Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #572221

Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes

From jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Newsgroups alt.astronomy, sci.physics
Subject Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes
Date 2016-04-21 21:24 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <02tnuc-ou6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink)
References (6 earlier) <SZydnW2qCbl4s4TKnZ2dnUU7-fHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <iconuc-pd6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <xcGdnVsv5PF3q4TKnZ2dnUU7-dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <48rnuc-so6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <Xq6dnTvHLsvz3YTKnZ2dnUU7-S3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:48rnuc-so6.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>> news:iconuc-pd6.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:evmnuc-i96.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:3finuc-mr5.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:maliuc-2vi.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:jatcuc-b2.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:htibuc-lvo.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:2d18uc-jfd.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:80h5uc-r65.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:r525uc-nl3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:7an2uc-67p.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:lob0uc-ndh.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:7b50uc-ipg.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:vdrvtc-9of.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure you can; no seismic readings from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hackjammer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hundred feet away.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So don't forget even the seismic records that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something very unusual about the destruction of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> three
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buildings
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> World
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trade Center because they are much smaller than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the size buildings that went down or were
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> down
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ended up floating away instead.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, nothing unusual about the readings at all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Funny how you do not have any supporting 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean other than the seismograph readings that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> showed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unusual?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Numbers dude, where are your numbers and then 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compare
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Posted many times before by many people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bullshit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope and noted by many other people.'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BULLSHIT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you just didn't want to acknowlege it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU NEVER DID A COMPARISON WITH OTHER BUILDINGS
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Such was done in the text that accompanied the data.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Funny how you don't have a message ID to support your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why in the world would I keep track of message IDs to kooks?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also the first time such was posted is well over a year ago
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it has been posted many times.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or you could do a google search.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was NOT posted was the seismic readings for WTC7 and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the destruction of other buildings.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure it was.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fact remains the Seismic records for when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ground
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly what one would expect.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So you expected WTC7 to hit the ground with the same force and
>>>>>>>>>>> energy
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> Jackhammer?  Wow?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, that is your delusion that jackhammers have any energy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There were no S-waves or P-waves from WTC7
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course there wasn't; to expect them would be extremely stupid at
>>>>>>>> best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And you are also saying that the surface waves of WTC7's destruction
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> supposed to be comparable to a jackhammer too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course not; that would be stupid,
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why was the lack of p-waves and s-waves and the very small surface
>>>>> waves from WTC7 comparable to a jackhammer?
>>>>
>>>> What delusion makes you think they were?
>>
>> As expected, no answer to the jackhammer question.
 
As expected, still no answer to what delusion makes this halfwit idiot
think a jackhammer has a seismic signature.


-- 
Jim Pennino

Back to sci.physics | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 17:38 -0500
  Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 23:08 +0000
    Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-13 15:24 -0500
      Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-13 20:37 +0000
        Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-14 07:20 -0500
          Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 17:55 +0000
            Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-14 15:49 -0500
              Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-14 22:08 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-15 08:22 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-15 21:00 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-16 22:52 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-17 05:18 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-17 02:54 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-17 17:21 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-19 16:21 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-19 21:42 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 13:02 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 18:24 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 13:52 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 19:41 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 14:49 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 20:05 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 15:23 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 20:53 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 16:04 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 21:24 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-22 13:05 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-22 20:52 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-28 14:08 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-28 19:48 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 03:04 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-18 07:23 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 14:40 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-19 16:31 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-20 14:26 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 11:25 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-21 18:53 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 14:12 -0500
  Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 14:26 +0000
    Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-13 15:28 -0500
      Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 21:39 +0000
        Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-14 11:07 -0500
          Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 17:36 +0000
            Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-14 15:54 -0500
              Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-15 14:12 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-15 13:39 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 03:00 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-18 07:27 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 14:30 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-19 16:29 -0500
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-20 14:19 +0000
                Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 11:34 -0500

csiph-web