Geopolitics.co claims that one of the explosions at TianJin was of nuclear origin.

So there you have it, the ‘smoking gun’ evidence of a nuke is to be found among the smoking wreckage of those incinerated cars.


There's a lot to work through, these are some of the arguments the author uses to explain why he believes it was a nuclear explosion:

A. The fuel tanks did not explode.

B. The rubber tires were ashed not burned see the white powder residue around the cars.

C. The radiators are all gone; indicating Freon explosions.

D. All the glass is ashed or melted; also the the glass was blown out not in.

E. All new white cars show extreme effects from very high temperature heating. The paint is badly damaged due to a very high oxidation rate effect.

F. Silicone rubber tires ash at 500 degrees centigrade. Glass ashes at 1500 degrees centigrade. Gasoline at 250 degrees centigrade. Tires melted but no gas tank explosions;

G. Yellow Volkswagen Beetle cars untouched due to location indicating radiation shielding from a nearby building.

H. Finally and most important is all of the nano particle sized ash on the ground everywhere. Purple haze in photo is an indication of toxic levels of the gases fluorine, chlorine and sodium.

I'm no expert on explosions and was wondering whether the evidence presented is true and whether it is plausible based on the evidence that one of the explosions might have been of nuclear origin.

closed as primarily opinion-based by Sklivvz Sep 1 '15 at 17:58

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • This question is not asking for facts (plausibility is an opinion). Furthermore it's about unresolved news events and those question only become answerable after the appropriate inquests have published their results. – Sklivvz Sep 1 '15 at 17:59
  • 3
    Simple reason for arguing "No" would be "Because if it were 1) you should be able to detect the radiation with a geiger counter and 2) every single nuclear-capable nation in the world would be throwing a blood hunt for those responsible. " – Shadur Sep 3 '15 at 17:24

Browse other questions tagged .