Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #519547
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Rocky's imagined nukes |
| Date | 2015-09-07 15:14 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <f8m0cc-gva.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <X4-dne9otPq7S0TInZ2dnUU7-TudnZ2d@giganews.com> <mrcu9r$squ$2@dont-email.me> <P76dnal9k4MwiUfInZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mrdaj7$hn4$3@dont-email.me> <W_Kdna8vXd4f3XDInZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > BTW incase you missed it the way excess radiation from GZ went undetected > was they sent samples to another area completely and they probably sat for a > long enough time that any excess radiation decreased in amount before the > samples were actually looked at. You mean like a few thousand years, you ignorant, babbling kook? If nukes had been used in New York, the radiation levels would still be higher today and for a very long time, ignorant kook. -- Jim Pennino
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 09:17 -0500
Re: Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 18:03 +0100
Re: Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:46 -0500
Re: Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:53 +0000
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:12 -0500
Re: Nukes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:18 -0500
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 17:11 -0500
Re: Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 21:33 +0100
Re: Nukes ( Tony has no proof of a collapse ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 02:47 -0500
Re: Rocky's imagined nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 15:14 +0000
Re: Nukes ( Tony has no proof of a collapse ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-07 18:46 +0100
Re: Nukes je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 13:33 -0700
2 je suis charly (was: Nukes) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 15:53 -0500
Re: 2 je suis charly (was: Nukes) je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 14:32 -0700
Re: 2 je suis charly (was: Nukes) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 16:59 -0500
depleted uranium (u-238 ... or U235? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 14:18 -0700
Re: 2 je suis charly Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 23:16 +0100
Re: 2 je suis charly gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:14 -0500
Re: Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:18 +0000
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:19 -0500
Re: Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 23:47 +0100
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 17:15 -0500
Re: Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 23:51 +0100
Re: Nukes collapse videos could be all bogus "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 17:00 -0500
Re: Nukes collapse videos could be all bogus "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:01 -0500
Re: Nukes collapse videos could be all bogus noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:21 -0700
Re: Nukes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 15:37 -0500
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:21 -0500
Re: Nukes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:18 -0500
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 17:17 -0500
Re: Nukes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 20:12 -0500
Re: Re: Nukes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-26 04:11 -0500
Re: Nukes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-07 19:00 -0500
Re: Re: Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 19:41 -0500
Re: Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:53 -0500
csiph-web