there is nothing easier to detect than the aftermath of a nuclear explosion. For a start, there will be fission products, which will be highly radioactive, and there will be residual plutonium or uranium. Those in the vicinity would almost certainly receive a lethal dose of gamma radiation. The fission products could be detected in 30 seconds with a geiger counter, which, if you made it to GCSE science, you will be familiar.

Didn't they excavate that whole Bali nightclub scene, and dump it to the bottom of the Indian Ocean in very quick time - cuts the forensic
What evidence do you have that independent people armed with radiation detectors would necessarily be present in these aftermaths?
How well would conventional detectors register the output of low-yield weaponry?
Personally I lean towards the Tesla Howitzer idea, which would mimic micronuke activity
But that's a whole other story

1. Did they excavate it and dump it? Reference?

2. A 'mini-nuke' would send fission fragments high into the air - that's why it's called 'fall out'. The entire district would be contaminated within a kilometre or so radius.

3. Gamma radiation from the blast? Again, there would be no survivors within at least 100 metres.

4. A Tesla Howitzer. Do explain this concept unknown to conventional physics [damn clever chaps, these zionists!]

5. Viall's webiste is full of crude scientific errors of the most basic kind. Read the section on ammonium nitrate. It's full of gems. The ammonium nitrate is there to provide oxygen to the diesel. True. Then he goes on to say you can use anything containing oxygen [but they don't tell you this1] Even iron oxide! Contains oxygen, don't you see. Well, by that criterion, so do water and carbon dioxide. Funny then that they're used for fire extinguishers.
It's full of other errors: [ps. given up on those. life is too short fto wait for it to load]

6. By the way, someone ought to teach him how to write HTML. And how to make websites that load in less than ten minutes. If he can't even make a worthwhile website, why should we take his word as an expert?

7. Why the incessant urge to try to prove that it wasn't Islamists? And must have been zionists [code for jews]. If the 'zionists' were capable of all of this, without ever being discovered, then, as I say, they must be damned clever chaps.

8. It's remarkable that people such as uourself and Viall can confidently make all these assertions without ever having been there or handled any of the forensic evidence whatso ever. Who needs Scotland Yard when we have people like you?

'(ways will be found to define it as: "conspiracy bollocks"; "anti-semetic" & "non news")'

Jackslucid, you have a real problem and you need help - quite seriously, if you're posting links like this as serious news (because you believe it) then I suggest you get tested for schizophrenia. The earlier you get help the more easily the symptoms can be managed.

At least jackslucid helpfully put "This is very important" in the title to convey the gravitas of his 'unrefutable proofs'.

Next time I post my theory on Giant Lizards I must make sure to headline it "this is a bit boring, actually" to catch people's attention.

jacklucid this is extreme overstretch. Get some sleep. Call a friend when you wake up, and ask them for honest advice.
What can I say? Mmmm ... don't push it, time's a great healer.