Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.conspiracy > #264483 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-21 17:22 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-08-23 06:44 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 96 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.conspiracy
The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 17:22 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-08-21 18:54 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-21 22:56 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-21 18:59 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse David <lerraf@mail.com> - 2015-08-21 20:48 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 11:46 +1000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 04:05 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 09:20 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Justin Tyme" <justin_tyme_2003@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-24 19:26 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:58 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-26 02:32 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 04:03 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 06:44 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 11:48 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 18:47 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 15:08 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 21:46 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:06 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 18:54 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 04:07 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:21 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-23 03:59 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 17:43 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 12:04 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 17:23 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 19:44 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:23 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:43 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 14:36 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 19:54 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 18:54 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:53 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:01 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 21:02 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:49 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:26 +0000
? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked (was: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 05:42 -0500
Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked (was: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse) je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 04:07 -0700
2 je suis charly was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked (was: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 14:52 -0500
Re: 2 je suis charly was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked (was: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse) je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 13:28 -0700
Re: 2 je suis charly was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 20:20 +0000
Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 12:15 +0100
Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 07:23 -0500
seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 07:35 -0500
Re: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 08:42 -0500
Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 09:05 -0500
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 18:03 +0100
T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:53 -0500
Re: T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:19 +0000
Re: T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:13 +0000
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:04 -0500
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 14:18 -0500
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 19:50 +0000
Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 15:28 -0500
Re: Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 20:40 +0000
Re: Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 14:20 -0700
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 04:08 -0500
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 04:03 -0500
Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100
Re: seismic evidence is inconsistent jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:11 +0000
Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked (was: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:46 -0500
Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:08 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:45 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:24 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:44 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 05:09 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 08:40 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 09:36 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:07 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 13:03 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-24 11:59 -0400
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-24 12:39 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-24 18:44 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:57 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 21:35 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 19:41 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 17:55 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:13 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 18:55 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 03:44 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:50 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 05:18 +0200
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:29 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:45 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:28 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Ming Tiggle" <none@nomail.com> - 2015-08-21 21:52 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:12 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Ming Tiggle" <none@nomail.com> - 2015-08-21 21:53 -0700
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 09:55 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:54 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:11 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:21 -0500
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:30 +0000
Re: The wings folded back like a birds wings going into a birdhouse "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:44 -0500
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 20:20 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: 2 je suis charly was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked |
| Message-ID | <sgmpac-tf5.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #264811 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > Those arrows are to help people see that the location of the deep > underground nukes can be determined by the "Surviving Corners" of the Twin > Towers. There were no nukes of any kind, kook. When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances that rational people would expect from such events. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 12:15 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked |
| Message-ID | <mrc9th$ajv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #264657 |
On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:u42oac-n4t.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> And the people that convinced me deep underground nukes and CGIs were >>> used >>> at Ground Zero. DUH >> >> Are just as batshit crazy as you are, kook. > > And yet it is you who has never been able to address what tell tale signs > are in the following: > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > > >> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. > > Ok so explain why the remains of the Twin Towers look like they were > vaporized by two deep underground nukes. See: > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > From a video posted by the Friendly Neighborhood Nut we know the North Tower > shook violently, stopped shaking for around 12 seconds and then started it's > trip down. Where is that series of events on those seismograph readings? > > Since photographic evidence give us tell tale signs that they were nuked > there are only three possibilitys.: > > 1. The people with the seismographs lied That is what I suspected. > > 2. With all the testing of undergroun nukes done by the USA they learned > how to fool the seismographs making you a LIAR. > > 3. Or a deep underground nuke leaves a different signature completely. It > is very hard to tell from the readings you show where the building shook for > a few seconds and than sat for 12 seconds and then started to fall. > > >> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. > > And on the other hand the following is clear evidence that two deep > underground nukes were used on the Twin Towers. <G> > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > >> >> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm > > ROTFLMAO because that site proves it is screwed up right off the bat. It > states: "were able to determine accurate times of the plane impacts and > building collapses." They should get real because real jets don't have > disappearing wings but 3D CGIs do. > > > >> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html > > We already know from videos taken of the Twin Towers that they shook for a > few seconds stopped shaking for about 12 seconds then started their way > down. Where is the video taken of the North Tower represened by the > seismograph readings? <G> > >> Jim Pennino > > Rocky > > Evasive answers noted. Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 07:23 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked |
| Message-ID | <roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #264665 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon
<tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote:
>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>> news:u42oac-n4t.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And the people that convinced me deep underground nukes and CGIs were
>>>> used at Ground Zero. DUH
>>>
>>> Are just as batshit crazy as you are, kook.
>>
>> And yet it is you who has never been able to address what tell tale signs
>> are in the following:
>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>
>>
>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
>>
>> Ok so explain why the remains of the Twin Towers look like they were
>> vaporized by two deep underground nukes. See:
>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>
>> From a video posted by the Friendly Neighborhood Nut we know the North Tower
>> shook violently, stopped shaking for around 12 seconds and then started it's
>> trip down. Where is that series of events on those seismograph readings?
>>
>> Since photographic evidence give us tell tale signs that they were nuked
>> there are only three possibilitys.:
>>
>> 1. The people with the seismographs lied That is what I suspected.
>>
>> 2. With all the testing of undergroun nukes done by the USA they learned
>> how to fool the seismographs making you a LIAR.
>>
>> 3. Or a deep underground nuke leaves a different signature completely. It
>> is very hard to tell from the readings you show where the building shook for
>> a few seconds and than sat for 12 seconds and then started to fall.
>>
>>
>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.
>>
>> And on the other hand the following is clear evidence that two deep
>> underground nukes were used on the Twin Towers. <G>
>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>
>>>
>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>>
>> ROTFLMAO because that site proves it is screwed up right off the bat. It
>> states: "were able to determine accurate times of the plane impacts and
>> building collapses." They should get real because real jets don't have
>> disappearing wings but 3D CGIs do.
>>
>>
>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>>
>> We already know from videos taken of the Twin Towers that they shook for a
>> few seconds stopped shaking for about 12 seconds then started their way
>> down. Where is the video taken of the North Tower represened by the
>> seismograph readings? <G>
>>
>
>Evasive answers noted.
>
>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature?
>
>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer?
>
Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings.
Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China
would naturally lie to help the U.S.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 07:35 -0500 |
| Subject | seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked) |
| Message-ID | <LvGdnTeLl_nSI0TInZ2dnUU7-cudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #264690 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... > On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon > <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: > >>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >> >>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >> >>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >> > > Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. > Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China > would naturally lie to help the U.S. We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then it stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and where is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction to not line up again. <G> 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds before collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA And the description of the shaking ground from witnesses at the scene puts that shaking on par with a 5.5 quake and not a 2.3 so someone is lying and I doubt if it was the witnesses or the video. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 08:42 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked) |
| Message-ID | <2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #264694 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon
>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote:
>>>
>>>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature?
>>>
>>>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer?
>>
>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings.
>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China
>> would naturally lie to help the U.S.
>
>We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then it
>stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and where
>is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction to
>not line up again. <G>
>
Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the
towers collapsed. This is not a secret.
>9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds
>before collapse
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA
>
>And the description of the shaking ground from witnesses at the scene puts
>that shaking on par with a 5.5 quake and not a 2.3 so someone is lying and I
>doubt if it was the witnesses or the video. <G>
You have no idea how the Richter scale works.
One will easily feel a 2.3 if they are near. Those within a few
blocks of the towers would have felt the 2.3 caused by the collapse of
the towers.
Hey, how is that whole ignoring my posts thing working out for
you?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 09:05 -0500 |
| Subject | Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) |
| Message-ID | <yp6dna02UJepTkTInZ2dnUU7-a-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #264702 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... > On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>> >>>>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>> >>>>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>> >>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >> >>We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then >>it >>stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>where >>is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction to >>not line up again. <G> >> > > Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the > towers collapsed. This is not a secret. And yet you can't point to it? Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me. And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin Towers did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using the term "pancake collapse" and then they simply went from a collapse initiation to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G> Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the Twin Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got around that issue. <G> And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the lack of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO The only way you will ever be able to figure out what really happened on 9/11 is if you track down why there were so many inconsistencies with the media bullshit about 9/11. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 18:03 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent |
| Message-ID | <mrcua7$squ$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #264709 |
On 23/08/2015 15:05, Rocky wrote: > "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... >> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>>> >>>>> Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>>> >>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >>> >>> We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then >>> it >>> stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>> where >>> is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction to >>> not line up again. <G> >>> >> >> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the >> towers collapsed. This is not a secret. > > And yet you can't point to it? Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me. > But you have claimed that the ground shook, if it did then seismographs would record it. Are you saying that the ground did not shake, or are you saying that seismographs did not record it? > And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin Towers > did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using the > term "pancake collapse" and then they simply went from a collapse initiation > to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little > debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G> > > Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the Twin > Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got around > that issue. <G> > > And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the lack > of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy > claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO > > The only way you will ever be able to figure out what really happened on > 9/11 is if you track down why there were so many inconsistencies with the > media bullshit about 9/11. > > Rocky Sheeple > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 12:53 -0500 |
| Subject | T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent ) |
| Message-ID | <Z6udnTxjiPKglUfInZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #264743 |
"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:mrcua7$squ$5@dont-email.me... > On 23/08/2015 15:05, Rocky wrote: >> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>>>> >>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >>>> >>>> We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds >>>> then >>>> it >>>> stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>>> where >>>> is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction >>>> to >>>> not line up again. <G> >>>> >>> >>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the >>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret. >> >> And yet you can't point to it? Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me. >> > > But you have claimed that the ground shook, if it did then seismographs > would record it. T-annoy, I agree with that but that does not mean we will be given what they recorded you idiot. > Are you saying that the ground did not shake, or are you saying that > seismographs did not record it? You gave two options and neither one of them was that we were lied to and yet there is all sorts of evidence that NIST lied to us so why shouldn't other government agencies lie too? >> And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin >> Towers >> did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using >> the >> term "pancake collapse" and then they simply went from a collapse >> initiation >> to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little >> debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G> >> >> Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the >> Twin >> Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got >> around >> that issue. <G> >> >> And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the >> lack >> of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy >> claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO >> >> The only way you will ever be able to figure out what really happened on >> 9/11 is if you track down why there were so many inconsistencies with the >> media bullshit about 9/11. >> >> Rocky And don't forget the best evidence that NIST was in on the "Great 9/11 Hoax" is the following playlist and the comments in those videos. <G> "NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence" Published on Jun 28, 2015 ... "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there." https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 18:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going |
| Message-ID | <pefpac-km4.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #264761 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:mrcua7$squ$5@dont-email.me... >> But you have claimed that the ground shook, if it did then seismographs >> would record it. > > T-annoy, I agree with that but that does not mean we will be given what they > recorded you idiot. As there are thousands and thousands of seismographs across the planet, someone somewhere would have noticed nuclear explosions, kook. There are lots of seismograph recordings made on the day on the Internet, kook. There is nothing secret about seismographs, lots of people and organizations have them, and many are connected to the Internet in real time, kook. There is a sample of some at the end of my post, kook. When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected by nearby seismographs. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: T-annoy the pain keeps keeps the bullshit going |
| Message-ID | <mrdajg$hn4$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #264761 |
On 23/08/2015 18:53, Rocky wrote: > "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:mrcua7$squ$5@dont-email.me... >> On 23/08/2015 15:05, Rocky wrote: >>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... >>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>>>>> >>>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >>>>> >>>>> We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds >>>>> then >>>>> it >>>>> stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>>>> where >>>>> is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction >>>>> to >>>>> not line up again. <G> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the >>>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret. >>> >>> And yet you can't point to it? Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me. >>> >> >> But you have claimed that the ground shook, if it did then seismographs >> would record it. > > T-annoy, I agree with that but that does not mean we will be given what they > recorded you idiot. > So how do you know what the reading were? >> Are you saying that the ground did not shake, or are you saying that >> seismographs did not record it? > > You gave two options and neither one of them was that we were lied to and > yet there is all sorts of evidence that NIST lied to us so why shouldn't > other government agencies lie too? > > Then answer it as two questions then. Are you saying that the ground did not shake? Are you saying that seismographs did not record it? >>> And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin >>> Towers >>> did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using >>> the >>> term "pancake collapse" and then they simply went from a collapse >>> initiation >>> to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little >>> debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G> >>> >>> Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the >>> Twin >>> Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got >>> around >>> that issue. <G> >>> >>> And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the >>> lack >>> of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy >>> claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO >>> >>> The only way you will ever be able to figure out what really happened on >>> 9/11 is if you track down why there were so many inconsistencies with the >>> media bullshit about 9/11. >>> >>> Rocky > > And don't forget the best evidence that NIST was in on the "Great 9/11 Hoax" > is the following playlist and the comments in those videos. <G> > > "NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence" > Published on Jun 28, 2015 > ... > "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the > fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a > horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building > structure would still be there." > > https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 17:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting |
| Message-ID | <libpac-e84.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #264709 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > And yet you can't point to it? Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me. Seismic signatures of the buildings collapsing and the airplane crashes at the end, kook. When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected by nearby seismographs. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 14:04 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) |
| Message-ID | <c86kta9ll422j11bs2qgfmne3eaudevttp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #264709 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:05:05 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon
>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature?
>>>>>
>>>>>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer?
>>>>
>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings.
>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China
>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S.
>>>
>>>We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then
>>>it
>>>stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and
>>>where
>>>is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction to
>>>not line up again. <G>
>>>
>>
>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the
>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret.
>
>And yet you can't point to it?
You've yet to point to a single seismograph that recorded any
nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001.
>Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me.
>
Who is this Kent person about whom you are so obsessed?
>And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin Towers
>did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using the
>term "pancake collapse"
The term was in regards to each floor falling onto the one
bellow. And it was the media that used the term. NIST used the term
progressive collapse.
What compels you to lie about such things?
>and then they simply went from a collapse initiation
>to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little
>debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G>
Most of the debris was found in the sub levels and bath tub. Old
news. But you are intellectually unable to accept the truth.
What is most sad, is that I don't mean that as an insult.
>
>Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the Twin
>Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got around
>that issue. <G>
>
Since there was no lack of debris, there was nothing to get
around.
>And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the lack
>of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy
>claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO
Direct quote and MID. Unless, of course, you're lying.
>
>The only way you will ever be able to figure out what really happened on
>9/11 is if you track down why there were so many inconsistencies with the
>media bullshit about 9/11.
In the early hours there was a lot of confusion. Some of what was
reported was wrong. This doesn't mean there were any inconsistencies.
Not to the educated mind.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 14:18 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) |
| Message-ID | <4pOdnX9URuu3gUfInZ2dnUU7-eudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #264789 |
So Kent and Jim both like to remove alt.astronomy for some reason. Could it be Bast? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c86kta9ll422j11bs2qgfmne3eaudevttp@4ax.com... > On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:05:05 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> >>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>>>> >>>>>>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>>>> >>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >>>> >>>>We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then >>>>it >>>>stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>>>where >>>>is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction >>>>to >>>>not line up again. <G> >>>> >>> >>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the >>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret. >> >>And yet you can't point to it? > > You've yet to point to a single seismograph that recorded any > nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001. Wrong because I can prove NIST lied through their teeth it is entirely possible that every government agency also lied through their teeth to help conceal the fact that not only were the Twin Towers brought down by a CD but it was an NCD. <G> The playlist for the Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 19:50 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting |
| Message-ID | <bpkpac-ka5.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #264803 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > Wrong because I can prove NIST lied through their teeth it is entirely > possible that every government agency also lied through their teeth to help > conceal the fact that not only were the Twin Towers brought down by a CD but > it was an NCD. <G> What anyone may have said is totally irrelevant when one looks at the seismic record, kook. When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances that rational people would expect from such events. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 15:28 -0500 |
| Subject | Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting |
| Message-ID | <ieidnaTZC_YDsUfInZ2dnUU7-YmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #264816 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:bpkpac-ka5.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> Wrong because I can prove NIST lied through their teeth it is entirely >> possible that every government agency also lied through their teeth to >> help >> conceal the fact that not only were the Twin Towers brought down by a CD >> but >> it was an NCD. <G> > > What anyone may have said is totally irrelevant when one looks at the > seismic record, kook. BULLSHIT because if one government agency lied big time why not all of them? BTW I've looked at your seismic readings at http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html and they don't show a gap of 12 seconds from when the ground shook and an EMP took place to when the towers started to come down so it appears that entire section was removed. And it is easy to see why because then all of America would know the Twin Towers were nuked. DUH. Too bad there are still photos of the hypocenter under WTC4 and a mushroom cloud that is consistent with an underground nuke. <G> Oh yeah, and the "Surviving Corners" that could only be caused by a nuke that was planted so far down into the ground it could not reach the far sides of the Towers. <G> So we have three things that are consistent with NCDs and one thing that isn't even consistent with videos taken at GZ and that is the seismic readings. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 20:40 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting |
| Message-ID | <omnpac-4k5.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #264821 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > BULLSHIT because if one government agency lied big time why not all of them? Spoken like a true tin foil hat kook. > BTW I've looked at your seismic readings at > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html > > and they don't show a gap of 12 seconds from when the ground shook and an > EMP took place to when the towers started to come down so it appears that > entire section was removed. And it is easy to see why because then all of > America would know the Twin Towers were nuked. DUH. There was no EMP, kook, as is proven by the fact that all the electronics in the area continued to work, you babbling retard. > Too bad there are still photos of the hypocenter under WTC4 and a mushroom > cloud that is consistent with an underground nuke. <G> One can create a mushroom cloud with a firecracker, kook. When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events. A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a fact that is widely known and trivial to verify. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 14:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Jim the bullshitter keeps bullshitting |
| Message-ID | <charlie-gordon1492-0DE535.14204623082015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> |
| In reply to | #264821 |
In article <ieidnaTZC_YDsUfInZ2dnUU7-YmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > BULLSHIT because if one government agency lied big time why not all of them? > > BTW I've looked at your seismic readings at > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html > > and they don't show a gap of 12 seconds from when the ground shook and an > EMP took place to when the towers started to come down so it appears that > entire section was removed. And it is easy to see why because then all of > America would know the Twin Towers were nuked. DUH. It sounds like you are arguing that a lack of evidence is the evidence. > Too bad there are still photos of the hypocenter under WTC4 and a mushroom > cloud that is consistent with an underground nuke. <G> Underground nuclear explosions do not produce mushroom clouds. A wide variety of hot rapid combustions do. A mushroom cloud is the visible trace of a pocket of hot gas rising and expanding into the air with some convective toroidal flow. > Oh yeah, and the "Surviving Corners" that could only be caused by a nuke > that was planted so far down into the ground it could not reach the far > sides of the Towers. <G> Or that the random trajectories of debris were.....random. What got hit or not hit was just a question of luck, good or bad. > So we have three things that are consistent with NCDs and one thing that > isn't even consistent with videos taken at GZ and that is the seismic > readings. <G> The State Department has 31 nuclear communist spies. -- Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent |
| Message-ID | <mrdajc$hn4$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #264803 |
On 23/08/2015 20:18, Rocky wrote: > So Kent and Jim both like to remove alt.astronomy for some reason. Could it > be Bast? > > "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:c86kta9ll422j11bs2qgfmne3eaudevttp@4ax.com... >> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:05:05 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> >>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com... >>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com... >>>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon >>>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer? >>>>>> >>>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings. >>>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China >>>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S. >>>>> >>>>> We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then >>>>> it >>>>> stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and >>>>> where >>>>> is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction >>>>> to >>>>> not line up again. <G> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the >>>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret. >>> >>> And yet you can't point to it? >> >> You've yet to point to a single seismograph that recorded any >> nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001. > > Wrong If it's wrong, then point us to these recordings. > because I can prove NIST lied through their teeth it is entirely > possible that every government agency also lied through their teeth to help > conceal the fact that not only were the Twin Towers brought down by a CD but > it was an NCD. <G> > > The playlist for the Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence is: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 04:08 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent |
| Message-ID | <jonlta5g8l030ef8gsret67aj419ludbkg@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #264831 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:33:23 +0100, Tony Dragon
<tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
[...]
>>>> We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and
>>>>>> where
>>>>>> is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction
>>>>>> to not line up again. <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the
>>>>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret.
>>>>
>>>> And yet you can't point to it?
>>>
>>> You've yet to point to a single seismograph that recorded any
>>> nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001.
>>
>> Wrong
>
>If it's wrong, then point us to these recordings.
But Rocky is claiming he already has. I've asked that he post the
MID for it. Since it was another Rocky lie, as he will prove, he won't
be able to offer the MID for the post.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-24 04:03 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Kent the bullshitter keeps bullshitting (was: seismic evidence is inconsistent (was: ? 4 Jim about why the Twin Towers look like they were nuked)) |
| Message-ID | <cdnltapq2ufesmmvln3g6iuibutbqapebq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #264803 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 14:18:42 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
Once again, alt.astronomy has been removed.
Your OBSESSION with unrelated groups is not healthy, Rocky.
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c86kta9ll422j11bs2qgfmne3eaudevttp@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:05:05 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:2djjtalggfqkvfl5u2us1pu43d4h0qtued@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 07:35:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:roejtalvjnnbv3hiuv81trbmhlc4jmmhrd@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:36 +0100, Tony Dragon
>>>>>> <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 23/08/2015 11:42, Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why have you not replied about the lack of seismic signature?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Is this yet another question that you refuse to answer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rocky is trying to claim everyone lied about the readings.
>>>>>> Because, you know, the people who monitor seismographs in China
>>>>>> would naturally lie to help the U.S.
>>>>>
>>>>>We have video evidence that the North Tower shook for a few seconds then
>>>>>it
>>>>>stopped shaking and then about 12 seconds later it started to fall and
>>>>>where is that in the seismic evidence? FYI for some reason fact and fiction
>>>>>to not line up again. <G>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Local seismographs recorded the shaking of the ground when the
>>>> towers collapsed. This is not a secret.
>>>
>>>And yet you can't point to it?
>>
>> You've yet to point to a single seismograph that recorded any
>> nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001.
>
>Wrong
Please post the MID wherein you did point to a seismograph that
recorded any nuclear explosions on 9/11/2001.
>because I can prove NIST lied through their teeth it is entirely
>possible that every government agency also lied through their teeth to help
>conceal the fact that not only were the Twin Towers brought down by a CD but
>it was an NCD. <G>
No nukes were used, as you have proved.
And your LIE that you pointed to any seismographs that recorded a
nuclear explosion on 9/11/2001 has been exposed.
Would you like to try another lie?
>>>Looks like more Kent Bullshit to me.
>>
>> Who is this Kent person about whom you are so obsessed?
>>
Rocky? Are you going to answer?
>>>And don't forget NIST could not explain why the remains of the Twin Towers
>>>did not resemble a "Pancake collapse" so they were forced to quit using the
>>>term "pancake collapse"
>>
>> The term was in regards to each floor falling onto the one
>>bellow. And it was the media that used the term. NIST used the term
>>progressive collapse.
>> What compels you to lie about such things?
>>
Rocky?
>>>and then they simply went from a collapse initiation
>>>to a "Global Collapse" and never tried to address why there was so little
>>>debris at the base of the Twin Towers. <G>
>>
>> Most of the debris was found in the sub levels and bath tub. Old
>>news. But you are intellectually unable to accept the truth.
>> What is most sad, is that I don't mean that as an insult.
Does the truth frighten you so much you couldn't reply?
>>>Oh, but you think you can address the lack of debris at the base of the Twin
>>>Towers and I'll bet you will never try knowing exactly how NIST got around
>>>that issue. <G>
>>
>> Since there was no lack of debris, there was nothing to get
>>around.
>>
Is your trying to hide from the truth of my comment your way of
admitting I was, and am, correct?
>>>And don't forget how the Ediot from alt.conspiracy tried to explain the lack
>>>of debris at the base of the Twin Towers. The Ediot from alt.conspiracy
>>>claimed the shaking by the jet weakened them. ROTFLMAO
>>
>> Direct quote and MID. Unless, of course, you're lying.
Your default admission that you were lying is noted and accepted.
What did you think you would gain from lying about what Ed
claimed? And how is that whole ignoring my posts thing working out for
you?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.conspiracy
csiph-web