaign, Rommel is hailed as a genius because he moved his 88mm high velocity, anti-aircraft guns up to the front and used them against British armour (tanks). Armchair generals claim this is evidence of Rommel's genius. In reality the 88mm gun was built with open sights to do exactly this, had a huge front shield for front line action and was supplied with anti-tank ordinance for that exact purpose. Rommel simply used the guns in the way there were intended to be used, as he was trained to do.
:D

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:19 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew, I made one mistake (count it, one). Apart from that, all that is happening is that you are making assertions with no real backing.


No Lance. I have informed you that the 1962 Russian nuclear torpedo could not hit a moving fleet five times and you still don't "get it". It was an unguided slow torpedo for coastal targets.

You are embarrassed because you can't look up basic facts and got confused by a movie's public relations campaign.
:lol:

I actually found an English translation of the Russian publicity article for you, which you also ignored. How could a Russian submarine launch a torpedo while being depth charged by USA destroyers? The sub was running out of air because it could not raise its snorkel, as it was too deep. Do you honestly think, for a nano second, that the Russian sub was going to raise its periscope, line itself up and launch a slow unguided torpedo, while being depth charged by USA destroyers? :lol:

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:53 am

And you forget that a nuclear torpedo really does not need to be aimed. It is not a precision weapon. One bang takes out everything around it. Submarines, in case you have forgotten, are built to fire torpedoes. So suggesting the sub could not fire the torpedo is not smart.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:50 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:And you forget that a nuclear torpedo really does not need to be aimed.

You are a total idiot Lance.

There are four other Soviet submarines in the area following the USA carrier fleet, that can't be contacted.

The USA fleet of 28 ships, is doing 17 knots, with and not in a straight line and covers an area of 10 kilometres in radius, at maximum spread to avoid Russian bombers in Cuba.

The torpedo can't be launched by the Russian sub until it reaches periscope depth and it can't do that as USA destroyers are depth charging it. The sub can't get its snorkel up for the same reason.

The torpedo is not guided and has no proximity fuse at it is designed to hit coastal fixed targets. The torpedo is not designed to hit other ships as it is too slow and unguided. It only has a 80 kiloton warhead.


You are simply ignoring all the hard evidence I have continuously provided and refusing to answer my clear questions that show how stupid this story from a movie press release is.


Lance Kennedy wrote:It is not a precision weapon. One bang takes out everything around it. Submarines, in case you have forgotten, are built to fire torpedoes.
You are a moron. Submarines cannot launch torpedoes while being depth charged. As water cannot be compressed it would simply destroy the other Russian submarines.

Lance Kennedy wrote: So suggesting the sub could not fire the torpedo is not smart.
Show me a Whiskey 1963 submarine (copied from a WWII German sub) launching an unguided torpedo while being depth charged and hitting a moving target from 30 kilometres away, while being chased by USA destroyers.

Give up Lance. You fell for a movie publicity story that only appeared once in a propaganda magazine.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:16 am

Matthew

Face it. You are (pun intended) out of your depth on this one.

You have no idea what a 1960's Soviet submarine is capable of, and you try to pretend you do. Firing a torpedo while below periscope depth is not a terribly difficult technical feat. I do not know where you get your bullsheet 'facts' from, but they are not terribly convincing to anyone but a moron.

Besides which, the depth charges are seriously ineffective, since they are all practice charges anyway. This incident did happen. The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. The only thing you can dispute is the argument inside the sub before capture between Arkipov, the sub captain and the political officer. Surprise, surprise. You were not there!!!!! The report describes what happened as the result of the testimony of those who were. Duh!!!!!

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:10 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:You have no idea what a 1960's Soviet submarine is capable of, and you try to pretend you do.
I know exactly what they could and can do from Janes. You are so ignorant you don't know that North Korea still uses them as does seven other countries.

Lance Kennedy wrote:Firing a torpedo while below periscope depth is not a terribly difficult technical feat.
You are a complete moron. You cannot launch a torpedo while at maximum depth avoiding depth charges. You are so stupid you claimed in your earlier post that the Russian submarine didn't even have to line up against its target.

Lance Kennedy wrote:I do not know where you get your bullsheet 'facts' from, but they are not terribly convincing to anyone but a moron.
Janes I have now told you this five times. Are you senile?

http://www.janes.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane%27s_Fighting_Ships

Lance Kennedy wrote:Besides which, the depth charges are seriously ineffective, since they are all practice charges anyway.
You idiot. the story you are claiming is true says they did not know they were being depth charged with practice depth charges.


Lance Kennedy wrote: This incident did happen. The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records.
You complete moron. The USA navy did not capture the sub. The sub surfaced and left the region under its diesel engines. I even showed you a photo of it doing this!!!! You haven't actually read the story you claim is true!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
B59.jpg


Lance Kennedy wrote: The only thing you can dispute is the argument inside the sub before capture between Arkipov, the sub captain and the political officer.
You idiot. the USA DID NOT CAPTURE THE RUSSIAN SUB. STOP LYING

Read the story that you claim is true Lance.
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nsa/cuba_mis_c ... 0Orlov.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:20 am

Lance Kennedy wrote: The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. Duh!!!!!
Show me these records that you have read Lance........

I've done the research. You are making up stories.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Lance Kennedy and Gorgeous: Power Team.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:20 am

Gorgeous wrote: The CIA have many documents that prove they captured aliens. I have read them all.
Matthew Ellard wrote: Link me to one of these papers.
(Sound FX : Gorgeous running away)

Lance Kennedy wrote:The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. Duh!!!!!
Matthew Ellard wrote: Show me any record that the USA captured a Soviet submarine from the Cuban missile crisis, even though they weren't at war
(Sound FX : Lance running away)

Well down Lance. You have finally found someone with your same level of research skills on a skeptic forum. :lol:

Next time try actually reading the story in a propaganda magazine that you claim is absolutely true. :lol:

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:56 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... uclear-war

The Guardian makes it clear that this incident happened. I would rather believe them than an Australian lawyer who claims to be an expert on everything.

You claim it was propaganda. That makes no sense at all. While 'the propaganda' makes a hero out of Arkhipov, it makes the Russians and the Soviets look very, very bad. Not exactly effective propaganda. They did not even treeat their hero as a true hero, which makes sense when you consider it was the irrational Soviets, but no sense for a supposed propaganda publication.

Answer this question, Matthew. If it was propaganda, why publish something that shows the Soviet (and by inheritance, the Russian) military to be incompetent and dangerous?
Last edited by Lance Kennedy on Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:24 pm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock

http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/18/13-times- ... r-6013942/

The reason Matthew refuses to believe the Arkhipov story is simple. He holds to the idiotic theory that Mutual Assured Destruction is a sane, and sensible policy. It is not. It has never been. Matthew should read a bit more of Noah Chomski, who presents this story as it truly is. Insanity. Pure, unadulterated insanity.

The reference above shows a number of times (not just the Arkhipov incident) in which the world came close to nuclear war. It does not even mention the time Jimmy Carter sent his clothes off to the laundry with nuclear codes in his pockets!

Matthew fails to understand that his point of view is moronic. The only reason we are still alive is pure luck. Those who monitor these things have set the Doomsday Clock at a few minutes to midnight, and kept it there for decades, due to the unbelievable risk that M.A.D. subjects the world to, all the time. This clock is not controlled by idiotic Australian lawyers who believe they know anything, but by a board that includes 18 Nobel Prize winners.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Lance makes up facts

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:30 pm

Matthew has the original source.
Lance Kennedy wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/27/vasili-arkhipov-stopped-nuclear-war

The Guardian makes it clear that this incident happened. I would rather believe them than an Australian lawyer who claims to be an expert on everything.
The entire Guardian article concerning Arkhipov is taken from the one story in Military Parade a Russian propaganda magazine, that I have linked for you twice. You refuse to read the original story, which was a movie PR story for the 100million dollar joint venture film based on Arkhipov, starring Harrison Ford.

The story does not appear anywhere else, in Russian or any other military record, either before or after this story appeared in Military Parade. You run away every time I point that out.


Not Propaganda but Movie Public Relations.
Lance Kennedy wrote:You claim it was propaganda.
No. I have clearly said five times is is a PR piece for a film about Arkhipov, who is played by Harrison Ford in the movie. You once said "his wife confirmed the story". His wife confirmed the story to the film's publicist during post production. The article, the film's release and the wife conforming the story all happened in 2002.

Lance directly lies and runs away.
Lance Kennedy wrote:This incident did happen. The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records.
The US Navy did not capture the Russian submarine B-59 or any Russian submarine at all. There is no record anywhere in world that claims that. You simply lied. . The diesel submarine B-59, ran out of air and surfaced after the the USA navy dropped practice depth charges. It then turned on its diesel engines and went home to Russia. I have even provided you a photo of it going home.
B59.jpg


Lance knows nothing about Submarines
You first claimed the Russian submarine was going to launch a nuclear missile, from underwater at the USA fleet. I had to inform you that Russia was not able to do that in 1962. I informed you it was an unguided nuclear torpedo for coastal targets. You then said the Russian submarine would not have to aim the torpedo to hit the USA fleet. The USA fleet was thirty kilometers away and Whiskey Class Russian submarines have to launch torpedoes at periscope depth as they are Type XXI German submarines from WWII. The B-59 could not launch any torpedo while being depth charged and at maximum depth. It could not raise its snorkel for exactly the same reason. The torpedo could not even reach the USA fleet let alone find them, as it was designed to hit fixed coastal targets, not other ships.

Why did you lie and say the USA Navy captured the B-59?

Did you read that anywhere at all? Show me. :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:38 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:The reason Matthew refuses ........
No Lance. Like Gorgeous, you have an agenda. Like Gorgeous, you are prepared to lie for your agenda. Therefore, like Gorgeous, you directly lied
Lance Kennedy wrote:The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. Duh!!!!!


So Gorgeous Lance, show all of us any USA or Russian book, magazine. official record or nursery book that says the USA Navy captured the B-59 Russian submarine. I'll even accept Wikipedia for this load of bull-shit you are making up. :lol:

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4205
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby gorgeous » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:58 pm

skeptics have agendas...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:24 pm

gorgeous wrote:skeptics have agendas...
Yes. It's called skepticism.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10063
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:08 am

Matthew has his flaws. He is a lawyer, which is a massive flaw all by itself.
Lawyers are used to argument by deduction, which science dismissed as a 'proof' 400 years ago. You can deduce anything, just by finding the 'facts' that support your case.

In this case, Matthew loves the Mutually Assured Destruction system and hates anything that opposes that idea. That is the whole basis for his refusal to believe, not just the Arhipov story, but anything that might suggest that M.A.D. is not a good idea. To get around such inconvenient facts, he refuses to believe them, and cherry picks data to permit him to deduce that they are not correct. A bit like religion, in fact.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26590
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Lance is a liar like Gorgeous.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:26 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew has his flaws. He is a lawyer, which is a massive flaw all by itself.
Lawyers are used to argument by deduction,
Lance you are a liar in the exact same way as Gorgeous. She makes up stories to support her agenda and runs away. So do you.

Lance Kennedy wrote:This incident did happen. The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records.
Show me where you read this or admit you made it up on the spot like Gorgeous. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Return to “History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest