Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 17 Sep 2009 18:49

At some patriotic level, the OSA is sacrosanct so long it is beneficial to hold secrets that are in the interest of the nation. If OSA becomes a burden and is seen detrimental to the nation, then perhaps the said individual has taken that risk.

I remember the analogy that a soldier could deny killing an innocent even if his higher authority asked him to do (again, this is an iffy subject as far as me as I don't have any real world exp in this matter). Clearly Santhanam is not alone in this and so many folks are in this. It is looking line the folks on the GOI's side (namely:RC, APJK, AK, and BM) are the ones that should also bother about OSA.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 17 Sep 2009 19:11

Arun_S wrote:National security has been betrayed/compromised last 11 years ...
I think the cover-up cabal starting with its head R.Chidambaram and former NSA Brijesh Mishra should be indicted and tried, and people responsible for failed oversight in AEC should be served justice.

Very sad indeed. For 11 yrs it was betrayed, Ooops! And the cabal who covered-up these things.. hey, you didnt include the name of Santhanam in that ? Is he not ? for 11 yrs he kept mum and now and enjoying the Govt service and after heading the quasi- gov institution and having all the retirement benefits, i mean, enjoying all these things for 11 yrs, should he not come under the same cabal who covered-up ? What else one can say ?

If it is the national interest that is driving Mr. Santhanam to tell all these while he is not at service, it should be the same national interest which should have drived him 11 yrs before to come open and come clean on these things in the first place. By being at service is he not more duty bound than when he is not at service ? Is he not sound very opportunistic by disclosing after 11 yrs ? The way he is gunning after Mr. Chidambaram looks either he is expecting "favour" from govt or having personal vendetta - IMHO.

Fine, let leave this thing. If anyone who could care more about national interest was in the place of Santhanam, he would have resinged in protest and went public on this. He didnt. He usurped all the benefits from the Govt and now try to establish himself as the guardian of truth. Is it not opportunistic ?

Disclosing the details is not a problem. but why he kept mum for all these years. And what credibility he shows to believe what he says on this matter ? The only new information he told in THe Hindu op-ed is the shaft is undamaged and the A-frame which housed the winch stands intact post the blast. How am i going to believe his words when he in the first place have the gullibility of withholding the information for so long which is detrimental to the national interest.

For example he says,

The fission bomb yield from the DRDO’s seismic instrumentation was 25 +2 kiloton and left a crater 25 metres in diameter. If the TN device had really worked with a yield of 50 +2 kt, it should have left a crater almost 70 metres in diameter. Instead, all that happened was that sand and mud from the shaft were thrown several metres into the air and then fell back, forming a small depression in the shaft mouth. There was no crater.

From the link

If these individuals are assumed to be 1.66 meters tall, it would appear that the subsidence crater has a depth of about 10 to 15 meters, and a radius of at least 30 meters and probably over 40 meters.

Thats is the diameter could be from 60 m to 80 m.

what credibility he has and what substantial evidence he has provided so far ? Nothing, Zlich, nada.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 17 Sep 2009 19:43

^^^

So, if one were to believe the fizzle lobby, RC and AK took liberties with the truth, are liars at worst (not my words)

If one were to believe sizzle lobby, then

The way he is gunning after Mr. Chidambaram looks either he is expecting "favour" from govt or having personal vendetta - IMHO.

Fine, let leave this thing. If anyone who could care more about national interest was in the place of Santhanam, he would have resinged in protest and went public on this. He didnt. He usurped all the benefits from the Govt and now try to establish himself as the guardian of truth. Is it not opportunistic ?

Either way, scientists of the AEC/BARC who spent their lives dedicated to their jobs are being reviled as being petty.

Truly, Kalyug has arrived.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 20:27

Tanaji, Not only that but now sizzle supporters have to use NPA data to bolster their case. Yes Santhanam also should be among the guilty men of 1998.

But lets start with BRF.

I am formally going to request Jagan to withdraw my article on BRM as its based on erroenous data.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 17 Sep 2009 20:38

Ramana ji,

What is wrong, when the fizzile side uses the same data why not everyone could. The logic is if even NPA is agreeing to the conclusion then we can say it is probably can be considered as irrefutable evidence ? JMT

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Sep 2009 20:40

Next we need to have vote to throw out those who support liars on this forum.

Who did NOT lie?

Bajpai, Mishra, AK, Kalam, Chid, Santhanam, Sethana, MMS, Sonia, Munna, Sikka - everyone did. Bush, Obama, Mush, China. They ALL knew this was a lie.

Outside of NPAs and Indian public, pretty much anyone interested in this topic seriously has kept this lie going for the past 5-10 years.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 17 Sep 2009 20:42

Either way, scientists of the AEC/BARC who spent their lives dedicated to their jobs are being reviled as being petty

Tanaji Sir, this mud slinging is started by the same scientists. If one is true then other should be wrong. By default, it is Kaliyug.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 17 Sep 2009 20:46

This is corroborated by fact that even after 11 years the TN device has not been weaponised by BARC while the 25 kiloton fission device has been fully weaponised and operationally deployed on multiplate weapon platforms. It would be farcical to use a 3500-km range Agni-3 missile with a 25 kiloton fission warhead as the core of our CMD. Only a 150 – 350 kiloton if not megaton TN bomb can do so which we do not have.

If (according to KS ) India has not weaponised 150-200 KT FBF devices then does it not imply that even these design lacks confidence? Even if deployed, I guess these single 200kt warheads will not have much additional damage effect then 3 -25kt bombs.

Sarma · Post by **Sarma** » 17 Sep 2009 20:46

I have to appreciate Sri K. Santhanam for coming out into the open and writing his op-ed piece. It is written in poor English and could have used some editing by The Hindu to make it a real convincing piece. That aside, I think he has directly addressed two criticisms levelled against him: (1) Sri Santhanam was not in the know of the weapons designs. He refutes this. (2) He also refutes allegations that DRDO seismic instrumentation failed. How does BARC know that the seismic instrumentation failed?

I think this is a real blow to BARC. They really have nothing left to stand on. So far, I was willing to give the benefit of doubt to RC, SKS and others of BARC. Now, I don't know what to say or to believe. Oh, one other. I had earlier made the point that Sri K. Santhanam was not an author on any of BARC's papers. It may be that he didn't want to be a part of what he believed was fallacious.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 20:56

I think there was hope amongst the scientific community that 10 years after pokharan 2 there would be a retest series to validate the tweaked TN design. I think it is true that BARC did go to ABV - and this includes Messers RC and AK, for a re-test, and ABV said that it would be too soon.

Let us not blame RC and AK alone for the 'obfuscation'. ABV is equally guilty. It is not possible for India's PM to not know exactly what went on, yet if still this course of action was pursued, there was national interest to do so. MCD had to be on board to deter Pakistan and China. It is a different matter that the Chinese and the P-5 were soon able to verify with intel data (as opposed to seismic data) that India's TN was being re-worked. So CMD became MCD or in effect, deterrence was downgraded.

While I agree with what solutions Arun_S posted, I feel that that would not be a pragmatic approach at this juncture. I feel that Vina's approach is much closer to what I would want, with the caveat that a test be done within a 3m - 1 yr time frame. I am confident that BARC has got the design tweaked with Russian help. (This is why Vladimir Putin was at BARC). This is why MMS says that deterrence is still there. This is why we hear of Megaton weapons.

A large test of a weaponized device will put to rest all doubts, India will be finally be purged of the devil that has been riding on India's and the NPA's shoulders all these years. After what ever sanctions India has to face, I am sure that they can not be crippling for India as in 1998. Even if the nuclear deal is goes, there will be more nuclear deals in the future - ones which will be much more in India's favor. With no doubt of the TN India will be a fullblown NWS, with a complete mastery of all aspects of Nuclear weapons science. India's growth and status will only improve from the second rung power goal now to that of one of the poles of a multipolar world.

Now wouldn't that be a goal worth striving for?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Sep 2009 20:58

That aside, I think he has directly addressed two criticisms levelled against him: (1) Sri Santhanam was not in the know of the weapons designs. He refutes this. (2) He also refutes allegations that DRDO seismic instrumentation failed. How does BARC know that the seismic instrumentation failed?

I think this is a real blow to BARC.

There are two issues:
1) The current issue brought up by Santhanam and associated articles, refutations, meeting notes, etc, and
2) The problem of a failed TN device

AEC/BARC will probably respond to the Santhanam article................. and that drama will go on.

BUT, the REAL problem is the lack of a TN device for deterrence.

IMVVVHO, the Santhanam vs. BARC/AK/Chid/etc needs to be put to rest - no use going any further (for the time being at least). ALL of them, without exceptions, have failed - for one reason or another.

The REAL problem needs to be tackled. Does India NEED a TN device for deterrence? And IF it does what is to be done?

IMHO, India NEEDS to test.

Or, if she does nto test THEN India is admitting India does NOT need a TN device to deter.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 21:12

Sarma garu, The percieved wisdom is that RC & APJK said no need to test anymore and BM went with that and advised ABV to propose the voluntary moratorium. I dont think BM was so innocent. Seeing the diplomatic fallout on May 11, 1998 itself he might have suggested closing the test program to deflect the pressure if acceptable to the scientists. Seeing the way he pointed to APJK in his recent interview makes me think he wanted fall guys for this and got them.

One thing to reflect on the S-I shaft and the undamaged winch facts, is that it was a very deep shaft that the resulantant explosion was a piffle for it.

I am still not sure in his usage of the language. Does he mean there was no active reaction in the S-I shaft or something else? We probably will get more clarification from some one or the other. The reason is a medium sized yield wepaon is need to deter PRC. And if it was total piffle as can be read from his article then there are no 60-80kt weapons that K Subramanyam garu was writing about. So this is where the clarification in needed to determine the way forward depends on.

------
Bottomline is India should press forward with its known weapons and retain the option to test. That means no accession to CTBT to please any body. After all Kargil to Mumbai terrorist attack can be shown as evidence of tough neighborhood and retaining the option to test is important hedge. And uncle has restrained India more than needed and should live with this uncertainity. If any thing happens India will TEST and break the system.

Time to be clear headed.

As I said earlier hats off to MMS for pulling off the deal! And to Jaswant Singh for all those light bulb engagements.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Sep 2009 21:16

NRao wrote: The REAL problem needs to be tackled. Does India NEED a TN device for deterrence? And IF it does what is to be done?

IMHO, India NEEDS to test.

Or, if she does nto test THEN India is admitting India does NOT need a TN device to deter.

Thermonuclear bombs give the best bang for the buck - even if most of the yield happens to be fission. The fusion that occurs is valuable in making a lot of the fissile material fission. When you are talking of weapons over 50-70kt - the way to make them with the least amount of Pu is thermonuclear.

I personally don't think anything above 300 kt is of much use and I also think that even 25 kt nukes are perfectly deadly and serve as a deterrent. But the point is that unless someone throws in a counter accusation to diss Santhanam's new statements - the balance of accusation is that there has been a bluff with regard to the success of the "thermonuclear" test.

Does it not seem then that there was a deliberate decision to announce a halt to testing and that decision might well have been made even before the tests. Do a few tests and say "OK no more" - no matter what the results were. If such a political decision had been made - why was it done? Tests are after all "tests" and what is needed from tests are results.

Having said that I believe that no more data will be released. Only counter arguments about whether an A frame was usable or not and what happened to the holes in the ground. Even Santhanam's 25+2 and earlier statement of 60% yield means the test was supposed to be 45 kt. Now even if it had been 100% yield and Santhanam is right in both his statements we were looking at small bomb - not what people like to imagine are city busters.

As an aside - I find it amusing that 27kt is exactly 60% of 45 kt

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 17 Sep 2009 21:28

Amirikhans attacked Iraq when they were 400% sure Saddam did not have any WMD.
Amrikhans offered 123 and changed it every so often as they got to know the duds as bums we had.

No wonder BM sang a different tune....

All in all a scam of colossal proportions on a billion strong nation., if not scam of the century.

In retrospect MMS must have come to know the ways of BARC and hence the starving of funds.
************

Those who went ahead and made bums greater than 25Kt are true bums indeed.
The discussion started with the success of H bum, then when it was convenient, the question came to is H bum necessary, when the yields were talked, we now come to the conclusion more that 25 Kt is not usefull.

Chalo chalta hai

oh by the way the GOI official gezette document is not valid because it was not notarized!

The deterrence is not for India that needs to be demonstrated, the enemies of India need to be convinced that we have the means to retaliate if the miscalculate...

The current stuff is more than adeqaute to continue talks even if Arunachal is occupied or Kashmir is lost to TSP.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 21:57

I wonder if OSA is being slapped on KS tonight as we speak. This will tell us for sure if GoI is behind KS's statements.
What ever he has spoken is certainly not open source, and I am sure that a case for the OSA to come in can be made out if required.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Sep 2009 22:00

Gagan wrote:I wonder if OSA is being slapped on KS tonight as we speak. This will tell us for sure if GoI is behind KS's statements.
What ever he has spoken is certainly not open source, and I am sure that a case for the OSA to come in can be made out if required.

No - that will be an admission that he is right. They will not do that unless they want to prove that he is right.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Sep 2009 22:02

Arunachal?

Entire NE and bet BD will donate Chittagong.

But, then I think smaller kts will also be good enough. However, like Shiv said, will GoI pull the trigger or tell NSA to formulate a statement that GoI is formulating a response and officials are "rushing to the spot".

A huge part of the problem is a complacent public too.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 22:06

Gagan wrote:I wonder if OSA is being slapped on KS tonight as we speak. This will tell us for sure if GoI is behind KS's statements.
What ever he has spoken is certainly not open source, and I am sure that a case for the OSA to come in can be made out if required.

It will be an Indian Dreyfuss case.

KS seems to have very strong backers. Dont read his article in isolation. Read all the articles together to see the totality of the picture emerging.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 17 Sep 2009 22:21

NRao wrote: A huge part of the problem is a complacent public too.

Why just complacent, hypocrite idiots of the very first order. The public always is. There is no faster way to ruin a nation than ruling through perceptions of the public. This is where leadership comes in and leads and takes decisions, that are right for the country.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 22:27

shiv wrote:As an aside - I find it amusing that 27kt is exactly 60% of 45 kt

I think I stated that many pages earlier.

You will also be amused that 45 kt is 60% of 75 kT that Shri K Subramanyam was banking on !

Now what does R Chidambaram owe the 1.2 billion Indian citizens?
Or conversely what 1.2 billion Indian citizens owe R.Chidambram and the cabal for orchestrating this extremely serious compromise of national security??

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 22:31

He is questioning the entire policy of ABV/RC/AK trio's motives for not re testing. I think MMS forms the quatrad to this since he is PM now in his second term.

This revelation by KS was bound to happen, if not by KS, by some one else. With the arihant in the waters, and China breathing fire on the borders and equipping pakistan with ballistic missile deliverable Pu weapons, and Ombaba-GWB playing the tag team tandav on india's interests, there really was no other way than to lift the veil from all the obfuscation.

Now the other veil needs remain. When MMS or the BARC cabal says that the deterrence is credible, I have to ask how? Surely not on the basis of that one failed test - some other factor has weighed in. Russia gave India the design or hand held BARC men to rectify the TN just as Russia hand held BARC/Kalpakkam on arihant's reactor?

I hope the above is not true.

munna · Post by **munna** » 17 Sep 2009 22:34

Arun_S wrote:Now what does R Chidambaram owe the 1.2 billion Indian citizens?
Or conversely what 1.2 billion Indian citizens owe R.Chidambram and the cabal for orchestrating this extremely serious compromise of national security??

Apology?
Dr Santhanam has bowled a dossra to catch entire GOI, PMO, DAE and all other Kaan-Fi-Dent people off guard. Although the damage cannot be undone but now it seems that atleast we are closer to the truth. Thanks to Arun_S for keeping us alert and alive to the "Satya".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 22:41

Gagan wrote:He is questioning the entire policy of ABV/RC/AK trio's motives for not re testing. I think MMS forms the quatrad to this since he is PM now in his second term.

This revelation by KS was bound to happen, if not by KS, by some one else. With the arihant in the waters, and China breathing fire on the borders and equipping pakistan with ballistic missile deliverable Pu weapons, and Ombaba-GWB playing the tag team tandav on india's interests, there really was no other way than to lift the veil from all the obfuscation.

Now the other veil needs remain. When MMS or the BARC cabal says that the deterrence is credible, I have to ask how? Surely not on the basis of that one failed test - some other factor has weighed in. Russia gave India the design or hand held BARC men to rectify the TN just as Russia hand held BARC/Kalpakkam on arihant's reactor?

I hope the above is not true.

Gagan, The PRC moves have also shaken the core belief of the strategic community in India that PRC doesnt want a war with India. And this was stated as the biggest reason for the nuke deal by eminent experts. Now this is going by the wayside.

BTW I wonder at why you keep saying the second statement. Why would they do that? It breaks all their agreements and undercuts their own position at the high table. And they learnt a bitter lesson from PRC.

If deterrent is based on the working weapon its still credible. Only needs more of them.

What I want is a clear statement from the GOI. This death by revelations is not doing anything good. Low level functionaries releaseing letters is passe. And so is imputing motives and lack of knowledge of the critics.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Sep 2009 22:52

for those asking for a TN test , KS clearly says BARC has no new weaponised device ready for test with the issues addressed.

so roaming around nanga seems like only thing we can do now. Boo.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 17 Sep 2009 23:07

ramana wrote:
Gagan wrote:I wonder if OSA is being slapped on KS tonight as we speak. This will tell us for sure if GoI is behind KS's statements.
What ever he has spoken is certainly not open source, and I am sure that a case for the OSA to come in can be made out if required.
It will be an Indian Dreyfuss case.

KS seems to have very strong backers. Dont read his article in isolation. Read all the articles together to see the totality of the picture emerging.

Indeed, I am surprised that people have not seen fit to highlight the following

Ashok Parthasarathi, the co-author of this article, was S&T Adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and deeply involved in Pokhran-I, of May

Along with the other luminaries who came out in KS's corner (and lets not forget Shri PKI, who has been officially complaining since 98, and BC and BK who were hammer and tongs against 123) the thought that KS is working alone is truly misleading.

It is a clear cut war between two sections of GoI, and it seems that one section was about to win when KS and gang started pulling out their Divya-astra's as a measure of last resort.

GoI is going to need to send 3-4 Top notch people at cabinet level to jail under OSA if they even think about touching KS -- there will be bloodbath.

No, OSA is going to sit exactly where it belongs in this case.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 23:10

Singha wrote:for those asking for a TN test , KS clearly says BARC has no new weaponised device ready for test with the issues addressed.

so roaming around nanga seems like only thing we can do now. Boo.

Now now this is not true.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 17 Sep 2009 23:12

ramana wrote:What I want is a clear statement from the GOI. This death by revelations is not doing anything good. Low level functionaries releaseing letters is passe. And so is imputing motives and lack of knowledge of the critics.

An idea for Sonia-ji!

After the upcomign state elections, come out openly on the fizzle issue with a three point strategy:
1. That NDA govt betrayed the nation with a fizzle bum and did not retest the design which would help India avoid yet another round of sanctions.
2. Arrange leaks on how MMS and some of the BARC officials "mis-understood" strategic interests of this great nation and they are requested to make room for new leadership.
3. Yuvaraj making sound-bites that India should go back to Nehru-ji's independent foreign policy approach and that India must test TN weapons.

Then arrange for Yuvaraj pattabhishek followed by a serious "Astra vidya pradarshan"

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 17 Sep 2009 23:14

If the BARC/GoI folks cheated/lied to the nation, how does testing again change things ? What reason would you have to believe them the second time around ? Obviously, there will be no 'independent observers' around.

It appears there will be no satisfaction until there's a megaton test suitably signed off as valid by the NPAs themselves - the very people who are otherwise reviled here.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 17 Sep 2009 23:20

But it is one thing NOT to wash dirty laundry in public, learn the lessons and keep marching forward. After all this is all frigging super cutting edge of science. There will be lessons learnt both in successes and more so in failures.

However, it is entirely different to reward people, elevate them to positions they have, create an aura paralleling gods knowing fully well the failures of those personalities. How the hell GOI can "exit" unscathed from this? This is going to be classic OB lesson as much in magnitude as the "Bay of pigs."

Sarma · Post by **Sarma** » 17 Sep 2009 23:22

Suraj, your argument about NPAs is incorrect and misleading. We are talking about half of the Indian scientific community (i.e. the DRDO side and others) doubting the yield of Shakti-I. Nobody has even mentioned NPAs in this thread. There should be unanimity among BARC, DAE, DRDO, Services and others who matter regarding the yields. Right now, there is a vertical split that needs to be bridged.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 23:28

They could test one and verify that the design and yeild correspond.
Then they could announce that they are testing a 350 - 400 KT warhead. and let the world see the seismic signature. Prove the signature matched the stated and realized yield.

Simble onlee. But it takes a spine of indian stainless steel to do this.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 17 Sep 2009 23:34

Sarma wrote:Suraj, your argument about NPAs is incorrect and misleading. We are talking about half of the Indian scientific community (i.e. the DRDO side and others) doubting the yield of Shakti-I. Nobody has even mentioned NPAs in this thread. There should be unanimity among BARC, DAE, DRDO, Services and others who matter regarding the yields. Right now, there is a vertical split that needs to be bridged.

True, Sarmaji thanks for stating that, I have myself at least twice protested that NPAs had nothing to do with it.

Various solutions for a verifiable trust-able system have been proposed in these very pages, I have done that, Arun_S has, and I have posted solution recipes of exactly the same problem from Bharat Karnad.

People have a way out -- we just need a will.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 17 Sep 2009 23:34

One Q i had in the article

As for radioactivity levels, senior BARC radiochemists who undertook radio-assay of fission products in samples similarly drilled at Pokhran-I (of May 1974) told Santhanam that the yield announced to the media was substantially higher than what they had submitted to Dr. Raja Ramanna. Dr. Chidambaram must publicly substantiate any claim that it did not occur in the TN test along with justification data.

What has this got to do with S-1/2 series of tests. Is KS trying to implicate all BARC scientists since its inception?

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 17 Sep 2009 23:41

The same 'scientific community' would have to conduct the next round of tests that is being demanded. And who 'validates' those tests ?

'Clear' statements and explanations are being demanded, while every participant in this regrettably public tussle have being stating just that - in their estimation.

The problem with this line of discussion is that there's no explanation of how one intends to trust those who are not trusted now. If BARC claims a 1MT test next week, why would there not be an N-part 200-page dhaga complaining that it was 100KT onlee ?

The nature of being an outside viewer in a matter like this is that there will never be conclusive proof to everyone's satisfaction.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 17 Sep 2009 23:43

suryag wrote:One Q i had in the article
As for radioactivity levels, senior BARC radiochemists who undertook radio-assay of fission products in samples similarly drilled at Pokhran-I (of May 1974) told Santhanam that the yield announced to the media was substantially higher than what they had submitted to Dr. Raja Ramanna. Dr. Chidambaram must publicly substantiate any claim that it did not occur in the TN test along with justification data.
What has this got to do with S-1/2 series of tests. Is KS trying to implicate all BARC scientists since its inception?

Tele-seismic evidence of S1 yield correlates to the yield of Pokhran-I device. If the yield of the Pok1 device was subantantially lower than what is claimed by BARC (13KT), it follows that yield of S1 was lower too. I think thats what KS is implying..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 23:47

A key assumption is same people will be in charge. Highly unlikely after this controversy.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 17 Sep 2009 23:51

Wow! With all the Smiley Bans and pictures of bent pulleys and half-destroyed concrete holes (BTW, abyone notice the difference in texture between the ground up to half the shaft, and the ground beyond that?) and paper withdrawals and calls for Survivor votes, this place is getting to be far more dangerous than Khetolai.

But the simple question remains. The damage to Khetolai may have been caused by S2, S3, S4 or S5 or even the non-existent S6, rather than S1. BUT... it STILL leaves the basic questions unanswered.

If what happened was a "fizzle" or 'Piffle" or whatever compared to what WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN, and given that what happened still caused major damage at Khetolai, what WOULD HAVE HAPPENED to Khetolai if S1 had NOT "fizzled" or "piffled"?

Aren't we dealing here with an Attempted Mass Murder of innocent villagers? Isn't it time to file PIL criminal charges for attempted murder against all those attempted murderers? Who was the person responsible for arranging the test?

Let's see... Oh! That would be Dr. K.S. Santanam!!!

And he is the one who is on record as of May 1998, saying that the tests were designed to NOT cause damage to Khetolai, and this was the constraint. Hellooo???????

Yeah, yeah, I know, start the Survivor vote. The Rational Thought level needs to be made homogeneous on the forum.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 17 Sep 2009 23:53

The other assumption is that we cannot ever have "internal" organizations agree on a given conclusion. Without caring for any outside validation, a new system should evolve whereby agreements within internal stakeholders is vitally necessary and sufficient. Keep validating till such time there is that agreement.

If everyone in home is corrupt we are screwed anyway. Thankfully, this is not the case.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 17 Sep 2009 23:57

What serves as the basis to trust the new people put in charge ? Who verifies them , and who verifies the verifiers ?

Nuclear testing will never be a 'normal' peer reviewed scientific exercise. Either one can accept that the ultimate truth on yields will only be known to BARC and that no one else including we can claim full authority, or go on an endless debate where every authority who's statement is not acceptable on subjective evaluation is deemed under suspicion.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 18 Sep 2009 00:00

So according to N guru its not the signs of science but what the scientists said takes precedence.

Even criminals are given a chance to retract statements they made. More recently Kasab did it did he not?