all 7 comments

[–]ArthnoldManacatsaman 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Probably because it's not true.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Evidence, please?

[–]polync 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

In case of nuclear explosion there would be a radioactive trace in the atmosphere. Quite a lot of nations looking for such traces, especially in Europe. So in case of nuclear explosion within a few days it would be a massive whine.

Recent examples: nenoksa incident.

[–]Sixto 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"But the governments could have conspired to suppress international science insti..."

Handheld geiger counters. I'm sure there are some in private hands down in the middle east.

[–]Sixto 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's not how evidence work. You have to present evidence for your initial statement and then those who disagree evaluate and dispute it if one wants.

Just saying "Because it's not true" is so worthless people should just ignore them.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I would imagine most places that have had, or are in danger of having attacks and warfare, which certainly Lebanon is, have security cameras of different types looking at their most important infrastructure? I certainly would do that if it were up to me. They might have UV cams, and ultra-high FPS cams, light-augmented cams, and who knows what.

    [–]Sixto 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Detect human trafficking, checking if engines have ran last few hours, monitor refrigerated units or even point an IR cam towards the giant silo to monitor the temps of the ammonium nitrate in danger of blowing up and wiping out a large portion of the harbour?