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

Groups > sci.physics > #516459 > unrolled thread

WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 10:23 -0500
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 10:57 -0500
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 18:37 +0200
      Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 12:31 -0500
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:44 +0000
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 20:12 +0200
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:12 +0100
      Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 16:40 -0500
        Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 23:47 +0100
          words about the special site of w.t.c7 ... and 6 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 09:41 -0700
    Re: WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 06:47 +0200

#516459 — WTC6 vs Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City

How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6 
and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?

Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and a 
truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah 
building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or nukes 
were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.

And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said "Radiation 
Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird reason.

As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the Internet 
and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving 
Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to say 
that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully 
believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were located.

BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6 
with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City and 
the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
 https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/ 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#516474

           <snip crap>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516500

On 08/24/2015 05:23 PM, Rocky wrote:
> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6 
> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?
> 

Have they hijacked your post to sci.physics again ?

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes a great man humble, but a small man arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516529

"Poutnik" <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mrfh5v$ja8$1@dont-email.me...
> On 08/24/2015 05:23 PM, Rocky wrote:
>> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6
>> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?
>>
>
> Have they hijacked your post to sci.physics again ?

so is that a yes or no to my question?

Rocky

OP follows:

How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6
and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?

Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and a
truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah
building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or nukes
were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.

And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said "Radiation
Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird reason.

As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the Internet
and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving
Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to say
that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully
believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were located.

BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6
with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City and
the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
 https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516509

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6 
> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?

A pile of rubble is a pile of rubble, you babbling kook.

<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516547

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Rocky, in <news:ZtGdnQ0T_ee3qkbInZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6 
> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?

No one sane. Only you and other broken-brained paranoid schizophrenics
like you. Get back on your meds.

Kook. LOL

> Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and a 
> truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah 
> building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or nukes 
> were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.

BWAHAHAAAA! Your paranoid delusional mind is greedily grabbing any
stray bit of data it can to support its retarded contention of nukes
being used at the WTC, and it's willing to completely warp reality in
order to "fit" those facts to your equally warped conspiracy theory.

You are in the throes of a schizophrenic paranoid delusion. You are
not lucid, you are not sane. You are off your meds. Deep down, you
know this. Stop for a minute and remember what you are supposed to do.
You are supposed to take your meds. You haven't. Do so now.

Kook. LOL

> And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said "Radiation 
> Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird reason.

No, you haven't shown anything. You're a delusional schizophrenic off
his meds. Your broken brain only thinks it's proved anything, when
you've really proven nothing except how wrong and insane you are. Get
back on your meds.

Kook. LOL

> As a side note<SMACKAKOOK!>

If your kooky conspiracy theory has to change so much, it cannot
reflect reality. That it violates several laws of physics proves it
does not reflect reality. Your brain is broken. Get back on your meds.

Kook. LOL

> Rocky

Now, get to addressing the 18 ways your kook conspiracy theory
violates the laws of physics:

======================================================
1) Your estimation of the time between detonation and the time of
collapse puts the nukes between from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep below
the towers, a depth we don't even have the technology to drill to
today, let alone back in 1968. Not to mention the fact that at that
depth, the temperature is so high things like metal *melt*. That's
*why* we can't drill much deeper than the 7.636 miles of the Al
Shaheen oil well in Qatar (the deepest hole *ever* dug in human
history)... the equipment fails. That's why the Kola Superdeep
Borehole was abandoned at 7.619 miles deep.

2) The claimed "EMP pulse" in the WCBS video *you* provided wasn't an
EMP pulse at all, it was satellite uplink interference. If it'd been a
nuke EMP (especially one sized 150 kt), the nanosecond time frame of
the explosion (and thus the sharp peak of the EMP) would have caused
the camera's electronics to burn out. No amount of shielding would
have been sufficient to prevent that. That there is video of the
immediate aftermath proves there was no nuke, especially one sized
your claimed 150 kt, which would have destroyed all electronics for
dozens of miles radius.

3) The radiation experienced was of such short duration that there's
no way it was neutron or gamma bombardment from a nuke. If it had been
from a nuke the metal in the buildings would have shown high levels of
radioactivity for decades. It was found to be beta radiation from the
tritium in the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement weapon sights
that was the source. That you're gullible enough not to know that a
nuke would spread radiation far and wide is testament to how
delusional you are.

4) No nuclear detonation byproducts were found at the WTC complex or
anywhere in NYC (MID: <e62c14c89ab831a63f27243e265c711a@dizum.com>).
They found tritium from the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement
weapons sites, radium from industrial sources unrelated to nuclear
weapons and background levels for all other sources of radiation.

5) The seismic waves caused by a small 150 kt nuke wouldn't be
sufficient to drop the buildings, it'd barely even be felt by people
in the vicinity, especially with the bombs buried, as you k'lamed,
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep. It would take on the order of 2
MEGAtons to do so, especially at the depths you k'lame the bombs were
buried.

6) The trigger that sets off the nuclear explosion is a neutron
source. It naturally radioactively decays over time, and its decay
byproducts, the elements the neutron source transmutes into as it
decays, include xenon, which is a neutron absorber. It's called xenon
poisoning. Any bomb that has sat for 33 years without its trigger
being replenished will not have a trigger that is viable to start any
sort of nuclear chain reaction.

7) I've provided a video from *inside* one of the towers *as* *it*
*was* *collapsing*, showing the vibration from the buckling vertical
support column and *NO* EMP:
======================
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xYjoSvzWeo>
You'll note the massive shaking from the central support column
buckling, but *NO* EMP. And that was INSIDE the WTC tower. No amount
of shielding would have saved that camera from a nuke EMP.
======================

8) Why aren't you explaining how those supposed nukes were going to
survive at a depth of 37.28 miles (where the temperature would be
approximately 960 degrees F) to 96.93 miles (where the temperature
would be approximately 1840 degrees F), Ko0K?

9) Explain how a nuclear weapon can direct its explosion through a
hole without any of the compressive blast going out into surrounding
rock.

10) Explain how 19 nukes (according to you, another leap of logic
taken by your broken brain to explain away the 19 instances of
satellite uplink interference in the video *you* provided) were
detonated at the WTC complex in rapid succession, yet no ill effects
were experienced by electronics, the electrical grid or aircraft.

11) Why aren't you explaining how the personnel you claim were sent
down to service those nukes (because now that you know the
neutron-source triggers for nuclear weapons require replacement on a
periodic basis, your broken brain *had* to construct an entire
facility at 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep (far deeper than we have the
technology to dig even today, let alone back in 1968), complete with
"4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area
the nukes were maintained", or your brain would have been forced to
admit it was wrong when it told you those nukes sat untouched for 33
years and maintained their viability) are supposed to survive in 960
to 1840 degree heat?

12) You admitted (MID:<ed75e9d6f7ccf7296c075fd695673a37@dizum.com>)
that all the materials used in construction of the twin towers (all
1.5 million tons of it) had been accounted for and trucked off to the
Fresh Kills landfill. How will you reconcile your admission with your
kook blather that significant percentages of the buildings "vaporized"
(your word) and "floated toward Europe" (your words)?

13) Why can't you provide proof of the nuclear explosion seismic
signatures for these 19 nukes you k'lame were detonated at the WTC
site on 11 Sep 2001?

14) Where were the vertically-directed plumes of dust and debris
kicked up from your claimed nuclear weapons being detonated deep
underground, Ko0K?

15) Explain how the 19 nukes you claimed to have existed could have
tunneled holes from the underground installation 37.28 to 96.93 miles
deep that you claimed to have existed, to directly under the WTC
complex... in 12 seconds... through solid bedrock... prior to
detonating directly below the WTC towers (which, of course, fucks up
your timing between the detonations you claim took place (for which
you used the WCBS video, claiming the satellite uplink interference
was "EMP") and the collapses, leading you back to where your delusion
started. Congratulations, Dimwit, you've made the full circuit on The
Island of Insanity. Now go 'round again.).

16) Explain why you're now saying there were 34 nukes
(MID:<345fee8b286a91037bc806ed589d182d@dizum.com>), as opposed to your
previously k'lamed 19 nukes (and your previously, previously k'lamed 3
nukes)... would it be because your broken little brain is squirming
under the scorching twin beams of truth and reality, screaming in
agony at its being forced to see just how delusional it truly is?
While you're at it, get to explaining how the regular rad sweeps
(radiological surveys) at the twin towers (because the space was
primarily rented by government agencies) showed no nukes or any
contamination whatsoever, and how 34 nukes were obtained and put in
place without drawing any attention whatsoever. Of course, this
*still* fucks up your timing between the detonations (ie: your claimed
"EMP" on the WCBS video) and the collapses, leading you back to where
your delusion started... that unresolvable logic hole rears its ugly
head again. LOL

17) Your broken brain is yet again expanding your delusion with your
"34 or more nukes" blather (you're now saying there were 65 nukes
(MID: <984122ddbf1e4e5d6f5a7b3f56eeeb6f@dizum.com>))... eventually,
your broken brain will be telling you that NYC today is a CGI and the
real city was blown up by
1,592,629,490,173,371,449,138,916,004,581,949 intelligent nano-nukes
which autonomously dug their way up from their secret underground
MoleMan base 15,682,941 miles below the surface of our hollow planet
and attached themselves to every steel part of every building in NYC
and vaporized them and they all floated down to MoleVille, and the
fact that the EMP from all those nukes detonating at once didn't burn
out every electrical generating station, electrical substation, every
piece of electronic equipment, every vehicle, every aircraft... that's
*proof* that NYC is a CGI today! LOL

18) Explain how a nuclear weapon wouldn't have nuclear detonation
byproducts with the right nuclear trigger, according to your words
"with the right detonator you could have a 'clean' nuke".

Do you see how utterly ridiculous you're beginning to sound? Get back
on your meds, you delusional loon.
======================================================

There are now 18 ways your kook konspiracy theory violates the laws of
physics... now you'd better get to work addressing each one, point by
point, or people are gonna know you're just a retard who can't grasp
simple physics.

Kook. LOL

-- 

Rocky, your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting
*you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate
to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook
conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic.

For instance:
=============================
A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video
*you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they
must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you
believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed
over the concrete and walked away for 33 years.

B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the
satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and
the tower falling being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but
kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil
composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never
mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today,
let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your
kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at
some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the
nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was
"dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years".

C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic
replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally
radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon,
which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken
brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the
triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to
change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped
the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an
entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service
personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back
into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words).

D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your
original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite
uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you
k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an
EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs,
so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in
rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke
detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out
electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no
nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the
vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC.

E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried
deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up
your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but
somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that
the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that
miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding,
in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that
your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of
*solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL

F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your
broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to
underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first
because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but
for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to
your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite
uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time
the buildings fell, which is pretty much where we started. So I've
proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of
sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL

G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your
broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a
desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility...
saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath
the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode,
where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive
metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the
vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why
did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not
just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the
WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP")
and the shaking and collapse of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole
seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL

H) Your brain becoming more and more broken, in just one short day it
moved from G) above to now telling you there are *more* than 34 nukes.
Where does your broken brain stop, Ko0k? Billions of intelligent
nano-nukes covering every metal surface of the twin towers? Robot
"crisis actors" able to withstand the extreme radiation? All of NYC
being blow up, replaced by a CGI that we all are fooled by today? LOL

I) Now your broken brain is back to k'laming the supposed nukes were
50 meters below the twin towers, instead of the 37.28 to 96.93 *miles*
you've k'lamed previously? Your poor broken brain is scrambling like
mad trying to come up with some way of making your retarded little
conspiracy theory have even an iota of plausibility... but you've yet
again run into your unresolvable logic hole. If, as you k'lame, these
nukes that you k'lame existed *were* buried 50 meters under the twin
towers (they weren't, but we're humoring a fucking retard... that's
you, ShortBus... so we'll continue) then the timing between your
k'lamed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference) in the WCBS video
and the time the towers fell is now off by approximately 14 seconds.
Your *only* option is to make these 50 meter deep nukes you k'lame
existed dig their way *down* 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep prior to
exploding. At least then, they'd have a hole through which to direct
their explosion, right? LOL

IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from
reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And
the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little
tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very
best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot
with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even
worked up a sweat yet.
=============================

Kook. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516618

On 24/08/2015 16:23, Rocky wrote:
> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6
> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?
>
> Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and a
> truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah
> building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or nukes
> were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.

About turn.

>
> And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said "Radiation
> Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird reason.
>

If true all it proves is that they used the tape that was available.

> As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the Internet
> and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving
> Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to say
> that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully
> believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were located.
>
> BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6
> with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City and
> the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
>   https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516630

"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
news:mrg187$llc$10@dont-email.me...
> On 24/08/2015 16:23, Rocky wrote:
>> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6
>> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?
>>
>> Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and 
>> a
>> truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah
>> building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or 
>> nukes
>> were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.
>
> About turn.

Bullshit.  It just so happens the Friendly Neighborhood Nut was getting 
photos of WTC6 and the Twin Towers messed up so I had to do something.  DUH.


>> And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said 
>> "Radiation
>> Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird 
>> reason.
>>
>
> If true all it proves is that they used the tape that was available.

Boy did you miss the comparison of WTC6 and the Alfred P. Murrah Federal 
building in the link below so it is clear that you want to remain an idiot. 
And talking about an idiot here is a video you just might like:

9/11 Fake: The Towers Destruction Videos
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp7SDi-lJbU

>> As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the 
>> Internet
>> and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving
>> Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to 
>> say
>> that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully
>> believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were 
>> located.
>>
>> BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6
>> with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City 
>> and
>> the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
>> 
>> https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/

Rocky 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516648

On 24/08/2015 22:40, Rocky wrote:
> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:mrg187$llc$10@dont-email.me...
>> On 24/08/2015 16:23, Rocky wrote:
>>> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6
>>> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?
>>>
>>> Given that very small nukes are suspected of doing the damage to WTC6 and
>>> a
>>> truck bomb was supposed to have done the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah
>>> building then maybe a truck bomb was used to do the damage to WTC6 or
>>> nukes
>>> were really used to do the damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building.
>>
>> About turn.
>
> Bullshit.  It just so happens the Friendly Neighborhood Nut was getting
> photos of WTC6 and the Twin Towers messed up so I had to do something.  DUH.
>
>

Is that the best excuse you can make?

>>> And I've already shown that yellow tape at in Oklahoma City said
>>> "Radiation
>>> Area" so it is clear that the US loves to nuke itself for some weird
>>> reason.
>>>
>>
>> If true all it proves is that they used the tape that was available.
>
> Boy did you miss the comparison of WTC6 and the Alfred P. Murrah Federal
> building in the link below so it is clear that you want to remain an idiot.
> And talking about an idiot here is a video you just might like:
>
> 9/11 Fake: The Towers Destruction Videos
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp7SDi-lJbU
>

Evasion noted.

>>> As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the
>>> Internet
>>> and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving
>>> Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to
>>> say
>>> that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully
>>> believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were
>>> located.
>>>
>>> BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6
>>> with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City
>>> and
>>> the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
>>>
>>> https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/
>
> Rocky sheeple
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516795 — words about the special site of w.t.c7 ... and 6

yeah; I mean,
why can't rockyN just *say*
wTf he is on about, in a "physical forum;
words are assessable tOOls of thought (though-tough

> Evasion noted.
> 
> >>> As a side note.  There is another nuke theory floating around the
> >>> Internet
> >>> and I do not follow that one because they can not explain the "Surviving
> >>> Corners" of the Twin Towers but they are on the right track.  I had to
> >>> say
> >>> that because I think the link at the end of this post is not what I fully
> >>> believe about where the nukes that vaporized the Twin Towers were
> >>> located.
> >>>
> >>> BTW the following site has a great comparison of the damage done to WTC6
> >>> with the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City
> >>> and
> >>> the lack of debris inside of WTC6 is a tell tale sign of a nuke.
> >>>
> >>> https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911/
> >
> > Rocky sheeple
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#516705

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

je suis charly, in
<news:charlie-gordon1492-CDCA24.12165024082015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>
did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> In article <ZtGdnQ0T_ee3qkbInZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Rocky (aka Michael S. Guthrie of 6913 Maynard Road, Summerfield, NC),
> <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>> How many of you ever saw the similarities between the damage done to WTC6 
>> and the damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City?

No one sane saw any similarities between OKC and WTC, especially as
concerns the non-existent nuclear weapons at both sites. You're just a
schizophrenic paranoid-delusional kook off his meds. Take your meds,
Mike.

Kook. LOL

> Since it was widely known that Oklahoma City was petrol/fertilizer chemical 
> explosion, that might have clued you in that WTC6 and all other buildings were 
> the results of an unfortunate pas de deux of chemistry and gravity. But no, it 
> must be magical nuclear devices.

Magical nuclear devices with speshul "detonators" that somehow make
the nuke not have any radioactive byproducts... it's that
soooper-sekret 'nucular fyooshin' detonator that everyone's been
talking about. I'ma go to Walmart and get 'em half-price. LOL

These kooks... always entertaining.

<snicker>

-- 

Michael S. Guthrie (aka Rocky)
336-643-6611
6913 Maynard Road
Summerfield, NC 27358-9206

Now that everyone knows who you are, they can get you the psychiatric
help you so desperately need. Perhaps they could call your mother
Paula S. Guthrie, given that in your mid-30's, you still live at home
with mommy.

Michael Guthrie (aka Rocky), your schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are*
*wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid
the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy
theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic.

For instance:
=============================
A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video
*you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they
must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you
believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed
over the concrete and walked away for 33 years.

B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the
satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and
the tower falling being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but
kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil
composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never
mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today,
let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your
kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at
some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the
nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was
"dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years".

C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic
replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally
radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon,
which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken
brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the
triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to
change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped
the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an
entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service
personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back
into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words).

D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your
original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite
uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you
k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an
EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs,
so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in
rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke
detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out
electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no
nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the
vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC.

E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried
deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up
your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but
somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that
the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that
miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding,
in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that
your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of
*solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL

F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your
broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to
underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first
because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but
for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to
your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite
uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time
the buildings fell, which is pretty much where we started. So I've
proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of
sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL

G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your
broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a
desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility...
saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath
the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode,
where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive
metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the
vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why
did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not
just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the
WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP")
and the shaking and collapse of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole
seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL

H) Your brain becoming more and more broken, in just one short day it
moved from G) above to now telling you there are *more* than 34 nukes.
Where does your broken brain stop, Ko0k? Billions of intelligent
nano-nukes covering every metal surface of the twin towers? Robot
"crisis actors" able to withstand the extreme radiation? All of NYC
being blow up, replaced by a CGI that we all are fooled by today? LOL

IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from
reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And
the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little
tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very
best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot
with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even
worked up a sweat yet.
=============================

Kook. LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web