Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #572190
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.astronomy, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes |
| Date | 2016-04-21 20:05 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <3eonuc-pd6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <cMCdnVYZbfQDiYTKnZ2dnUU7-R3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1oinuc-mr5.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <XbqdnVfrQdXbv4TKnZ2dnUU7-cfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r1nnuc-i96.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <RMSdnaNmbKXlsoTKnZ2dnUU7-LfNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:r1nnuc-i96.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>> news:1oinuc-mr5.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:hhfnuc-4h5.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:96qkuc-rvp.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:9ctcuc-b2.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:23jbuc-lvo.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:if18uc-jfd.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:vto2uc-5dp.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:prb0uc-ndh.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:km80uc-n3h.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:nejp0q$li$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:vdrvtc-9of.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ROTFLMAO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And your evidence the readings were too low or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "unusual" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is..... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missing because Jim failed to post any supporting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The seismic records on 9/11 have been posted many times >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are dead wrong about WTC7 but what they didn't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seismic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> records from WTC1 and WTC2 is what is important. They >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compared to other collapsing buildings or jackhammers and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jackhammers don't generate seismic signatures that can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detected >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than a few blocks away. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And your proof of that is what? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The energy of a jackhammer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And why didn't the destruction of WTC7 have an S-wave or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P-wave? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you have been told many, many, many times, the collapse of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> building >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not an earthquake. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So now you are telling me none of the buildings should have had >>>>>>>>>>>>> S-waves >>>>>>>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>>>>>> P-waves just because WTC7 didn't leave any? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, I am telling you yet again that the collapse of a building >>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>> different thing than an earthquake. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And I'm telling you that the seismic records for three buildings >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Exactly what one would expect. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now you have to stoop to truncating my post. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your first sentence is usually a steaming pile of delusional >>>>>>>> nonsense >>>>>>>> and there is no need to go any further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pretty funny that you want to swear by seismic readings when they >>>>>>> were >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> way too small >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, they were way too small to be an explosion of any kind, and >>>>>> especially >>>>>> a nuclear explosion. >>>>> >>>>> YOU ASSHOLE BECAUSE YOU DO NOT KNOW ABOUT MRR NUKES >>>> >>>> A nuke is a nuke when discussing seismic signatures. >>> >>> 1. How can you claim they are the same when you have no idea what makes >>> MRR >>> nukes different? >> >> Why don't you tell us what makes them different from the standpoint of >> explosive energy? No answer, as expected. -- Jim Pennino
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 22:16 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 17:48 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 23:10 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-13 15:30 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-13 21:05 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-15 08:28 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-15 21:02 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-16 22:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-17 05:21 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-17 02:57 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-17 17:22 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-20 03:45 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-20 17:17 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 11:36 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 17:34 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 12:57 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 18:28 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 13:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 19:42 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 14:52 -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 16:10 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 21:26 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-22 13:08 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-22 20:54 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-28 14:12 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-28 19:49 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-21 20:20 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 15:37 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-21 21:56 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-22 13:22 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-22 19:14 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-22 14:57 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-22 22:04 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-28 14:16 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-28 20:44 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 14:12 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-13 15:36 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 21:45 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-14 11:12 -0500
csiph-web