Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #523737 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-29 09:53 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-29 11:59 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 247 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-29 09:53 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 11:27 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 11:38 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 17:24 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 13:46 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 18:23 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 14:47 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 14:48 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-29 17:23 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 23:05 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 19:37 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 00:18 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-29 19:17 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 05:02 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 08:55 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:05 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-30 15:21 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 22:55 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:44 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 14:20 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 19:20 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 16:00 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 17:48 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 04:06 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-02 09:58 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 12:21 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-03 10:37 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 23:31 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 04:06 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-02 10:06 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 04:05 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 05:42 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 03:47 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 06:27 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:42 -0500
Re: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-03 05:33 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-03 10:44 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-03 22:57 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-04 08:58 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:55 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-04 19:33 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-04 16:30 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 19:49 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 04:00 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 04:19 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 14:12 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 10:44 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 16:12 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 11:41 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 18:00 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 13:25 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-05 21:41 +0100
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 10:05 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 12:34 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 17:19 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 20:12 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 21:12 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 11:18 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-06 15:36 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 16:37 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 00:45 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 10:25 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 16:09 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 17:45 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-08 03:43 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 15:11 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 16:46 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:19 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-09 20:09 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 04:38 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-10 10:59 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 20:18 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-10 00:57 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-10 11:22 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-07 09:40 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 14:06 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 18:44 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 00:28 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 17:05 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-07 16:46 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 20:43 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:44 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 09:31 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 04:07 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-06 15:59 +0200
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 11:16 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 13:31 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 14:57 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-07 05:58 +0200
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 15:58 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 17:28 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 16:46 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 18:44 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 02:21 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-06 02:29 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:44 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 18:57 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 18:07 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-07 10:28 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 18:40 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 00:37 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-04 19:54 +0100
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 11:00 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-03 19:27 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-03 15:00 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-04 18:07 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-04 20:28 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 03:24 +0000
Re: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-04 04:39 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-29 18:07 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 13:36 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 17:21 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 04:22 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 14:41 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 18:51 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 19:08 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 09:18 +1000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 09:32 +1000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 19:55 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-29 19:02 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:22 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 09:31 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:08 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 17:05 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 19:51 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 00:26 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 21:33 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 22:15 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 22:39 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 04:55 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 17:30 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:34 +1000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 21:36 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 21:49 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 22:04 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-03 10:41 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 19:56 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 20:05 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:44 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 15:45 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 16:00 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 17:26 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-04 07:38 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-04 09:48 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-10-04 07:34 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-04 11:18 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-10-04 09:28 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 19:09 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-05 10:54 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:54 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-04 07:31 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:51 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 02:56 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 23:08 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-30 22:36 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 23:00 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-01 10:11 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-01 12:29 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-02 10:03 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 18:05 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-03 10:29 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 16:13 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 11:07 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 18:58 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 22:56 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 00:25 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-09 10:47 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:45 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 17:52 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 23:34 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 17:55 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 22:54 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 22:16 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-02 04:35 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 04:23 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 16:19 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 20:59 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 09:36 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 17:05 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 15:59 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:44 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 08:03 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 04:08 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 17:09 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 20:39 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 22:58 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 00:28 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 04:38 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-09 10:50 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-09 10:42 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 04:38 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 19:31 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 00:24 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-29 21:06 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 09:57 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 09:16 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:14 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 17:04 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 22:43 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 04:19 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:46 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 14:30 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 15:46 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 15:40 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 21:00 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 23:27 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 13:35 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 14:54 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 16:24 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 22:46 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 17:02 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 04:17 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 15:37 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-01 18:35 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 04:07 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 01:37 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-02 14:41 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-02 10:46 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-02 17:34 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-02 20:34 +0200
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-02 19:43 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-02 17:09 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:11 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-30 17:04 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:45 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 04:23 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 23:07 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 19:44 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 00:19 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 08:27 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-30 00:34 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 15:32 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 21:03 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-29 17:36 -0700
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 10:06 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:18 +0000
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 04:23 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 10:15 -0400
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:43 -0500
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 19:54 +0100
Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned into a liquid. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 11:59 -0700
Page 4 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 13 Next page →
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 16:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mv1bdc$knm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524956 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > wrote: > >> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>> >>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>> >>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>> >>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>> working the system. >>>>> >>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>> >>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>> >>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>> >>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>> that. >>> >>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >> >> She changed a fuse once. > > Truly an accomplishment for her. > Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. I still always get a kick out of the ones on +100,000 KV lines, that take a crane to lift. Not to mention the wild arc that you sometimes get when trying to power up the lines. But I'm too old (and smart) for that now. Now, though I'm semi-retired. I just stick to the inside "design type" computer work.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 00:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <er891bppsipi1di5i8pt370tenpsd109jh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524966 |
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:37:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >>> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>>> >>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>>> working the system. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>>> >>>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>>> >>>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>>> that. >>>> >>>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >>> >>> She changed a fuse once. >> >> Truly an accomplishment for her. >> > > >Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. Maintainance men usually do. What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you should know it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 10:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mv39s6$a87$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #525030 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:37:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >>>> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>>>> working the system. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial >>>>>>> buildings? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>>>> >>>>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >>>> >>>> She changed a fuse once. >>> >>> Truly an accomplishment for her. >>> >> >> >> Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. > > Maintainance men usually do. > > > What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you > should know it. Of couse I know about your organization. SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion You think I don't pay attention when I watch James Bond movies ? Do you have a cat in your lap when you type these messages ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 16:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rg2b1bd9qqf5u7cbr11tion3l828m3jk53@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525075 |
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 10:25:07 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
>>> Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years.
>>
>> Maintainance men usually do.
>>
>>
>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you
>> should know it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Of couse I know about your organization.
>
>SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge
>and Extortion
>
>
>You think I don't pay attention when I watch James Bond movies ?
>Do you have a cat in your lap when you type these messages ?
Pure gold. You are seriously off, mentally.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 17:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2g4b1b5nn6dl240kjrq9cbprc30tsb91ii@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525075 |
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 10:25:07 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:37:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >>>>> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>>>>> working the system. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial >>>>>>>> buildings? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>>>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>>>>> that. >>>>>> >>>>>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >>>>> >>>>> She changed a fuse once. >>>> >>>> Truly an accomplishment for her. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. >> >> Maintainance men usually do. >> >> >> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you >> should know it. > > >Of couse I know about your organization. > >SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge >and Extortion The word is "spectrum". Any electrical engineer would know the answer immediately. You've demonstrated you've lied again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-08 03:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #525146 |
Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: >>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you >>> should know it. >> >>Of couse I know about your organization. >> >>SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge >>and Extortion >The word is "spectrum". Any electrical engineer would know the answer >immediately. >You've demonstrated you've lied again. As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever. Excellent job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-08 15:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <e9-dndV4JMDYU4vLnZ2dnUU7-VmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #525220 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com... > Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: > >>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you >>>> should know it. >>> >>>Of couse I know about your organization. >>> >>>SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, >>>Revenge >>>and Extortion > >>The word is "spectrum". Any electrical engineer would know the answer >>immediately. > >>You've demonstrated you've lied again. > > As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever. Excellent job > exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh! ROTFLMAO no wonder why you think every nuke even the ones buried deep underground should have massive EMPs. Chances are none of the underground nukes in the following video had much of an EMP, air blast wave, radiation or seismic signature. And if it really was test after test after test what the heck were they trying to learn from them? Unedited footage of underground nuclear bomb blast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4pwEjPTVc And if you are really an engineer what do you know about Protection Engineers that work for Electric Power Companies? Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-08 16:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <37ld1b5a5k00be5o8oerrc75hfill3egvh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525297 |
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com... >> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: >> >>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you >>>>> should know it. >>>> >>>>Of couse I know about your organization. >>>> >>>>SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge >>>>and Extortion >> >>>The word is "spectrum". Any electrical engineer would know the answer >>>immediately. >> >>>You've demonstrated you've lied again. >> >> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever. Excellent job >> exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh! Thanks! I knew any real electrical engineer would know exactly what " spectrum" meant. I knew Bast was a fraud but all her squirming about confirmed it very quickly. Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy. What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-08 20:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4g5e1bpcd47kqspkp8ueik7pk6me7h4qfu@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525303 |
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 16:46:15 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast. It is very specific and you
>>>>>> should know it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>
>>>>>SPECTRE = Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge
>>>>>and Extortion
>>>
>>>>The word is "spectrum". Any electrical engineer would know the answer
>>>>immediately.
>>>
>>>>You've demonstrated you've lied again.
>>>
>>> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever. Excellent job
>>> exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>
>Thanks! I knew any real electrical engineer would know exactly what
>" spectrum" meant. I knew Bast was a fraud but all her squirming
>about confirmed it very quickly.
>
>Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy.
>What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there?
He doesn't post to the astronomy group. Try the conspiracy or
physics groups.
Typically I don't send posts to the astronomy group unless I'm
replying to Bast. It's not related in any way, so it's generally
pointless.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-09 20:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mv96td$ksp$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #525303 |
Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: >Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy. >What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there? I have a computer script remove alt.astronomy on my replies because kooktardery has nothing to do with astronomy, and Rocky has some sort of mental condition where he insists I must post there. I read sci.physics (even though kooktardery has gone off-topic to physics) and it seems kooktardery is right at home on a conspiracy group. (alt.astronomy temporarily re-added) >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-10 04:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <14nh1b1uit86f8ntsjov8tg29lm44aaslm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525487 |
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:09:17 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy.
>>What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there?
>
>I have a computer script remove alt.astronomy on my replies because
>kooktardery has nothing to do with astronomy, and Rocky has some sort of
>mental condition where he insists I must post there.
>
>I read sci.physics (even though kooktardery has gone off-topic to physics)
>and it seems kooktardery is right at home on a conspiracy group.
>
>(alt.astronomy temporarily re-added)
K00ks are the bread and butter of alt.conspiracy. The 9/11
discussions fit in very well over here.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-10 10:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <i76dnREyt8R3qITLnZ2dnUU7-LudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #525577 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:14nh1b1uit86f8ntsjov8tg29lm44aaslm@4ax.com... > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:09:17 +0000 (UTC), > moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: > >>Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: >> >>>Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy. >>>What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there? >> >>I have a computer script remove alt.astronomy on my replies because >>kooktardery has nothing to do with astronomy, and Rocky has some sort of >>mental condition where he insists I must post there. >> >>I read sci.physics (even though kooktardery has gone off-topic to physics) >>and it seems kooktardery is right at home on a conspiracy group. >> >>(alt.astronomy temporarily re-added) > > K00ks are the bread and butter of alt.conspiracy. The 9/11 > discussions fit in very well over here. But the number of Television Set Huggers kooks keeps going down as it becomes more apparent that 9/11 was orchestrated by our own government.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-10 20:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vfaj1bhf0nhicg3vjgq363sciemdc4imr1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #525487 |
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:09:17 +0000 (UTC), moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: >Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes: > >>Btw Michael, I don't get your posts directly on alt.astronomy. >>What newsgroup do you come from so I can see your messages there? > >I have a computer script remove alt.astronomy on my replies because >kooktardery has nothing to do with astronomy, and Rocky has some sort of >mental condition where he insists I must post there. > >I read sci.physics (even though kooktardery has gone off-topic to physics) >and it seems kooktardery is right at home on a conspiracy group. > >(alt.astronomy temporarily re-added) Thanks Michael. I read the astrology ng because Rocky was/is there. I'll also subscribe to alt.conspiracy and I should catch your relies there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-10 00:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mv9nq0$qqd$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #525297 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >Chances are none of the underground nukes in the following video had much of >an EMP, air blast wave, radiation or seismic signature. And if it really >was test after test after test what the heck were they trying to learn from >them? >Unedited footage of underground nuclear bomb blast > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4pwEjPTVc Kooktard, good job for finally watching and posting a link to a non-kookvid! Keep it up and maybe your insanity won't be quite so bad. Why underground nukes? We were in the middle of the "Cold War" with the Soviet Union, but we did have a treaty with them not to detonate ground or air blasts, since both sides realized spewing radiation into the atmosphere was bad for everyone. (BTW, we still have a newer treaty with Russia where neither side can detonate *any* nukes, underground or not. That rules out your mythical "nuclear demolition" by either side, since that would be a treaty violation) What were they trying to learn? How to make better and better nuclear weapons. Some raw physics, too. Let's look at the idea of these deep underground nukes. They wouldn't have an air blast, fireball or mushroom clound, of course. They won't release radiation into the air as long as the debris remains buried and doesn't "leak". (Don't worry! Your excellent "Duck Test" proof of no nukes at the WTC is safe!!) They'd give off an even stronger seismic signature, being in solid rock. And as I mentioned before, the EMP range of an underground nuke is 10 km. I'm sure you're now going to get all kooktarded and say "what if that's what they did at the World Trade Center?" That would mean that you change your story again, from nukes 27 meters below ground to deep underground nukes. How deep? I don't know, but "Sedan" was over 600' below ground in solid rock but still released a fireball, a 12,000' mushroom cloud and a ton of radiation, so deeper than that. Anyway, your deep underground nuke wouldn't release a fireball, mushroom cloud or radiation (I said don't worry! Your "duck test" is still safe!!). But you missed something in those videos! "10 seconds before collapse" followed by a new crater! So where are those 3 craters from the three nukes you claim were used? I suppose if you went super duper deep, like the 32 to 96 mile deep nukes you were kooking about a while ago there would be no collapses, and no EMP, too, but there's still the little problem of 32 to 96 mile deep nukes being WAY beyond our technology. Second, the shock wave from the detonation was so strong you could see it in most detonations! What would such a shock wave do to the people on the streets of NYC? How about all the other buildings in Lower Manhattan? Third, a super deep nuke means no fireball to vaporize the towers. (Hooray! The people in Stairwell B won't get vaporized!!) You seem to have a need for the towers to be vaporized for some reason, even though 108,342 truckloads carrying 1.5 million tons of debris says nothing got vaporized. So now you have to produce a modified "duck test" proving no deep underground nukes were used. You have to remove the fireball, mushroom cloud and radiation tests, but you get to add no collapse craters and no super shock wave as new proofs of no underground nukes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-10 11:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4tGdnfXpJJUYpoTLnZ2dnUU7-N2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #525537 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mv9nq0$qqd$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>Chances are none of the underground nukes in the following video had much >>of >>an EMP, air blast wave, radiation or seismic signature. And if it really >>was test after test after test what the heck were they trying to learn >>from >>them? > >>Unedited footage of underground nuclear bomb blast >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4pwEjPTVc > > Kooktard, good job for finally watching and posting a link to a > non-kookvid! Keep it up and maybe your insanity won't be quite so bad. > > Why underground nukes? We were in the middle of the "Cold War" with the > Soviet Union, but we did have a treaty with them not to detonate ground or > air blasts, since both sides realized spewing radiation into the > atmosphere was bad for everyone. (BTW, we still have a newer treaty with > Russia where neither side can detonate *any* nukes, underground or not. > That rules out your mythical "nuclear demolition" by either side, since > that would be a treaty violation) ROTFLMAO because you missed it by miles. Look up Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. > > What were they trying to learn? How to make better and better nuclear > weapons. Some raw physics, too. > > Let's look at the idea of these deep underground nukes. They wouldn't > have an air blast, fireball or mushroom clound, of course. They won't > release radiation into the air as long as the debris remains buried and > doesn't "leak". (Don't worry! Your excellent "Duck Test" proof of no > nukes at the WTC is safe!!) They'd give off an even stronger seismic > signature, being in solid rock. And as I mentioned before, the EMP range > of an underground nuke is 10 km. Once again you are wrong and have no supporting link. FYI radiation from an underground nuke will make it out of the cavity even if the explosion stayed underground. > I'm sure you're now going to get all kooktarded and say "what if that's > what they did at the World Trade Center?" That would mean that you change > your story again, from nukes 27 meters below ground to deep underground > nukes. How deep? I don't know, but "Sedan" was over 600' below ground in > solid rock but still released a fireball, a 12,000' mushroom cloud and a > ton of radiation, so deeper than that. Anyway, your deep underground nuke > wouldn't release a fireball, mushroom cloud or radiation (I said don't > worry! Your "duck test" is still safe!!). You forgot that the Duck Test for nukes worked in 4 out of four places. > But you missed something in those videos! "10 seconds before collapse" > followed by a new crater! So where are those 3 craters from the three > nukes you claim were used? We have seen the one they claim was a non-round ice age pothole. I suppose if you went super duper deep, like > the 32 to 96 mile deep nukes you were kooking about a while ago there > would be no collapses, and no EMP, too, but there's still the little > problem of 32 to 96 mile deep nukes being WAY beyond our technology. > > Third, a super deep nuke means no fireball to vaporize the towers. > (Hooray! The people in Stairwell B won't get vaporized!!) You seem to > have a need for the towers to be vaporized for some reason, even though > 108,342 truckloads carrying 1.5 million tons of debris says nothing got > vaporized. You are one twisted clown because by allowing an underground nuke to get above the ground you get the best of both worlds. You get the destruction of a nuke and can tell everybody it was jet fuel. <G> > So now you have to produce a modified "duck test" proving no deep > underground nukes were used. You have to remove the fireball, mushroom > cloud and radiation tests, but you get to add no collapse craters and no > super shock wave as new proofs of no underground nukes. You have never proven there was no radiation above the level of 3 underground nukes. As a matter of fact you have proven no radiation reading from GZ so why didn't they take any readings at GZ and then publish them? Again, only nukes could do this and only nukes could cause so much radiation that the following shot didn't have people getting fried by recent nuclear detonations. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 09:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ceKdnf_D4tWEsojLnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524966 |
removed alt.conspiracy & sci.physics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mv1bdc$knm$1@dont-email.me... > > > Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >>> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>>> >>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>>> working the system. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>>> >>>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>>> >>>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>>> that. >>>> >>>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >>> >>> She changed a fuse once. >> >> Truly an accomplishment for her. >> > > > > > > Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. > > I still always get a kick out of the ones on +100,000 KV lines, that take > a crane to lift. > Not to mention the wild arc that you sometimes get when trying to power up > the lines. > But I'm too old (and smart) for that now. > > Now, though I'm semi-retired. I just stick to the inside "design type" > computer work. That sound interesting. So what do you know about Electrical Power Generator Protection Engineers? Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 14:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mv3mra$8om$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #525076 |
Rocky wrote: > removed alt.conspiracy & sci.physics > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message > news:mv1bdc$knm$1@dont-email.me... >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >>>> ninety7gt@cox.net says... >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be >>>>>>>> carrying out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >>>>>>> building will tell you the same thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie >>>>>>> working the system. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance >>>>>>> regulations. Would you kindly point out where in any manual it >>>>>>> states that laws and regulations do not allow for more than "a few >>>>>>> minutes" to be used when ire alarm testing in commercial >>>>>>> buildings? >>>>>>>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated >>>>>>>> in minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >>>>>> What a special little snowflake you are. >>>>>> >>>>>> But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at >>>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >>>> >>>> She changed a fuse once. >>> >>> Truly an accomplishment for her. >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Oh heck, of course I've changed lots of fuses over the years. >> >> I still always get a kick out of the ones on +100,000 KV lines, that >> take a crane to lift. >> Not to mention the wild arc that you sometimes get when trying to >> power up the lines. >> But I'm too old (and smart) for that now. >> >> Now, though I'm semi-retired. I just stick to the inside "design type" >> computer work. > > That sound interesting. So what do you know about Electrical Power > Generator Protection Engineers? > > Rocky Actually back in the early 80's for a couple of years, I did work at the Robert-Moses pump station at Niagara. So I can even claim to have gotten my lifetime fill of dioxin from Love Canal. The experiences were great, but Niagara/ Buffalo,....was not exactly a place I wanted to settle down. (Especially in the winter)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 18:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.307dedc75ce2832798c31c@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524956 |
In article <ng881bdr0paplhavo8p46dck2ronjdovpp@4ax.com>, ninety7gt@cox.net says... > > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > wrote: > > >In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, > >ninety7gt@cox.net says... > >> > >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > > >> >Sarah Ehrett wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be carrying > >> >>> out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. > >> >> > >> >> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial > >> >> building will tell you the same thing. > >> >> > >> >> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie working > >> >> the system. > >> >> > >> >>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. > >> >> > >> >> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance regulations. > >> >> Would you kindly point out where in any manual it states that laws and > >> >> regulations do not allow for more than "a few minutes" to be used > >> >> when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated in > >> >>> minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. > >> > > >> >Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. > >> >What a special little snowflake you are. > >> > > >> >But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at that. > >> > >> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? > > > >She changed a fuse once. > > Truly an accomplishment for her. Indeed. > > > >> And what does "spectrum" mean to you? Think outside the box, Bast. > >> > >> >So I know what happens when those systems are tested. > >> > > >> >And NOBODY would ever dare completely shut down an alarm system in a > >> >commercial highrise, while it was occupied. > >> > >> You fraud. An "engineer" would know that fire suppression systems > >> are not shut down during alarm system testing. > > > >All she knows is Troofery. She is a real expert in that. > > LOL. We'll see if she comes up with her degree, school, and what > "spectrum" means to an electrical engineer. If she has any degree, it probably came from something like "Billy Bob's Bible College". Useful as emergency toilet paper. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 00:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <gp791b57912qn1h9ji0ha1g13d5kidc77e@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524985 |
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:44:32 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote: >In article <ng881bdr0paplhavo8p46dck2ronjdovpp@4ax.com>, >ninety7gt@cox.net says... >> >> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, >> >ninety7gt@cox.net says... >> >> >> >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be carrying >> >> >>> out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. >> >> >> >> >> >> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial >> >> >> building will tell you the same thing. >> >> >> >> >> >> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie working >> >> >> the system. >> >> >> >> >> >>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. >> >> >> >> >> >> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance regulations. >> >> >> Would you kindly point out where in any manual it states that laws and >> >> >> regulations do not allow for more than "a few minutes" to be used >> >> >> when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated in >> >> >>> minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. >> >> > >> >> >Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. >> >> >What a special little snowflake you are. >> >> > >> >> >But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at that. >> >> >> >> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? >> > >> >She changed a fuse once. >> >> Truly an accomplishment for her. > >Indeed. >> >> >> >> And what does "spectrum" mean to you? Think outside the box, Bast. >> >> >> >> >So I know what happens when those systems are tested. >> >> > >> >> >And NOBODY would ever dare completely shut down an alarm system in a >> >> >commercial highrise, while it was occupied. >> >> >> >> You fraud. An "engineer" would know that fire suppression systems >> >> are not shut down during alarm system testing. >> > >> >All she knows is Troofery. She is a real expert in that. >> >> LOL. We'll see if she comes up with her degree, school, and what >> "spectrum" means to an electrical engineer. > >If she has any degree, it probably came from something like "Billy Bob's >Bible College". Useful as emergency toilet paper. LOL. "She" never was an electrical engineer. "She" has neither the structured mind or a brain good enough to do the maths required.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 17:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.307f5332a91d12bf98c320@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #525022 |
In article <gp791b57912qn1h9ji0ha1g13d5kidc77e@4ax.com>, ninety7gt@cox.net says... > > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:44:32 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > wrote: > > >In article <ng881bdr0paplhavo8p46dck2ronjdovpp@4ax.com>, > >ninety7gt@cox.net says... > >> > >> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:18:47 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <b6761bd27ukibfvu9tuf3qiah5cdjvoaur@4ax.com>, > >> >ninety7gt@cox.net says... > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:12:50 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >Sarah Ehrett wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:59 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> There is no such think that ANY commercial building would be carrying > >> >> >>> out fire alarm tests for more than a few minutes. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> That is not true and anyone who has ever worked in a commercial > >> >> >> building will tell you the same thing. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Apparently you've always been a bum and mentally unstable, ie working > >> >> >> the system. > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> The laws and fire insurance regulations would never allow it. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I happen to be well versed in Fire alarm/ fire insurance regulations. > >> >> >> Would you kindly point out where in any manual it states that laws and > >> >> >> regulations do not allow for more than "a few minutes" to be used > >> >> >> when ire alarm testing in commercial buildings? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> Any building system that couldn't be tested and problems isolated in > >> >> >>> minutes would be declared unsafe and evacuted. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> LOL. Keep digging with your shovel Bast. > >> >> > > >> >> >Well, you are just an expert in every area, aren't you. > >> >> >What a special little snowflake you are. > >> >> > > >> >> >But I just happen to be an engineer,....and an electrical one at that. > >> >> > >> >> LOLOL! Sure you are. What school and degree, Bast? > >> > > >> >She changed a fuse once. > >> > >> Truly an accomplishment for her. > > > >Indeed. > >> > >> > >> >> And what does "spectrum" mean to you? Think outside the box, Bast. > >> >> > >> >> >So I know what happens when those systems are tested. > >> >> > > >> >> >And NOBODY would ever dare completely shut down an alarm system in a > >> >> >commercial highrise, while it was occupied. > >> >> > >> >> You fraud. An "engineer" would know that fire suppression systems > >> >> are not shut down during alarm system testing. > >> > > >> >All she knows is Troofery. She is a real expert in that. > >> > >> LOL. We'll see if she comes up with her degree, school, and what > >> "spectrum" means to an electrical engineer. > > > >If she has any degree, it probably came from something like "Billy Bob's > >Bible College". Useful as emergency toilet paper. > > LOL. "She" never was an electrical engineer. "She" has neither the > structured mind or a brain good enough to do the maths required. I love it when they bury themseves in their own bullshit. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web