Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #521637 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-17 10:03 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 175 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 10:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 11:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:47 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 16:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 12:11 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 09:04 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:31 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:04 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 09:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 15:57 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 15:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:38 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:27 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:38 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:15 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-17 17:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 19:45 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 15:30 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:35 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 09:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:48 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 22:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 16:53 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 17:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 21:48 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 20:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:29 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:13 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-19 13:20 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:38 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:52 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 12:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 18:53 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:53 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 05:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 12:29 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 17:07 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:50 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 20:33 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:52 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 21:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 03:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 08:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 15:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:48 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 10:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-22 17:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:27 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 07:56 +0200
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 01:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-19 20:32 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:31 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:54 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-20 15:21 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-21 13:01 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:23 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 07:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:31 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:59 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:07 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 07:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:19 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:01 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:24 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 18:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 17:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 22:54 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 06:39 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:29 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 14:05 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:34 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 14:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 00:34 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 14:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 22:09 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 13:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 12:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 14:41 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:53 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 22:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 23:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:30 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 02:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 06:34 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( the Ediot forgets a link I gave him earlier ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 01:16 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 21:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <resmva50qllbipso4ic8jnq7v5j1hsr62i@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521637 |
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me...
>> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08
>
>Thanks and cool video but it is too bad that Tony the heckler , The Ediot,
>Kidd Wills, Sarah the Stalker, jimp, BKD, Giv Shitt, Michael, Sual, Hagbor
>and others will ask for proof by Willie E Coyote or the Roadrunner because
>those two are the only two with the credentials that they believe as proven
>by they still think the CGIs were real. <G>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wile_E._Coyote_and_The_Road_Runner
>
>Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only
>dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See:
>
I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making
the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very
obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not
that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it.
>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
> ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>
What do you think we should see in the video?
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 10:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3065e328c16b966998c2b7@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521758 |
In article <resmva50qllbipso4ic8jnq7v5j1hsr62i@4ax.com>, compuelf@gmail.com says... > > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > >"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message > >news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me... > >> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 > > > >Thanks and cool video but it is too bad that Tony the heckler , The Ediot, > >Kidd Wills, Sarah the Stalker, jimp, BKD, Giv Shitt, Michael, Sual, Hagbor > >and others will ask for proof by Willie E Coyote or the Roadrunner because > >those two are the only two with the credentials that they believe as proven > >by they still think the CGIs were real. <G> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wile_E._Coyote_and_The_Road_Runner > > > >Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only > >dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See: > > > > I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making > the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very > obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not > that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it. > > >Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4 > > ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 ) > > https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s > > > > What do you think we should see in the video? > > "Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their > belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with." > Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used > on 9/11/01 in > Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com> Since you aren't insane, you'll never see the stuff the Troofers see. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <6p7qva1e8dm7uocil7lu6v58qp7ibvp9hc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521806 |
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:01:06 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
wrote:
>In article <resmva50qllbipso4ic8jnq7v5j1hsr62i@4ax.com>,
>compuelf@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>> >news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08
>> >
>> >Thanks and cool video but it is too bad that Tony the heckler , The Ediot,
>> >Kidd Wills, Sarah the Stalker, jimp, BKD, Giv Shitt, Michael, Sual, Hagbor
>> >and others will ask for proof by Willie E Coyote or the Roadrunner because
>> >those two are the only two with the credentials that they believe as proven
>> >by they still think the CGIs were real. <G>
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wile_E._Coyote_and_The_Road_Runner
>> >
>> >Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only
>> >dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See:
>>
>> I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making
>> the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very
>> obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not
>> that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it.
>>
>> >Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>> > ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
>> > https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>> >
>>
>> What do you think we should see in the video?
>>
>> "Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
>> belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
>> Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
>> on 9/11/01 in
>> Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>
>Since you aren't insane, you'll never see the stuff the Troofers see.
Kind of a pity, in a way. I'd like to be able to better
understand Troofer logic, but I know that my being mentally stable
means I'll never be able.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 09:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30672d2f67b1bc9498c2bf@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521958 |
In article <6p7qva1e8dm7uocil7lu6v58qp7ibvp9hc@4ax.com>, compuelf@gmail.com says... > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:01:06 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > wrote: > > >In article <resmva50qllbipso4ic8jnq7v5j1hsr62i@4ax.com>, > >compuelf@gmail.com says... > >> > >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> > >> >"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message > >> >news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me... > >> >> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! > >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 > >> > > >> >Thanks and cool video but it is too bad that Tony the heckler , The Ediot, > >> >Kidd Wills, Sarah the Stalker, jimp, BKD, Giv Shitt, Michael, Sual, Hagbor > >> >and others will ask for proof by Willie E Coyote or the Roadrunner because > >> >those two are the only two with the credentials that they believe as proven > >> >by they still think the CGIs were real. <G> > >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wile_E._Coyote_and_The_Road_Runner > >> > > >> >Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only > >> >dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See: > >> > >> I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making > >> the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very > >> obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not > >> that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it. > >> > >> >Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4 > >> > ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 ) > >> > https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s > >> > > >> > >> What do you think we should see in the video? > >> > >> "Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their > >> belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with." > >> Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used > >> on 9/11/01 in > >> Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com> > > > >Since you aren't insane, you'll never see the stuff the Troofers see. > > Kind of a pity, in a way. I'd like to be able to better > understand Troofer logic, but I know that my being mentally stable > means I'll never be able. It is kind of a pity, but you have to be thankful you aren't gullible or dumb enough to swallow their bullshit. If so, you would be screwed, so bad. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 14:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mth5ns$6ts$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #521758 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes: >On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >>news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me... >>> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 >> >>Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only >>dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See: >> > I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making >the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very >obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not >that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it. I made several still images from that video, particularly as the plane crossed the crane cable. For those who aren't about to watch YA kookvid, it shows Flight 175 impacting the South Tower, viewed from somewhere to the east. There is a construction crane in the foreground and the plane flies behind it. The kook claim is that the image of the plane flies in front of the crane cable and then behind the crane arm, so "obviously it's faked". They replay it again at a slower speed, then twice more, magnified and slower so you can see the plane pass in front of the cable. What is faked is the replays. Still images of the normal speed video shows the plane as a blurry double exposure. The double exposure is from NTSC video interlacing, where the camera first scans and records the odd TV lines and then scans the even lines, but in the intervening 1/60 second, the plane has moved. (I am surprised the kooktards didn't kook about "the plane with 4 wings" or something) In all the replays the plane image is no longer a double exposure and is more detailed. How did they get detail not in the original? In addition, some of the images look like crude pastes of a rectangular image of the plane onto the background. In some of them, the crane cable doesn't even reach the plane, it stops at the edge of the paste rectangle. With NTSC scanning, MPEG compression, Youtube compression etc. it's hard to figure out all of what is going on. However it's obvious the replays of the event are not taken from the full speed clip of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 09:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <L7SdnYW_NtRSuGHInZ2dnUU7-V-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521807 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mth5ns$6ts$1@pcls7.std.com... > "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes: > >>On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:03:08 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >>>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >>>news:mtd0a8$hov$1@dont-email.me... >>>> 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 >>> >>>Oh yes, because the software that added CGIs to hundreds of videos only >>>dealt with buildings it had problems with a crane. See: >>> > >> I saw where whomever altered the video did a poor job of making >>the plane appear in front of the lines form the crane. And it's very >>obvious the video had been altered. Even you will have noticed. Not >>that your mental defects will permit you to be honest and admit it. > > I made several still images from that video, particularly as the plane > crossed the crane cable. For those who aren't about to watch YA kookvid, > it shows Flight 175 impacting the South Tower, viewed from somewhere to > the east. There is a construction crane in the foreground and the plane > flies behind it. The kook claim is that the image of the plane flies in > front of the crane cable and then behind the crane arm, so "obviously it's > faked". They replay it again at a slower speed, then twice more, > magnified and slower so you can see the plane pass in front of the cable. > > What is faked is the replays. Still images of the normal speed video > shows the plane as a blurry double exposure. The double exposure is from > NTSC video interlacing, where the camera first scans and records the odd > TV lines and then scans the even lines, but in the intervening 1/60 > second, the plane has moved. (I am surprised the kooktards didn't kook > about "the plane with 4 wings" or something) In all the replays the plane > image is no longer a double exposure and is more detailed. How did they > get detail not in the original? In addition, some of the images look like > crude pastes of a rectangular image of the plane onto the background. In > some of them, the crane cable doesn't even reach the plane, it stops at > the edge of the paste rectangle. > > With NTSC scanning, MPEG compression, Youtube compression etc. it's hard > to figure out all of what is going on. However it's obvious the replays > of the event are not taken from the full speed clip of it. You sound just like the Ediot on alt.conspiracy because he too blames the anomalies on NTSC instead of that was the way the CGI was programmed. DUH. And again, the only person that has been able to recreate the disappearing wing on CGI 175 did it was 3D software. <G> And do not forget there are at least 2 different CGIs used for the bogus Flight 175 and the black one should be direct sunlight unless if they had the settings in their 3D program wrong. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 16:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mthee2$24b$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #521814 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:mth5ns$6ts$1@pcls7.std.com... >> I made several still images from that video, particularly as the plane >> crossed the crane cable. For those who aren't about to watch YA kookvid, >> it shows Flight 175 impacting the South Tower, viewed from somewhere to >> the east. There is a construction crane in the foreground and the plane >> flies behind it. The kook claim is that the image of the plane flies in >> front of the crane cable and then behind the crane arm, so "obviously it's >> faked". They replay it again at a slower speed, then twice more, >> magnified and slower so you can see the plane pass in front of the cable. >> >> What is faked is the replays. Still images of the normal speed video >> shows the plane as a blurry double exposure. The double exposure is from >> NTSC video interlacing, where the camera first scans and records the odd >> TV lines and then scans the even lines, but in the intervening 1/60 >> second, the plane has moved. (I am surprised the kooktards didn't kook >> about "the plane with 4 wings" or something) In all the replays the plane >> image is no longer a double exposure and is more detailed. How did they >> get detail not in the original? In addition, some of the images look like >> crude pastes of a rectangular image of the plane onto the background. In >> some of them, the crane cable doesn't even reach the plane, it stops at >> the edge of the paste rectangle. >> >> With NTSC scanning, MPEG compression, Youtube compression etc. it's hard >> to figure out all of what is going on. However it's obvious the replays >> of the event are not taken from the full speed clip of it. >You sound just like the Ediot on alt.conspiracy because he too blames the >anomalies on NTSC instead of that was the way the CGI was programmed. DUH. ... Don't change the subject, kook. We're discussing how that video clip with the crane (which you claim proves there was no plane or some such nonsense) was itself doctored with, and fake. Were you actually dumb enough to fall for that poor attempt at video editing? I guess so, since it was you who brought it up in the first place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 17:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <65vtcc-2o8.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #521818 |
In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote: > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:mth5ns$6ts$1@pcls7.std.com... > >>> I made several still images from that video, particularly as the plane >>> crossed the crane cable. For those who aren't about to watch YA kookvid, >>> it shows Flight 175 impacting the South Tower, viewed from somewhere to >>> the east. There is a construction crane in the foreground and the plane >>> flies behind it. The kook claim is that the image of the plane flies in >>> front of the crane cable and then behind the crane arm, so "obviously it's >>> faked". They replay it again at a slower speed, then twice more, >>> magnified and slower so you can see the plane pass in front of the cable. >>> >>> What is faked is the replays. Still images of the normal speed video >>> shows the plane as a blurry double exposure. The double exposure is from >>> NTSC video interlacing, where the camera first scans and records the odd >>> TV lines and then scans the even lines, but in the intervening 1/60 >>> second, the plane has moved. (I am surprised the kooktards didn't kook >>> about "the plane with 4 wings" or something) In all the replays the plane >>> image is no longer a double exposure and is more detailed. How did they >>> get detail not in the original? In addition, some of the images look like >>> crude pastes of a rectangular image of the plane onto the background. In >>> some of them, the crane cable doesn't even reach the plane, it stops at >>> the edge of the paste rectangle. >>> >>> With NTSC scanning, MPEG compression, Youtube compression etc. it's hard >>> to figure out all of what is going on. However it's obvious the replays >>> of the event are not taken from the full speed clip of it. > >>You sound just like the Ediot on alt.conspiracy because he too blames the >>anomalies on NTSC instead of that was the way the CGI was programmed. DUH. > ... > > Don't change the subject, kook. We're discussing how that video clip with > the crane (which you claim proves there was no plane or some such nonsense) > was itself doctored with, and fake. Were you actually dumb enough to fall > for that poor attempt at video editing? I guess so, since it was you who > brought it up in the first place. Of course he did as it was in agreement with his delusions. You have to understand that a doctored video that agrees with his delusions is absolute fact while an undoctored video that does not agree with his delusions is a CGI. As an aside, from Rocky's comments, I highly doubt he has the slightest clue what a CGI actually is or what it takes to generate one, especially in 2001. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 14:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <aaydnbl50MVxwmHInZ2dnUU7-eGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521818 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mthee2$24b$3@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:mth5ns$6ts$1@pcls7.std.com... > >>> I made several still images from that video, particularly as the plane >>> crossed the crane cable. For those who aren't about to watch YA >>> kookvid, >>> it shows Flight 175 impacting the South Tower, viewed from somewhere to >>> the east. There is a construction crane in the foreground and the plane >>> flies behind it. The kook claim is that the image of the plane flies in >>> front of the crane cable and then behind the crane arm, so "obviously >>> it's >>> faked". They replay it again at a slower speed, then twice more, >>> magnified and slower so you can see the plane pass in front of the >>> cable. >>> >>> What is faked is the replays. Still images of the normal speed video >>> shows the plane as a blurry double exposure. The double exposure is >>> from >>> NTSC video interlacing, where the camera first scans and records the odd >>> TV lines and then scans the even lines, but in the intervening 1/60 >>> second, the plane has moved. (I am surprised the kooktards didn't kook >>> about "the plane with 4 wings" or something) In all the replays the >>> plane >>> image is no longer a double exposure and is more detailed. How did they >>> get detail not in the original? In addition, some of the images look >>> like >>> crude pastes of a rectangular image of the plane onto the background. >>> In >>> some of them, the crane cable doesn't even reach the plane, it stops at >>> the edge of the paste rectangle. >>> >>> With NTSC scanning, MPEG compression, Youtube compression etc. it's hard >>> to figure out all of what is going on. However it's obvious the replays >>> of the event are not taken from the full speed clip of it. > >>You sound just like the Ediot on alt.conspiracy because he too blames the >>anomalies on NTSC instead of that was the way the CGI was programmed. >>DUH. > ... > > Don't change the subject, kook. We're discussing how that video clip with > the crane (which you claim proves there was no plane or some such > nonsense) > was itself doctored with, and fake. Were you actually dumb enough to fall > for that poor attempt at video editing? I guess so, since it was you who > brought it up in the first place. The poor attempt at video editing was done by the software people used to add CGIs to all sorts of videos. And don't forget to notice there were basically two different CGIs used and the sun should have been shinning on the right side of the jet so why is one of the two main CGIs so black? <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 00:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtiaj8$nt4$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #521845 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> Don't change the subject, kook. We're discussing how that video clip with >> the crane (which you claim proves there was no plane or some such >> nonsense) >> was itself doctored with, and fake. Were you actually dumb enough to fall >> for that poor attempt at video editing? I guess so, since it was you who >> brought it up in the first place. >The poor attempt at video editing was done by the software people used to >add CGIs to all sorts of videos. K00ktard, you're changing the subject again. We're not talking about your imaginary "CGIs", we're talking how some "Truther" who made that clip is essentially lying to us by tampering with that video, making it look like the jet flew in front of the cable, and then lying to us by saying there can't be any jet because it's impossible for a jet to fly in front of the cable and behind the tower. So let's discuss "Truthers" lying to us. Did you even try to check out that clip to see if it was actually real? Or are you just being a sheeple and just baa and blindly accept any video the kookmeisters feed you? How about other clips on that same Youtube video? Are there falsehoods and doctored clips elsewhere on it? How about other Youtube kookvids? Are they full of lies and tampered clips as well? And what about simple misleading videos? A great example is the collapse of WTC 7. Kookvids almost never show the collapse of the east penthouse, they always start the collapse clip after. However, from the collapse of the east penthouse several seconds before the main collapse, we know that the building interior had already substantially collapsed before the visible collapse even started. Isn't it pure irony, when it's the "Truthers" who are lying?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 11:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <HrednUzScY_UFWDInZ2dnUU7-Q-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521928 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mtiaj8$nt4$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>> Don't change the subject, kook. We're discussing how that video clip >>> with >>> the crane (which you claim proves there was no plane or some such >>> nonsense) >>> was itself doctored with, and fake. Were you actually dumb enough to >>> fall >>> for that poor attempt at video editing? I guess so, since it was you >>> who >>> brought it up in the first place. > >>The poor attempt at video editing was done by the software people used to >>add CGIs to all sorts of videos. > > K00ktard, you're changing the subject again. We're not talking about your > imaginary "CGIs", we're talking how some "Truther" who made that clip is > essentially lying to us by tampering with that video, making it look like > the jet flew in front of the cable, and then lying to us by saying there > can't be any jet because it's impossible for a jet to fly in front of the > cable and behind the tower. > > So let's discuss "Truthers" lying to us. Did you even try to check out > that clip to see if it was actually real? Or are you just being a sheeple > and just baa and blindly accept any video the kookmeisters feed you? > > How about other clips on that same Youtube video? Are there falsehoods > and doctored clips elsewhere on it? How about other Youtube kookvids? > Are they full of lies and tampered clips as well? > > And what about simple misleading videos? A great example is the collapse > of WTC 7. Kookvids almost never show the collapse of the east penthouse, > they always start the collapse clip after. However, from the collapse of > the east penthouse several seconds before the main collapse, we know that > the building interior had already substantially collapsed before the > visible collapse even started. > > Isn't it pure irony, when it's the "Truthers" who are lying? ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through concrete and steel? 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 Now that is irony. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 12:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ik2rvats0tcnctie3p5i2vio4sgpemaikb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522016 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at who made >hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through concrete and steel? Bast. " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 14:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtkb1m$mvh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522017 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at who >> made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through concrete >> and steel? > > Bast. > > " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make > it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything flying into the towers on 9/11 than what they released. A few days after 9/11 I had someone send me that stupid photograph that was going viral over the net of that supposed photo of a guy on top of the tower having his photo taken and a jet coming in right behind him. And we were told the camera survived the dustification of the towers. <giggle> Within an hour I was able to substitute that guy for myself and changed the jet to a pterodactyl, and told the sender I had them beat. .....I think I still have that picture in my old computer. And since photo and video work is only a hobby for me, I'm sure a real pro could do it even faster and better. 2015 NEW Loose Change 3rd Edition! MUST SEE! 9/11 Truth https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsRm8M-qOjQ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 22:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <cb5svali9t479vicbmc433696outjdjegi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522067 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at who >>> made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through concrete >>> and steel? >> >> Bast. >> >> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make >> it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." > > > > >Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything flying How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 13:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtmonu$4j1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522140 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at >>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through >>>> concrete and steel? >>> >>> Bast. >>> >>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make >>> it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." >> >> >> >> >> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything >> flying > > How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel? Sure,....I could do that. Rocky the flying squirrel substitution of the plane images, and flying into the towers. What level of quality do you want, and how much are you willing to pay ??? ...I could even throw in a few flying saucers hovering over top watching the whole thing. It's only a simple step more to take the same static image, and slip it into a video
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 12:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vNKdnU2Mp_Drd2PInZ2dnUU7-KOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522230 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mtmonu$4j1$1@dont-email.me... > > > Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at >>>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through >>>>> concrete and steel? >>>> >>>> Bast. >>>> >>>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make >>>> it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything >>> flying >> >> How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel? > > > > > > > > Sure,....I could do that. > Rocky the flying squirrel substitution of the plane images, and flying > into the towers. > > What level of quality do you want, and how much are you willing to pay ??? > ...I could even throw in a few flying saucers hovering over top watching > the whole thing. > > It's only a simple step more to take the same static image, and slip it > into a video Good point. The main reason for the 3D layout of Nuke York City used by the 9/11 hoaxsters was not to make sure to have the jet fly behind certain buildings but to try and get the alleged flight path of all the CGIs to match up. And there is one more very interesting part in the following video: Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4 ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 ) https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s Not only is the alleged impact with the South Tower consistent with other bogus videos but the disappearing wing of the alleged Flight 175 is also consistent with other bogus impact videos so the above video which is clearly a sham had to be done by the same group of 9/11 hoaxsters that did other 9/11 videos. <G> *********** OP **************** 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08 ******************************** Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <cufuvalrit1n9tbs6ea85kv7b3iddiheeq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522236 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:17:45 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>news:mtmonu$4j1$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at
>>>>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through
>>>>>> concrete and steel?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bast.
>>>>>
>>>>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make
>>>>> it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything
>>>> flying
>>>
>>> How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure,....I could do that.
>> Rocky the flying squirrel substitution of the plane images, and flying
>> into the towers.
>>
>> What level of quality do you want, and how much are you willing to pay ???
>> ...I could even throw in a few flying saucers hovering over top watching
>> the whole thing.
>>
>> It's only a simple step more to take the same static image, and slip it
>> into a video
>
>Good point. The main reason for the 3D layout of Nuke York City used by the
As of the time I write this, you've offered no evidence, valid or
not, that such a layout was ever used.
>9/11 hoaxsters was not to make sure to have the jet fly behind certain
>buildings but to try and get the alleged flight path of all the CGIs to
>match up.
>
But, as you have helped to prove, no CGIs were used.
How do you explain away this truth?
>And there is one more very interesting part in the following video:
>
>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>
>Not only is the alleged impact with the South Tower consistent with other
>bogus videos but the disappearing wing of the alleged Flight 175 is also
>consistent with other bogus impact videos so the above video which is
>clearly a sham had to be done by the same group of 9/11 hoaxsters that did
>other 9/11 videos. <G>
>
Using the video you linked to, I was able to PROVE the wing did
not disappear. Why, knowing this lie of yours has been exposed, do you
continue to present the lie?
> *********** OP ****************
>
>9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaOOf0SwY08
>
>
> ********************************
>
Can you offer something that hasn't been proved false? Anything
at all?
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 14:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0bvtva18hsritkp5513clcjqgg57bu59kk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522230 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:03:14 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at >>>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through >>>>> concrete and steel? >>>> >>>> Bast. >>>> >>>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make >>>> it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything >>> flying >> >> How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel? > > > > > > > >Sure,....I could do that. Ok. Do so, post it to a binary ng, and post the link. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtncm8$qv4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522249 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:03:14 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at >>>>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through >>>>>> concrete and steel? >>>>> >>>>> Bast. >>>>> >>>>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can >>>>> make it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything >>>> flying >>> >>> How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sure,....I could do that. > > Ok. Do so, post it to a binary ng, and post the link. :) uh,....How are you going to pay for it over a binary group ???? I don't work as a charity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <44euva1nc94u3ofjgnf8l0q4rk95m7hm24@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522344 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 18:44:38 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:03:14 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:56:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:10:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> ROTFLMAO because all you have to do to see who is lying is look at >>>>>>> who made hollow ball made out of aluminum fly straight through >>>>>>> concrete and steel? >>>>>> >>>>>> Bast. >>>>>> >>>>>> " I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can >>>>>> make it show a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Actually I could have easily made a far better simulation of anything >>>>> flying >>>> >>>> How about Rocky the Flying Squirrel? >>> >>> Sure,....I could do that. >> >> Ok. Do so, post it to a binary ng, and post the link. :) > >uh,....How are you going to pay for it over a binary group ???? LOL. Are you serious? You don't *know* there are alt.binary newsgroups? Pick one and post the link.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web