Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Sun Nov 24, 2024 7:23 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[QUESTION] SPOILERWas it a nuke or some kind of bombardment?
View previous topicView next topic
Page 5 of 9 [126 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Author Message
Rudyred
Boot


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 15
Location: Lake Superior

I'm thinking it was a nuke, for all the reasons listed, but the biggest one being the soldier who says they'll implement Hammerdown if conventional weapons don't work. "Conventional weapons" is the phrase used to describe all non-nuclear, non-chemical, and non-biological weapons. (See wikipedia if you don't believe me!)

So, technically, the soldier could have been referring to a nuke, chemical weapons, or biological weapons, but considering the situation I'd say it's most likely nukes.

And, in response to those who say, "But we'd never bomb our own country!!" -- Tell that to the people in Nevada and Utah dying of cancer because of the radiation from the nuclear testing done there in the 40's and 50's. If we can bomb our own country just to test nuclear weapons, then I'll bet we can bomb our own country for something as dire as MGP rampaging around.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:52 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Master Shake
Boot

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 25

I'm guessing it wasn't a nuke because:

1. EMP would've destroyed the camera's electronics.
2. Fireball from the nuke would've torched everything around the nearby area. From the sounds before the final bombing, the monster was still fairly close to Rob and Beth.
3. Nuclear explosions send shock waves above ground and below ground. Rob and Beth would've been buried by more than just a few rocks (and the camera would've been smashed) from the shockwaves.

I also have some speculations about the stealth bomber dropping bombs that Hud filmed. When the B-2 drops its bombs, you see maybe 8-10 bombs come out of its bomb bay. The B-2 is capable of carrying EIGHTY 500-lb. bombs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_Spirit

Anything bigger than a 500-lb. bomb is going to leave massive craters (and again, more shockwaves), make much more noise, and have bigger explosions than what I saw.

My question is, is it possible that they were dropping something other than conventional explosives on MGP? Maybe some kind of chemical weapon like mustard gas? You don't need massive explosions to drop a toxic skin agent, and in fact, the smaller the explosion the better, in order to keep the chemical more localized.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:29 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
h311b3nt
Decorated


Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 271
Location: OC

If I was prez and there was a nuclear solution that would not cause fallout to any other area than Manhattan Island, I would drop it. You would have to look at your whole arsenal and determine what would cause the most damage in a single area and, at the same time, cause as little damage a possible to surrounding areas. If that is a tactical nuke…then that is that is what you would use. I personally would use some sort of heavy flammable ordinance to try to corral it back to the ocean.

Spoiler (Rollover to View):
It seemed from the movie that they surrounded it and were trying to contain it (unsuccessfully). At least that is what the ground troops were doing. The deathblow would have com from an airstrike like you see in the apartment scene.

The "tape" would have not been erased because it was filmed a memory card according to the beginning of the movie (although this being filmed on a card does not really play into what is shown in the film).


Either way (nuke or no nuke) you have to suspend some disbelief. It is just a movie after all.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:01 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
penguin-1203
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 88

Master Shake wrote:
I'm guessing it wasn't a nuke because:

1. EMP would've destroyed the camera's electronics.
2. Fireball from the nuke would've torched everything around the nearby area. From the sounds before the final bombing, the monster was still fairly close to Rob and Beth.
3. Nuclear explosions send shock waves above ground and below ground. Rob and Beth would've been buried by more than just a few rocks (and the camera would've been smashed) from the shockwaves.

I also have some speculations about the stealth bomber dropping bombs that Hud filmed. When the B-2 drops its bombs, you see maybe 8-10 bombs come out of its bomb bay. The B-2 is capable of carrying EIGHTY 500-lb. bombs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_Spirit

Anything bigger than a 500-lb. bomb is going to leave massive craters (and again, more shockwaves), make much more noise, and have bigger explosions than what I saw.

My question is, is it possible that they were dropping something other than conventional explosives on MGP? Maybe some kind of chemical weapon like mustard gas? You don't need massive explosions to drop a toxic skin agent, and in fact, the smaller the explosion the better, in order to keep the chemical more localized.


true, but didnt the government out-law mustard gas?
but that could be a possibility aswell.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:19 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Row2k
Boot

Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 27

I'm amazed at some of the misconceptions on nukes. Do you really think that we haven't advanced on the technology at all since we dropped the bombs in WW2?

Quote:
A tactical nuclear weapon (TNW) refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to actually be used on a battlefield in military situations. This is as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are designed to threaten large populations or to generally deter attacks. Tactical nuclear weapons are generally considered part of a strategy of limited, rather than total, nuclear war.



Some of these tactical nukes actually have smaller area of effect than MOABs while packing just as hard of a punch. The EMP wouldn't necessarily disable the camera even at close range. Most of todays electronic storage mediums (excluding harddrives and magnetic tapes) do not use magnetic fields to store the data. So even if the camera did stop functioning after an EMP blast from the nuke, there's still a pretty good chance that the data would survive on the SD card.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:38 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
penguin-1203
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 88

Row2k wrote:
I'm amazed at some of the misconceptions on nukes. Do you really think that we haven't advanced on the technology at all since we dropped the bombs in WW2?

Quote:
A tactical nuclear weapon (TNW) refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to actually be used on a battlefield in military situations. This is as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are designed to threaten large populations or to generally deter attacks. Tactical nuclear weapons are generally considered part of a strategy of limited, rather than total, nuclear war.



Some of these tactical nukes actually have smaller area of effect than MOABs while packing just as hard of a punch. The EMP wouldn't necessarily disable the camera even at close range. Most of todays electronic storage mediums (excluding harddrives and magnetic tapes) do not use magnetic fields to store the data. So even if the camera did stop functioning after an EMP blast from the nuke, there's still a pretty good chance that the data would survive on the SD card.


true, but i still highly doubt that the prez would use the nuke as his final solution. there's still a hell of a lot more stuff he can do with out the use of nukes.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:59 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
fleabit
Veteran

Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 125

I really don't know why people still think it's a nuke. That makes no sense whatsoever. The only reason I could even think of it being a nuke would be the parasites. Worried they will spread and mate and be a national hazard. MPG himself? Why would you nuke him? Because he might kill everyone in the city? Um...

If he is going to head to other areas, I'm sure they can evacuate well in advance, working out a solution to down him in the meantime. Nuking your own largest city makes absolutely no sense, any way you think about it. What advantages would nuking have? If he is going to destory the city, let him do it and try to stop him in the meantime. Don't do it for him instantly. The fallout regardless of how they dropped it would probably cause sickness, disease, corrupted crops, fish, you name it, and end up killing more people than the critter ever could.

And the two orange-ish bomb explosions really make you think "massive carpet bombing." They did not carpet bomb previously, it seemed like all the strikes were surgical in nature. So now they are just going to for an all out bombardment.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:30 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
alptraum
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 15

I also think the parasite things could lead to a nuke. If out of nowhere (assuming the government knew nothing before the attack) some huge thing starts laying waste to a major city and then they start getting reports of smaller things that have some ability to infect people a nuke sounds pretty appealing. Especially if you've been attacking it with conventional weapons including armor and air strikes for hours and its not stopping the thing.

The sequence of explosions in the end does seem like it could be non nuke related. On the other hand, its a movie. And all the talk of Hammerdown being the plan to be used after "one more try" with conventional weapons if they do not work...

fleabit wrote:
I really don't know why people still think it's a nuke. That makes no sense whatsoever. The only reason I could even think of it being a nuke would be the parasites. Worried they will spread and mate and be a national hazard. MPG himself? Why would you nuke him? Because he might kill everyone in the city? Um...

If he is going to head to other areas, I'm sure they can evacuate well in advance, working out a solution to down him in the meantime. Nuking your own largest city makes absolutely no sense, any way you think about it. What advantages would nuking have? If he is going to destory the city, let him do it and try to stop him in the meantime. Don't do it for him instantly. The fallout regardless of how they dropped it would probably cause sickness, disease, corrupted crops, fish, you name it, and end up killing more people than the critter ever could.

And the two orange-ish bomb explosions really make you think "massive carpet bombing." They did not carpet bomb previously, it seemed like all the strikes were surgical in nature. So now they are just going to for an all out bombardment.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:45 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Aquastorm
Boot

Joined: 06 Dec 2007
Posts: 21
Location: Hong Kong

penguin-1203 wrote:
Master Shake wrote:
I'm guessing it wasn't a nuke because:

1. EMP would've destroyed the camera's electronics.
2. Fireball from the nuke would've torched everything around the nearby area. From the sounds before the final bombing, the monster was still fairly close to Rob and Beth.
3. Nuclear explosions send shock waves above ground and below ground. Rob and Beth would've been buried by more than just a few rocks (and the camera would've been smashed) from the shockwaves.

I also have some speculations about the stealth bomber dropping bombs that Hud filmed. When the B-2 drops its bombs, you see maybe 8-10 bombs come out of its bomb bay. The B-2 is capable of carrying EIGHTY 500-lb. bombs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_Spirit

Anything bigger than a 500-lb. bomb is going to leave massive craters (and again, more shockwaves), make much more noise, and have bigger explosions than what I saw.

My question is, is it possible that they were dropping something other than conventional explosives on MGP? Maybe some kind of chemical weapon like mustard gas? You don't need massive explosions to drop a toxic skin agent, and in fact, the smaller the explosion the better, in order to keep the chemical more localized.


true, but didnt the government out-law mustard gas?
but that could be a possibility aswell.


The carpet bombing run by the B-2 seems to be using Mk-84 2000lb, it was nicknamed "Hammer" for its considerable power, it is capable of making 50 feet deep by 26 foot wide craters.
The B-2 can carry up to 16 of those.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:58 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
cowboyfromhell
Veteran


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 130
Location: Tennessee/Alabama

No freakin way they dropped a nuke.There would be no tape for the DOD to review.
_________________
Twisted Evil "You can't kill me 'cause I'm already dead!" Twisted Evil

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
3000gtx
Boot


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 18

Yea let's just nuke an entire city to destroy one monster. perhaps killing many more people in turn. seems highly unlikely we would nuke a part of our own territory, the monster didn't destroy everything in NYC so why do it ourselves?

i say they just a massive bombardment of the area it was in at the time

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:11 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
jinx-33
Greenhorn

Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 7

Nuke...

Has to be a nuke. Solid State media in the camera could survive the EMP. Its relatively shielded by the bridge, trees in the park, even the atmosphere itself will suck up some of the emp shockwave. Nukes are designed to preform certain functions...one of them it a total EMP shockwave, I am sure we have some that are designed to minimize it. The Movie starts with the designation of "THE AREA FORMALLY KNOWN AS CENTRAL PARK". To me thats the biggest clue. If it wasn't a total wasteland, wouldn't we still call it central park? Yeah we still call it Chernobyl, but is it really the same place? I am sure with out movie magic we have tactical nukes capable of turning a focused area in to a bowl of glowing sand, leaving just enough residual radiation make the surrounding area at best partially uninhabitable and damage free. Most of NYC looked pretty bad off anyway and would have to be leveled to be rebuilt regardless. As Pres. and I saw what happened I would turn in to GWB in a second and NUKE MGP, but thats just me. Very Happy

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:32 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
alptraum
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 15

3000gtx wrote:
Yea let's just nuke an entire city to destroy one monster. perhaps killing many more people in turn. seems highly unlikely we would nuke a part of our own territory, the monster didn't destroy everything in NYC so why do it ourselves?

i say they just a massive bombardment of the area it was in at the time


Highly unlikely? As unlikely as a giant monster attacking NYC? Smile

The US had plans to use tactical nukes on friendly soil during the Cold War, so its obviously something the military would consider. Throw in a giant monster plus little infection dealing spider things that just destroyed a huge chunk of NYC in a few hours and nukes seem pretty reasonable. For all they (or we) knew the place was crawling with those spider things.

While I think a number of issues about "Hammerdown" can be debated (what the explosions seemed like, what they meant by conventional weapons, etc..) I don't think you can rule out nukes just by saying the military would never use one on a US city.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:46 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
3000gtx
Boot


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 18

alptraum wrote:


Highly unlikely? As unlikely as a giant monster attacking NYC? Smile



haha well you got me there. and I forgot about the "formerly known" part

as realistic as using a nuke on NYC is, I just don't want to believe it really haha

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:15 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Rjet
Boot

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 53

deleted

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:19 pm
Last edited by Rjet on Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 5 of 9 [126 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group