Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Take a look inside the Finnish bunkers capable of withstanding a nuclear attack


Grim Reaper 6
 Share

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

I seem to remember you dismissing my post as factually incorrect, and stating I knew nothing about nuclear weapons. Now you try to turn it around as my fault you dont know what you`re talking about. You stated I was wrong, so how about you post some factual evidence next time you do that to show why?

Cause you dont know anything about nuclear weapon, you argued that neutrons were a key component in fusion which just isnt true.  You also made a ridiculous argument about how Russia can make this extremely tiny 100 megaton thermonuclear warhead, also still waiting for proof of your claim that Russia only limited the tzar bomba to 50 megatons cause it was concerned about the damage it could do.

40 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Oh go on then, you tempted me, you can start with the link showing its in granite and while the entrance is only 60 feet underground the rest of the complex is much deeper lol.

This will be pointless as you just hand wave everything inconvenient to you away.

This article goes into more details about entering the bunker than other ones even though it largely says the same stuff.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/finland-builds-500-underground-shelters-26948577.amp

"We are led down four steep flights of concrete steps, covered by what seems like decades of dust, until, 25 metres below the surface, a long, sloping tunnel dug into solid rock stretches into the distance.

Further on, and even deeper underground, two sold steel doors, the first a metre thick and so heavy it takes two people to push it open, before it seals us off from the outside world with a thunderous bang."

As for being built into granite

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/10022486

"Helsinki sits atop a hard granite bedrock suited to underground construction.

Since the 1960s the city has excavated nearly 9 million cubic metres of that tough granite."

Or one could just look up the geology of Helsinki.

Given how you are I have little doubt you will hand wave this all away or ignore it cause you like to pretend like you know what you are talking about and like to believe that Russia is some unstoppable force which it clearly isnt.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Cause you dont know anything about nuclear weapon, you argued that neutrons were a key component in fusion which just isnt true.  You also made a ridiculous argument about how Russia can make this extremely tiny 100 megaton thermonuclear warhead, also still waiting for proof of your claim that Russia only limited the tzar bomba to 50 megatons cause it was concerned about the damage it could do.

This will be pointless as you just hand wave everything inconvenient to you away.

This article goes into more details about entering the bunker than other ones even though it largely says the same stuff.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/finland-builds-500-underground-shelters-26948577.amp

"We are led down four steep flights of concrete steps, covered by what seems like decades of dust, until, 25 metres below the surface, a long, sloping tunnel dug into solid rock stretches into the distance.

Further on, and even deeper underground, two sold steel doors, the first a metre thick and so heavy it takes two people to push it open, before it seals us off from the outside world with a thunderous bang."

As for being built into granite

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/10022486

"Helsinki sits atop a hard granite bedrock suited to underground construction.

Since the 1960s the city has excavated nearly 9 million cubic metres of that tough granite."

Or one could just look up the geology of Helsinki.

Given how you are I have little doubt you will hand wave this all away or ignore it cause you like to pretend like you know what you are talking about and like to believe that Russia is some unstoppable force which it clearly isnt.

OMG this just gets funnier and funnier.

I put it to you that with the comment that neutrons arent needed its you who knows nothing. I mean come on, there would be no point in using Deuterium or Tritium or Lithium-6. Please got watch a documentary on how nuclear weapons work. Then ones on the Tzar Bomba along with Satan-1 and Satan-2.

Your links do not say the bunker is the 100s of metres underground needed to survive the blast. They are a network of fallout shelters, not nuclear bunkers. The only point I can award you (and I kind of guess it had to happen eventually) is Helsinki is built on granite bedrock lol.

Your attitude combined with lack of knowledge is hilarious, very entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

OMG this just gets funnier and funnier.

I put it to you that with the comment that neutrons arent needed its you who knows nothing. I mean come on, there would be no point in using Deuterium or Tritium or Lithium-6. Please got watch a documentary on how nuclear weapons work. Then ones on the Tzar Bomba along with Satan-1 and Satan-2.

Your links do not say the bunker is the 100s of metres underground needed to survive the blast. They are a network of fallout shelters, not nuclear bunkers. The only point I can award you (and I kind of guess it had to happen eventually) is Helsinki is built on granite bedrock lol.

Your attitude combined with lack of knowledge is hilarious, very entertaining.

Neutrons are used in fission to split atoms in fusion atoms are forced together, neutrons are only used in thermonuclear weapons is to convert lithium-6 deuteride to tritium as lithium-6 deuteride is stable while tritium has a relatively short half life.  It's not really that hard of a concept to understand but you cant admit being wrong.

So still no proof posted of your claim that the tsar bomba was reduced from 100 megatons to 50 megatons due to destructive concerns.  I know you wont find it cause that wasnt the reason and just something you made up.

It doesn't need to be hundreds of meters down.  Your own source sites a 1 megaton warhead will create an approximately 60.9 meter deep crater in dirt if detonated at ground level.  Being built into granite the bunkers being between 20 and 80 meters deep will be more than enough to protect from a nuclear attack which wouldnt even use ground detonation anyway.

Just as I thought you continue to show you know nothing about this stuff and cant admit to being wrong.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Neutrons are used in fission to split atoms in fusion atoms are forced together, neutrons are only used in thermonuclear weapons is to convert lithium-6 deuteride to tritium as lithium-6 deuteride is stable while tritium has a relatively short half life.  It's not really that hard of a concept to understand but you cant admit being wrong.

So still no proof posted of your claim that the tsar bomba was reduced from 100 megatons to 50 megatons due to destructive concerns.  I know you wont find it cause that wasnt the reason and just something you made up.

It doesn't need to be hundreds of meters down.  Your own source sites a 1 megaton warhead will create an approximately 60.9 meter deep crater in dirt if detonated at ground level.  Being built into granite the bunkers being between 20 and 80 meters deep will be more than enough to protect from a nuclear attack which wouldnt even use ground detonation anyway.

Just as I thought you continue to show you know nothing about this stuff and cant admit to being wrong.

That just cracks me up.

The Hydrogen Bomb | Introduction to Chemistry (lumenlearning.com)

From which I quote `The nuclear fusion in an H-bomb releases neutrons much faster than a fission reaction, and these neutrons then bombard the remaining fissile fuel, causing it to undergo fission much more rapidly`

Perhaps you would like to revisit an earlier debate where you seemed to think current hydrogen bombs must be the size of a bus to give a yield of 100 megatons? What is really ironic is you quote lithium-6 deuteride without knowing the implications of your quote lol.

Tsar Bomba: Tsar Bomba - Wikipedia

From which I quote `In theory, the bomb would have had a yield in excess of 100 Mt (418 PJ) if it had included the uranium-238[14] fusion tamper which figured in the design, but which was omitted in the test to reduce radioactive fallout.`

Finally, when a nuclear bomb is detonated the explosion`s energy does not cease at the walls of the crater it has created. I really cannot believe I have to say that. At the surface you can even see the shock wave radiate out through the ground. That shockwave goes downwards as well as side-wards. A nuclear bunker or fallout shelter has to be strong enough and far enough away from ground zero to survive that shock wave.

A fallout shelter a few miles away is fine, a hardened nuclear bunker within a kilometre of a megaton bomb is toast.

Now, you keep arguing you are right and I am wrong, yet I keep posting the links showing you are wrong and I am right. Why am I posting most of the links? If you want to claim I am wrong on something how about you post the link? Oh, I forgot, if you actually had to find a link you would discover you are wrong lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much wrong in all of this it's going to take awhile to go through everything but it will be fun to rub your face in everything.

4 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

From which I quote `The nuclear fusion in an H-bomb releases neutrons much faster than a fission reaction, and these neutrons then bombard the remaining fissile fuel, causing it to undergo fission much more rapidly`

Your own quoted part even says that neutrons are used in fission not fusion.

Deuterium-tritium_fusion_svg.png.634e407d0364814c141445c4666e1720.png

As can easily be seen from the fusion reaction of tritium and deuterium there are no neutrons involved in causing the reaction but one is produced as a by-product.  Your claim that the produced neutron helps cause fusion reactions is just wrong, it plays no part at all in inducing fusion.

15 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Perhaps you would like to revisit an earlier debate where you seemed to think current hydrogen bombs must be the size of a bus to give a yield of 100 megatons? What is really ironic is you quote lithium-6 deuteride without knowing the implications of your quote lol.

You have argued that the Russians can somehow make a magical 100 megaton warhead that is extremely small and light weight with absolutely zero proof.  You already shown you have zero knowledge of how nuclear weapons work and have to rely on children level science information to back up your arguments, and even than you use it wrong.

15 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

From which I quote `In theory, the bomb would have had a yield in excess of 100 Mt (418 PJ) if it had included the uranium-238[14] fusion tamper which figured in the design, but which was omitted in the test to reduce radioactive fallout.`

But that isnt what you claimed, you claimed that it was reduced to lower the blast size due to concerns of it damaging a Soviet city.  Your claim was just wrong, you cant admit you were wrong, and now you are trying to weasel your way out and desperately trying to get anything you can spin to try and argue you were actually right when you werent.

17 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Finally, when a nuclear bomb is detonated the explosion`s energy does not cease at the walls of the crater it has created. I really cannot believe I have to say that. At the surface you can even see the shock wave radiate out through the ground. That shockwave goes downwards as well as side-wards. A nuclear bunker or fallout shelter has to be strong enough and far enough away from ground zero to survive that shock wave.

A fallout shelter a few miles away is fine, a hardened nuclear bunker within a kilometre of a megaton bomb is toast.

You truly have no idea what you are talking about.  Nuclear weapons dont function like chemical explosives and have an inherent shock wave, they instead super heat the surrounding area and that causes gasses to rapidly expand.  On the surface it will super heat the air and that will expand and cause a visible shock wave but for the crater it has to vaporize whatever the ground is made of before it can start expanding and even than it will want to take the path of least resistance to expand which will be upwards instead of down into the earth.  The downward shockwave will be minimal and in the case if the Finland bunkers are built into granite which is rather hard and will provide good protection from any shockwave.

25 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Now, you keep arguing you are right and I am wrong, yet I keep posting the links showing you are wrong and I am right. Why am I posting most of the links? If you want to claim I am wrong on something how about you post the link? Oh, I forgot, if you actually had to find a link you would discover you are wrong lol.

You arent right, your own links show you that you arent right but you cant admit to being wrong and are too desperate to notice that what you link isnt helping you.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Your own quoted part even says that neutrons are used in fission not fusion.

If you look at the link its a hydrogen bomb link.

Ok here is the full key points:

  • A thermonuclear weapon is a nuclear weapon design that uses the heat generated by a fission bomb to compress a nuclear fusion stage.
  • The basic principle of the Teller–Ulam configuration, the most common configuration of hydrogen bombs, is the idea that different parts of a thermonuclear weapon can be chained together in “stages,” with the detonation of each stage providing the energy necessary to ignite the next stage.
  • The nuclear fusion in an H-bomb releases neutrons much faster than a fission reaction, and these neutrons then bombard the remaining fissile fuel, causing it to undergo fission much more rapidly.

The fusion releases neutrons which essentially heat up the uranium or plutonium to an even higher temperature which then provides more energy to accelerate the fusion reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

If you look at the link its a hydrogen bomb link.

Ok here is the full key points:

  • A thermonuclear weapon is a nuclear weapon design that uses the heat generated by a fission bomb to compress a nuclear fusion stage.
  • The basic principle of the Teller–Ulam configuration, the most common configuration of hydrogen bombs, is the idea that different parts of a thermonuclear weapon can be chained together in “stages,” with the detonation of each stage providing the energy necessary to ignite the next stage.
  • The nuclear fusion in an H-bomb releases neutrons much faster than a fission reaction, and these neutrons then bombard the remaining fissile fuel, causing it to undergo fission much more rapidly.

The fusion releases neutrons which essentially heat up the uranium or plutonium to an even higher temperature which then provides more energy to accelerate the fusion reaction.

No matter how you try to spin it the reality is neutrons play no role in fusion reactions which you argued they did, in that regard you are simply and completely wrong.

As for your link it drastically over simplifies the science and while not strictly wrong isnt 100% accurate either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

No matter how you try to spin it the reality is neutrons play no role in fusion reactions which you argued they did, in that regard you are simply and completely wrong.

As for your link it drastically over simplifies the science and while not strictly wrong isnt 100% accurate either.

The link tells you they are, read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

The link tells you they are, read.

The link literally says they cause uranium to undergo fission not that the neutrons help tritium and deuterium undergo fusion.  There is even the fusion diagram I posted, and is easy to find in a ton of sources, that shows the fusion reaction of tritium and deuterium and a neutron is not a part of the fusion process at all but just created as a by product after the fusion reaction is complete.

Its honestly not that difficult to understand so either you have severe reading comprehension issues or you are so desperate to be right and not to have to admit being wrong that you are just ignoring everything that proves you wrong even when you provide it yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

The link literally says they cause uranium to undergo fission not that the neutrons help tritium and deuterium undergo fusion.  There is even the fusion diagram I posted, and is easy to find in a ton of sources, that shows the fusion reaction of tritium and deuterium and a neutron is not a part of the fusion process at all but just created as a by product after the fusion reaction is complete.

Its honestly not that difficult to understand so either you have severe reading comprehension issues or you are so desperate to be right and not to have to admit being wrong that you are just ignoring everything that proves you wrong even when you provide it yourself.

And where do the neutrons go and what do they do? You are almost there, read the link lmao.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cookie Monster said:

And where do the neutrons go and what do they do? You are almost there, read the link lmao.

Once again neutrons cause fission and not fusion, you are purposefully being obtuse at this point and a waste of time.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Once again neutrons cause fission and not fusion, you are purposefully being obtuse at this point and a waste of time.

No I`m not, there is a fission reaction driving the fusion reaction, read the link.

The neutrons come back, cause a faster chain reaction in the fissile material, which provides significantly more heat and x-rays to the fusion material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

No I`m not, there is a fission reaction driving the fusion reaction, read the link.

The neutrons come back, cause a faster chain reaction in the fissile material, which provides significantly more heat and x-rays to the fusion material.

Which is not what you originally argued, you originally stated that neutrons cause the fusion reaction and they simply do not.  You can keep trying to spin it to be right since you desperately need to be but you simply arent.  

By the time the fusion reaction starts going it can produce enough heat, pressure, and energy to sustain further fusion reactions which is how multi-stage thermonuclear weapons work.  The fission warhead induces the first fusion stage which than can induce a second fusion stage and onward for arbitrary fusion stages.  Keeping fissionable material around isnt necessary after the first stage.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two weeks ago on my vacation in Bulgaria I met one Swede. He told me that Finland is keeping 500,000 Fin man near the border with Russia. They are civilians living there but if needed they will jump into uniforms. He also told me that his grandfather fought three wars against Russians and that he is ready for a new one.

Not directly related to the topic subject but I think that it may be interesting to hear.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrumanB said:

Two weeks ago on my vacation in Bulgaria I met one Swede. He told me that Finland is keeping 500,000 Fin man near the border with Russia. They are civilians living there but if needed they will jump into uniforms. He also told me that his grandfather fought three wars against Russians and that he is ready for a new one.

Not directly related to the topic subject but I think that it may be interesting to hear.

Lol, let those ********s go into Finland... they will not come out alive. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TrumanB said:

Two weeks ago on my vacation in Bulgaria I met one Swede. He told me that Finland is keeping 500,000 Fin man near the border with Russia. They are civilians living there but if needed they will jump into uniforms. He also told me that his grandfather fought three wars against Russians and that he is ready for a new one.

Not directly related to the topic subject but I think that it may be interesting to hear.

My friend moved to Finland from Wales years ago, lives in a city not far from Russian border. Her other half would be ready since hes been through his training!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TrumanB said:

Two weeks ago on my vacation in Bulgaria I met one Swede. He told me that Finland is keeping 500,000 Fin man near the border with Russia. They are civilians living there but if needed they will jump into uniforms. He also told me that his grandfather fought three wars against Russians and that he is ready for a new one.

Not directly related to the topic subject but I think that it may be interesting to hear.

Read an interview someone did of Finnish volunteers fighting in Ukraine.  When asked what they thought of the Russian military and Finlands prospects of being able to resist Russia the volunteers were not impressed with the Russian military and believed that Finland would win a war against Russia and that Finland would occupy Moscow within a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DarkHunter said:

Read an interview someone did of Finnish volunteers fighting in Ukraine.  When asked what they thought of the Russian military and Finlands prospects of being able to resist Russia the volunteers were not impressed with the Russian military and believed that Finland would win a war against Russia and that Finland would occupy Moscow within a month.

Well, that may be a slight exaggeration. :)

Finland and Sweden applied to join NATO. That is a good thing for them. In case that Russia tries something they will have to help after these two countries join.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrumanB said:

Well, that may be a slight exaggeration. :)

Finland and Sweden applied to join NATO. That is a good thing for them. In case that Russia tries something they will have to help after these two countries join.

They were definitely exaggerating but the Russian military has certainly performed extremely poorly so far.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrumanB said:

Well, that may be a slight exaggeration. :)

Finland and Sweden applied to join NATO. That is a good thing for them. In case that Russia tries something they will have to help after these two countries join.

To be honest, I think Finland could fight the orcs off. Say now Putler decided to do something stupid like invade Finland WHILST still at war in Ukraine, I doubt Putler's orcs would have the logistics for two major wars. They'd do considerable damage to Finlands infrastructure, not going to doubt that but it would be suicide for the Orcs and Russia's economy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

To be honest, I think Finland could fight the orcs off. Say now Putler decided to do something stupid like invade Finland WHILST still at war in Ukraine, I doubt Putler's orcs would have the logistics for two major wars. They'd do considerable damage to Finlands infrastructure, not going to doubt that but it would be suicide for the Orcs and Russia's economy.

Putin is not stupid. I doubt that he would attack Finland whilst still at war in Ukraine. But...after the war you never know who is next. That's why it would be a good thing for these two countries to join NATO asap before the war in Ukraine ends. Let's see if NATO is going to speed up the process. If they start protracting that will raise a suspicion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrumanB said:

Putin is not stupid. I doubt that he would attack Finland whilst still at war in Ukraine. But...after the war you never know who is next. That's why it would be a good thing for these two countries to join NATO asap before the war in Ukraine ends. Let's see if NATO is going to speed up the process. If they start protracting that will raise a suspicion.

Even one on one, in todays climate, I dont think hed do it. They cant deploy the majority of their regular forces to the Finnish border, cause they still need troops on the Western border with Eastern Europe, troops in the East of Russia due to the proximity to Alaska plus even the South due to even China. Despite how they act with eachother Russia and China aren't allies like US and the UK. Its more of a business partnership.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Which is not what you originally argued, you originally stated that neutrons cause the fusion reaction and they simply do not.  You can keep trying to spin it to be right since you desperately need to be but you simply arent.  

By the time the fusion reaction starts going it can produce enough heat, pressure, and energy to sustain further fusion reactions which is how multi-stage thermonuclear weapons work.  The fission warhead induces the first fusion stage which than can induce a second fusion stage and onward for arbitrary fusion stages.  Keeping fissionable material around isnt necessary after the first stage.

I just told you that, dont tell me what I already wrote as if you know it and are now telling me it lol.

Edited by Cookie Monster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

I just told you that, dont tell me what I already wrote as if you know it and are now telling me it lol.

No you havent, this is getting ridiculous.  You cant even stay consistent in what you are saying.  You clearly don't understand the science and are just reaching for any way to be right.  I'm not going to bother wasting any more time on you if you are going to be this sad, pathetic, and desperate to be right so you can pretend you know about a topic you clearly dont.

Edited by DarkHunter
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

I just told you that, dont tell me what I already wrote as if you know it and are now telling me it lol.

Dude, I've been feeling second-hand embarrassment for you throughout the entire exchange between you and @DarkHunter. He clearly is leagues above you in terms of knowledge on the topic. Sometimes you've just gotta accept that you don't know what you're talking about and just move on.

This is just sad. For the love of god just see it as a learning opportunity.

Edited by Nuclear Wessel
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.