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


Groups > sci.physics > #520084 > unrolled thread

Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes

Started byFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
First post2015-09-10 09:01 +0200
Last post2015-09-10 19:24 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 283 — 21 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.


Contents

  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-10 09:01 +0200
    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-10 15:44 -0500
      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-10 19:07 -0400
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-11 15:17 -0500
          Re: Rocky wrong again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-11 20:38 +0000
          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-11 18:54 -0400
            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:14 -0500
              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 09:11 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 08:48 -0500
                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 10:33 -0400
                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 21:46 -0500
                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 19:24 +0100
                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 13:36 -0500
                      Re: Rocky still crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 18:54 +0000
                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 21:19 +0100
                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:47 -0500
          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:13 -0500
      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:31 -0500
        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 14:43 -0500
          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:26 -0500
            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 03:55 -0500
          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:09 -0500
      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 06:43 +0200
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 19:22 +0200
        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:34 -0500
          Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-12 06:59 +0200
            Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:34 -0500
              Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-12 11:47 -0500
              Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-13 07:04 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:34 -0500
                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 06:36 +0200
                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:47 -0500
                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 17:22 -0400
                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:43 -0500
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 17:34 -0400
                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-15 17:39 -0400
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 19:29 -0400
                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 09:21 -0400
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 08:57 -0700
                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 15:50 -0400
                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 20:08 +0000
                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 16:43 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 16:51 -0400
                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 21:10 +0000
                                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:29 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 17:20 -0400
                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:26 -0400
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 18:34 -0400
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:41 -0400
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:52 -0700
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:50 -0700
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 00:23 -0400
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:42 -0700
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 01:13 -0400
                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:45 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 16:48 -0700
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:43 -0400
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:50 -0700
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:51 +0200
                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:56 -0500
                                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:25 +0200
                                                    Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:34 -0500
                                                      Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:31 +0200
                                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:09 -0500
                                                          Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 23:00 +0200
                                                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:03 -0500
                                                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:24 +0200
                                                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:43 -0500
                                                                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:01 -0500
                                                                  9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:29 +0200
                                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:25 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 14:13 -0700
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 13:25 -0400
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 17:56 +0000
                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:19 -0500
                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:34 -0400
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 17:00 -0700
                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 17:09 -0700
                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:40 -0700
                                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:24 -0500
                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:12 -0400
                                            Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:35 -0500
                                              Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 09:47 -0400
                                                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:44 -0500
                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:20 -0500
                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:36 -0500
                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
                                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:11 -0500
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:47 -0500
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:20 -0400
                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:43 -0500
                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 21:15 -0400
                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
                                                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:09 -0500
                                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:13 -0500
                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:25 +0000
                                                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:48 -0500
                                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:02 +0200
                                                                  Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:29 -0500
                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:49 -0400
                                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 00:02 -0400
                                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:27 -0400
                                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 03:04 -0400
                                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:18 -0400
                                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 21:41 -0400
                                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:57 -0400
                                                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 15:17 -0500
                                                                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 15:59 -0500
                                                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:49 -0500
                                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
                                                                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:56 -0500
                                                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:18 -0500
                                                                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:21 -0500
                                                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 17:05 -0500
                                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:22 -0400
                                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:40 -0400
                                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:06 -0400
                                                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 16:59 -0400
                                                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:48 -0400
                                                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                                                                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:03 -0500
                                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 07:58 -0500
                                                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:30 -0500
                                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 17:58 -0500
                                                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:23 -0400
                                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 13:38 -0400
                                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
                                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 14:05 -0400
                                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
                                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:48 -0400
                                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-24 09:41 -0400
                                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:08 -0400
                                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 17:13 -0400
                                                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:52 -0400
                                                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:46 -0500
                                                                                  planes thereupon none where noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 18:10 -0700
                                                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                                                                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:14 -0500
                                                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 08:24 -0500
                                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:47 -0500
                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:32 -0500
                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:50 -0500
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:32 -0500
                                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:06 -0500
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:13 -0500
                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:22 -0500
                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:33 -0500
                                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:15 -0500
                                                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 05:42 -0500
                                                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 14:53 -0500
                                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
                                                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 07:17 -0500
                                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:07 -0500
                                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:42 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:24 -0500
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:45 -0500
                                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:15 -0500
                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
                                        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:38 -0500
                                          Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:02 +0200
                                            Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:13 -0500
                                              Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 21:26 +0200
                                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:13 -0500
                                                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 21:31 +0200
                                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:31 -0500
                                                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:57 +0200
                                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 16:01 -0500
                                                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 16:19 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:11 -0500
                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:40 -0500
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:11 -0500
                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:15 -0500
                              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:36 +0200
                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 01:12 -0400
                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:44 +0200
                                    Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:39 -0500
                                      Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:31 +0200
                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:15 -0500
                                          Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:36 +0200
                                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
                                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:04 +0200
                                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:41 -0500
                                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:41 +0200
                                      Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:17 -0500
                                        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:11 +0200
                                          Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
                                        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 13:07 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-21 18:25 +0200
                                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-21 20:27 -0400
                                          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:36 +0200
                                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-22 10:28 -0400
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2015-09-22 17:47 +0100
                                              9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 2 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 05:27 +0200
                                              9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 06:09 +0200
                                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-23 20:22 -0400
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:53 +0200
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-24 01:49 -0400
                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-25 07:33 +0200
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1a Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:59 +0200
                                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:27 -0500
                                  Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 17:38 -0400
                                  no asbestos cladding on the main beams noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0700
                                  Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
                                    if the planes were not bombs, or if they were bombs noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 11:21 -0700
                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:42 -0500
                                      Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:36 +0200
                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:19 -0500
                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:48 +0200
                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-15 04:18 +0200
                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:55 -0500
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 17:03 -0500
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:38 -0500
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:01 -0500
                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:36 -0500
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:07 -0500
                                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:44 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
                                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:21 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
                                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:20 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:14 -0500
                                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:56 -0500
                                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-22 03:28 -0700
                                                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
                          9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:37 +0200
                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:42 -0500
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:46 -0400
                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:06 -0700
                                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 00:30 -0400
                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0500
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-16 17:59 -0500
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 07:11 +0200
                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:05 -0500
                    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 17:06 +0200
                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:57 -0500
                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:31 -0500
                        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:06 -0500
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 12:09 -0500
                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:47 -0500
      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:20 -0500
        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:36 -0500
          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-12 08:02 -0400
            Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:42 -0500
              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-13 04:18 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-13 04:45 -0700
                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:04 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:03 -0500
                  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-14 14:19 -0700
                    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:17 -0500
                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:54 -0500
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 16:01 -0700
                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:08 -0700
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 02:12 -0700
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:33 -0500
                                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 13:45 -0700
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                            Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:45 -0500
                              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:46 -0500
                                  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:25 +0200
                                    Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:22 -0500
                      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 11:32 -0500
                        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 12:40 -0400
                          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 15:28 -0400
                            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 14:10 -0700
                        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:56 -0500
                      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:19 -0700
    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 14:04 -0700
    no bombs that were not planes e.g noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:24 -0700

Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15  Next page →


#521463

From"Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge>
Date2015-09-16 08:57 -0700
Message-ID<MPG.3063312974fc150198aea8@news.altopia.com>
In reply to#521452
In article <erqiva10vg3rs16fv6k7dfjimbb4hnt1md@4ax.com>, 
greghall@yacht_master.fake says...


> 
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:29:13 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
> >On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 17:39:13 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
> ><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> >>On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 17:34:44 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 15:43:18 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>>On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:22:04 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
> >>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>None of the conspiracy whacko's can manage to write a sentence 
> >>>>>without some reference to shit, turds, and assholes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  And that includes the ring leader Pathological Liar Roger the stalker/heckler.
> >>>>
> >>>>There is no way that jet fuel would get hot enough to melt steel
> >>>
> >>>It didn't melt steel it WEAKENED IT.  
> >>>
> >>>It isn't rocket science to know that if you heat steel it WEAKENS it.
> >>>WEAKENED steel will fail.  When it can no longer hold a load failure
> >>>occurs.  
> >>
> >>Topaz is an idiot. There is a thing called a forge that melts
> >>steel using, of all things, coal which doesn't burn as hot as
> >>jet fuel. It's the oxygen pumped in that creates the high temps.
> >>
> >>In those towers there was a natural forge - the air came in the
> >>bottom and accelerated out the top - tall chimney and a natural 
> >>forge. There was so much air (oxygen) present that the temperatures got 
> >>high enough to MELT steel.
> >>
> >>FACT.
> >
> >Gerg, you're inhaling fumes again from your poop bucket.  
> >
> >Coke, a form of coal, is needed to melt steel in an open forge.  
> 
> Like I said - coal! A Corvette is a form of an automobile but
> it's still an automobile. Duh!
> 
> >The WTC collapsed because the steel WSEAKENED and the floors pancaked
> >down.   
> 
> To some extent. But the fact that way less steel was recovered
> than was in place prior to the collapse indicates that some 
> of it actually MELTED. 
> 
> All the idiots who claim it wasn't hot enough to melt steel
> are just plain ignorant. 

If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.

-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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


#521492

From"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>
Date2015-09-16 15:50 -0400
Message-ID<rshjva5ougho65ghbaqsjf6pugilpg8iho@4ax.com>
In reply to#521463
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:

>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.

Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!

Read this for verification of molten steel in the
basement.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 

-- 
Sir Gregory

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


#521499

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-09-16 20:08 +0000
Message-ID<pquocc-78l.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#521492
In sci.physics Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
> 
>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
> 
> Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
> 
> Read this for verification of molten steel in the
> basement.
> 
> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

A lot of that is laughable, but it doesn't change anything.

If there were actually molten steel, all it would prove is that the fire
was very hot.

BFD.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#521506

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-09-16 16:43 -0400
Message-ID<rqkjva110kasi6jhluhtb231ucegvfkj9f@4ax.com>
In reply to#521492
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
<greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>
>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>
>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>
>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>basement.
>
>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>
>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 

Gerg, pay attention.     

I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  

I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 

The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
not molten pools of steel in the basement.  

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


#521507

From"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>
Date2015-09-16 16:51 -0400
Message-ID<tdljva90iiogvu3ljs66mfsessb6dbpor3@4ax.com>
In reply to#521506
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>
>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>
>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>
>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>basement.
>>
>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>
>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>
>Gerg, pay attention.     
>
>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>
>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>
>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>


Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. Well, duh!
Steel tends to do that when it's melting.

And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
says about things that involve physics?

Now go powder your nose.

-- 
Sir Gregory

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


#521516

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-09-16 21:10 +0000
Message-ID<fe2pcc-jjl.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#521507
In sci.physics Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>
>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>
>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>basement.
>>>
>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>
>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>
>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>
>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>
>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>
>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>
> 
> 
> Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. Well, duh!
> Steel tends to do that when it's melting.

Steel weakens at tempertures far below the melting point.

1,000 F gets soft.
2,500 F melts.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#521697

FromTopaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
Date2015-09-17 15:29 -0500
Message-ID<nh8mva1fkit7vt1f68q89jhvm1rd6uojcu@4ax.com>
In reply to#521516
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:10:07 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:


>
>Steel weakens at tempertures far below the melting point.
>
>1,000 F gets soft.
>2,500 F melts.

 It melted in huge quantities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7S9bnd_pnY




www.tomatobubble.com  www.ihr.org   http://nationalvanguard.org  

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com    

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


#521520

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-09-16 17:20 -0400
Message-ID<49njvapvk68t2ja36vt0dt3n55n6mqkp45@4ax.com>
In reply to#521507
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
<greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>
>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>
>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>basement.
>>>
>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>
>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>
>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>
>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>
>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>
>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>
>
>
>Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. 

That's correct Gerg.  

>Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.

All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.

Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?  

Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand
while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI ref.

Stretch and pull.   No heat applied.  


>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>says about things that involve physics?

I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  

Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  

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


#521523

From"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>
Date2015-09-16 17:26 -0400
Message-ID<6cnjva1qqivlkhsmog68jf88qcug8tlgoi@4ax.com>
In reply to#521520
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:38 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>>
>>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>>
>>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>>basement.
>>>>
>>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>>
>>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>>
>>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>>
>>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>>
>>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>>
>>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>>
>>
>>
>>Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. 
>
>That's correct Gerg.  
>
>>Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.
>
>All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.
>
>Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?  

Yes.

>Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand
>while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI ref.
>
>Stretch and pull.   No heat applied. 

Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION.  

>>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>>says about things that involve physics?
>
>I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  

You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
fundamentals.

>Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
>wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  

Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*. 

-- 
Sir Gregory

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


#521541

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-09-16 18:34 -0400
Message-ID<r2qjvalkrsgkv779nuuimrablr0d7q0asr@4ax.com>
In reply to#521523
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:26:23 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
<greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:38 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>>>
>>>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>>>
>>>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>>>basement.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>>>
>>>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>>>
>>>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>>>
>>>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>>>
>>>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>>>
>>>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. 
>>
>>That's correct Gerg.  
>>
>>>Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.
>>
>>All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.
>>
>>Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?  
>
>Yes.
>
>>Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand
>>while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI ref.
>>
>>Stretch and pull.   No heat applied. 
>
>Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
>But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
>central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION.  

Gerg, this is not rocket science.  

1.  The steel weakened.  
2.  Then the steel failed.    
3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall.   
4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down.  


>>>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>>>says about things that involve physics?
>>
>>I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  
>
>You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
>fundamentals.

LOL   Next time I'll make sure I number the steps for you.     

>>Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
>>wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  
>
>Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
>There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*. 

Poor Gerg.   LOL

Guy wires ON SAILBOATS.  

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=guy+wires+on+sailboats&view=detailv2&qpvt=guy+wires+on+sailboats&id=C05CB8B2E0E5D5C488AA5812A19D44116CB50D68&selectedIndex=10&ccid=ZjG%2b4o6v&simid=608037803550510965&thid=JN.k%2fLOjNv%2frlYsuBNG6xh0ig&ajaxhist=0

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


#521561

From"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>
Date2015-09-16 21:41 -0400
Message-ID<9u5kva1a02madf6urp24h8vdttm0ifn80c@4ax.com>
In reply to#521541
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:34:21 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:26:23 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:38 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>>>>basement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>>>>
>>>>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>>>>
>>>>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>>>>
>>>>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>>>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>>>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>>>>
>>>>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>>>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>>>>
>>>>Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. 
>>>
>>>That's correct Gerg.  
>>>
>>>>Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.
>>>
>>>All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.
>>>
>>>Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?  
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>>Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand
>>>while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI ref.
>>>
>>>Stretch and pull.   No heat applied. 
>>
>>Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
>>But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
>>central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION.  
>
>Gerg, this is not rocket science.  
>
>1.  The steel weakened.  

Yes, because it got so hot from the fuel enhanced fire
that it commenced to melt.

>2.  Then the steel failed.  

Yes, it failed in compression which has nothing to do
with pulling as in tensile strength but had everything to
do with pushing as compression forces.
  
>3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall. 

One entire floor fell where the central support column failed
under compression.

This floor fell to the floor below and knocked that floor down.
And, so it went. Floor after floor slammed down on the one below
and knocked it down.
  
>4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down. 

Yes, so you admit you are wrong about your silly tensile
strength claims? 

>>>>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>>>>says about things that involve physics?
>>>
>>>I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  
>>
>>You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
>>fundamentals.
>
>LOL   Next time I'll make sure I number the steps for you.     
>
>>>Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
>>>wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  
>>
>>Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
>>There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*. 
>
>Poor Gerg.   LOL
>
>Guy wires ON SAILBOATS.  
>
>http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=guy+wires+on+sailboats&view=detailv2&qpvt=guy+wires+on+sailboats&id=C05CB8B2E0E5D5C488AA5812A19D44116CB50D68&selectedIndex=10&ccid=ZjG%2b4o6v&simid=608037803550510965&thid=JN.k%2fLOjNv%2frlYsuBNG6xh0ig&ajaxhist=0

Those are more properly called stays which comprise the standing rigging.
Because some lubberly web page incorrectly calls them guys only goes to
show that some lubberly types like you don't call them out on their
obvious mistakes. 

Standing rigging on modern small sailboats usually consists of stainless
steel wire and fittings used to support the mast and keep it in column.

There are upper and lower shrouds which shrouds are stays that support
the mast athwartship. There are forestays and backstays which support the
mast fore and aft. There are even running backstays. Guy wires are for
circus tents, you fool.

Don't argue with a sailor, wench!

-- 
Sir Gregory

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


#521565

From"%" <persent@gmail.com>
Date2015-09-16 18:52 -0700
Message-ID<8p9rl0.hv4.19.1@news.alt.net>
In reply to#521561
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:34:21 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:26:23 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>> <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:38 -0400, Sarah Ehrett
>>> <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>> <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett
>>>>> <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>>>> <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1"
>>>>>>> <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile...
>>>>>>>> it didn't
>>>>>>>> vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>>>>> basement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gerg, pay attention.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the
>>>>>> WTC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>>>>> could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>>>>> caused the floors to buckle and pancake down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> not molten pools of steel in the basement.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*.
>>>>
>>>> That's correct Gerg.
>>>>
>>>>> Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.
>>>>
>>>> All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.
>>>>
>>>> Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can
>>>> withstand
>>>> while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI
>>>> ref.
>>>>
>>>> Stretch and pull.   No heat applied.
>>>
>>> Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah.
>>> But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
>>> central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION.
>>
>> Gerg, this is not rocket science.
>>
>> 1.  The steel weakened.
>
> Yes, because it got so hot from the fuel enhanced fire
> that it commenced to melt.
>
>> 2.  Then the steel failed.
>
> Yes, it failed in compression which has nothing to do
> with pulling as in tensile strength but had everything to
> do with pushing as compression forces.
>
>> 3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall.
>
> One entire floor fell where the central support column failed
> under compression.
>
> This floor fell to the floor below and knocked that floor down.
> And, so it went. Floor after floor slammed down on the one below
> and knocked it down.
>
>> 4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down.
>
> Yes, so you admit you are wrong about your silly tensile
> strength claims?
>
>>>>> And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>>>>> says about things that involve physics?
>>>>
>>>> I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.
>>>
>>> You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
>>> fundamentals.
>>
>> LOL   Next time I'll make sure I number the steps for you.
>>
>>>> Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
>>>> wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.
>>>
>>> Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
>>> There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*.
>>
>> Poor Gerg.   LOL
>>
>> Guy wires ON SAILBOATS.
>>
>> http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=guy+wires+on+sailboats&view=detailv2&qpvt=guy+wires+on+sailboats&id=C05CB8B2E0E5D5C488AA5812A19D44116CB50D68&selectedIndex=10&ccid=ZjG%2b4o6v&simid=608037803550510965&thid=JN.k%2fLOjNv%2frlYsuBNG6xh0ig&ajaxhist=0
>
> Those are more properly called stays which comprise the standing
> rigging.
> Because some lubberly web page incorrectly calls them guys only goes
> to
> show that some lubberly types like you don't call them out on their
> obvious mistakes.
>
> Standing rigging on modern small sailboats usually consists of
> stainless
> steel wire and fittings used to support the mast and keep it in
> column.
>
> There are upper and lower shrouds which shrouds are stays that support
> the mast athwartship. There are forestays and backstays which support
> the
> mast fore and aft. There are even running backstays. Guy wires are for
> circus tents, you fool.
>
> Don't argue with a sailor, wench!

it's impossible to do that here because there are none 

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


#521568

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2015-09-16 18:50 -0700
Message-ID<64089b30-f5c2-4ea3-836a-2500018c6fcb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#521561
concrete has no tensile strength;
it is mostly sand & gravel

> Yes, it failed in compression which has nothing to do
> with pulling as in tensile strength but had everything to
> do with pushing as compression forces.
>   
> >3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall. 
> 
> One entire floor fell where the central support column failed
> under compression.
> 
> This floor fell to the floor below and knocked that floor down.
> And, so it went. Floor after floor slammed down on the one below
> and knocked it down.
>   
> >4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down. 
> 
> Yes, so you admit you are wrong about your silly tensile
> strength claims? 
> 
> >>>>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
> >>>>says about things that involve physics?
> >>>
> >>>I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  
> >>
> >>You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
> >>fundamentals.
> >
> >LOL   Next time I'll make sure I number the steps for you.     
> >
> >>>Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
> >>>wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  
> >>
> >>Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
> >>There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*. 
> >
> >Poor Gerg.   LOL
> >
> >Guy wires ON SAILBOATS.  
> >
> >http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=guy+wires+on+sailboats&view=detailv2&qpvt=guy+wires+on+sailboats&id=C05CB8B2E0E5D5C488AA5812A19D44116CB50D68&selectedIndex=10&ccid=ZjG%2b4o6v&simid=608037803550510965&thid=JN.k%2fLOjNv%2frlYsuBNG6xh0ig&ajaxhist=0
> 
> Those are more properly called stays which comprise the standing rigging.
> Because some lubberly web page incorrectly calls them guys only goes to
> show that some lubberly types like you don't call them out on their
> obvious mistakes. 
> 
> Standing rigging on modern small sailboats usually consists of stainless
> steel wire and fittings used to support the mast and keep it in column.
> 
> There are upper and lower shrouds which shrouds are stays that support
> the mast athwartship. There are forestays and backstays which support the
> mast fore and aft. There are even running backstays. Guy wires are for
> circus tents, you fool.
> 
> Don't argue with a sailor, wench!
> 
> -- 
> Sir Gregory

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


#521591

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-09-17 00:23 -0400
Message-ID<9hfkva5ddm18hlt8btn36jt2ja3ujbpnus@4ax.com>
In reply to#521561
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:41:14 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
<greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:34:21 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:26:23 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:38 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:51:57 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:43:55 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:50:12 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
>>>>>><greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>>>>>>>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:57:06 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>If it melted, it would still be at the bottom of the pile... it didn't 
>>>>>>>>vaporize and float away like Rocky seems to think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Get your fag head out of your ass, bumpkin!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Read this for verification of molten steel in the
>>>>>>>basement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You and Sarah are stupid AND ignorant. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gerg, pay attention.     
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I never said anything about molten steel in the basement of the WTC.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I said the steel at the WTC weakened.  When the steel weakened it
>>>>>>could no longer hold the load.  The failure of the weakened steel
>>>>>>caused the floors to buckle and pancake down. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The buildings fell due to structure failure before there were or were
>>>>>>not molten pools of steel in the basement.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>Sarah, YOU pay attention. You said the steel *weakened*. 
>>>>
>>>>That's correct Gerg.  
>>>>
>>>>>Well, duh!  Steel tends to do that when it's melting.
>>>>
>>>>All it has to do is weaken before failure is a certainty.
>>>>
>>>>Ever heard of tensile strength, Gerg?  
>>>
>>>Yes.
>>>
>>>>Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a material can withstand
>>>>while being stretched or pulled before failing or breaking. WIKI ref.
>>>>
>>>>Stretch and pull.   No heat applied. 
>>>
>>>Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
>>>But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
>>>central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION.  
>>
>>Gerg, this is not rocket science.  
>>
>>1.  The steel weakened.  
>
>Yes, 

>>2.  Then the steel failed.  
>
>Yes, 
>  
>>3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall. 
>
>One entire floor fell where the central support column failed
>under compression.
>
>This floor fell to the floor below and knocked that floor down.
>And, so it went. Floor after floor slammed down on the one below
>and knocked it down.
>  
>>4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down. 
>
>Yes, so you admit you are wrong about your silly tensile
>strength claims? 

You can try and wiggle word it Gerg the beams lost their tensile
strength and buckled.    That failure led to the collapse.   

>>>>>And, do you really think anybody takes seriously what a girl
>>>>>says about things that involve physics?
>>>>
>>>>I know about utensil strength & tensile testing.   You don't.  
>>>
>>>You try to talk a good game but you seem to lack the
>>>fundamentals.
>>
>>LOL   Next time I'll make sure I number the steps for you.     
>>
>>>>Be sure you stay away from all the melted steel the next time a guy
>>>>wire fails on the SS Mustard Colored Turd.  
>>>
>>>Guy wire? LOL. I see you are also ignorant about sailboats.
>>>There are no guy wires. There is *standing rigging*. 
>>
>>Poor Gerg.   LOL
>>
>>Guy wires ON SAILBOATS.  
>>
>>http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=guy+wires+on+sailboats&view=detailv2&qpvt=guy+wires+on+sailboats&id=C05CB8B2E0E5D5C488AA5812A19D44116CB50D68&selectedIndex=10&ccid=ZjG%2b4o6v&simid=608037803550510965&thid=JN.k%2fLOjNv%2frlYsuBNG6xh0ig&ajaxhist=0
>
>Those are more properly called stays 

I've sailed Gerg.   Everything from Lightnings to 12 meters.    I live
20 miles from Newport RI.   

[ flush remaining crapola]

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


#521598

From"Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge>
Date2015-09-16 21:42 -0700
Message-ID<MPG.3063e49b10b6000198aebf@news.altopia.com>
In reply to#521561
In article <9u5kva1a02madf6urp24h8vdttm0ifn80c@4ax.com>, 
greghall@yacht_master.fake says...


>  athwartship

Sailors talk funny.


-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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


#521604

From"\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1>
Date2015-09-17 01:13 -0400
Message-ID<op.x43csmdltm21m2@benson.localhost>
In reply to#521598
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:42:44 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1  
<Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote:

> In article <9u5kva1a02madf6urp24h8vdttm0ifn80c@4ax.com>,
> greghall@yacht_master.fake says...
>
>
>>  athwartship
>
> Sailors talk funny.
>
>

"fortosay", i bet you never went to law school...

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd


--

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


#521705

FromTopaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
Date2015-09-17 15:45 -0500
Message-ID<qr8mva5k1uamu0ai7gl9179qckfajceo90@4ax.com>
In reply to#521541
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:34:21 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

\
>Gerg, this is not rocket science.  
>
>1.  The steel weakened.  
>2.  Then the steel failed.    
>3.  The load which could no longer be supported began to fall.   
>4.  Compression failure caused the floors to pancake down.  

Here is proof that this government BS is nonsense:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE




www.tomatobubble.com  www.ihr.org   http://nationalvanguard.org  

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com    

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


#521555

From"Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge>
Date2015-09-16 16:48 -0700
Message-ID<MPG.30639fbf1eb4bf8798aeb3@news.altopia.com>
In reply to#521523
In article <6cnjva1qqivlkhsmog68jf88qcug8tlgoi@4ax.com>, 
greghall@yacht_master.fake says...


> Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
> But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
> central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION. 
> 

The failure analysis reports attributed the collapse to BEAMS, not 
columns, sagging as they achieved plasticity from the heat.  Once that 
happened, the floors they supported started collapsing, with the impact 
of each collapse causing the floor below it to collapse.

-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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


#521562

From"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>
Date2015-09-16 21:43 -0400
Message-ID<ni6kva5mhpjc78ndrb9561vdhjig8f7tg0@4ax.com>
In reply to#521555
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:48:57 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:

>In article <6cnjva1qqivlkhsmog68jf88qcug8tlgoi@4ax.com>, 
>greghall@yacht_master.fake says...
>
>
>> Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
>> But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
>> central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION. 
>> 
>
>The failure analysis reports attributed the collapse to BEAMS, not 
>columns, sagging as they achieved plasticity from the heat.  Once that 
>happened, the floors they supported started collapsing, with the impact 
>of each collapse causing the floor below it to collapse.


Idiot! You don't think the central column consisted on one
giant beam do you? LOL! The central column consisted of a
series of beams sort of like one of those tall radio towers
you see everywhere.  Duh!  The beams that failed failed in
column.

-- 
Sir Gregory

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


#521600

From"Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge>
Date2015-09-16 21:50 -0700
Message-ID<MPG.3063e6866e07800698aec2@news.altopia.com>
In reply to#521562
In article <ni6kva5mhpjc78ndrb9561vdhjig8f7tg0@4ax.com>, 
greghall@yacht_master.fake says...


> 
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:48:57 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote:
> 
> >In article <6cnjva1qqivlkhsmog68jf88qcug8tlgoi@4ax.com>, 
> >greghall@yacht_master.fake says...
> >
> >
> >> Being a man, I know ALL about stretch and pull, Sarah. 
> >> But, do tell what stretch and pull has to do with a
> >> central, structural steel column that failed UNDER COMPRESSION. 
> >> 
> >
> >The failure analysis reports attributed the collapse to BEAMS, not 
> >columns, sagging as they achieved plasticity from the heat.  Once that 
> >happened, the floors they supported started collapsing, with the impact 
> >of each collapse causing the floor below it to collapse.
> 
> 
> Idiot! You don't think the central column consisted on one
> giant beam do you? LOL! The central column consisted of a
> series of beams sort of like one of those tall radio towers
> you see everywhere.  Duh!  The beams that failed failed in
> column.

The beams sagged across their spans, and simply collapsed.  It was 
primarily the sagging of the beams which caused the ensuing chain 
reaction.  A vertical column under compression is pretty damned 
strong... unless something causes it to start to lean.  

Somebody needs to stuff your pie hole full of Tampons.

-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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


Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web