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

Groups > sci.physics > #518963 > unrolled thread

Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 17:29 -0500
    Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-09-04 18:42 -0400
      Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 18:22 -0500
        Re: Rocky raves on yet again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 00:10 +0000
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-09-05 07:22 -0400
    Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 19:59 -0400
      Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-05 02:40 -0500
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-05 08:00 -0400
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-05 10:48 -0500
          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-05 16:28 +0000
          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-05 18:39 +0100
            Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero  (Link for Tony) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 03:28 -0500
              Re: Rocky imagines nukes yet again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:53 +0000
              Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Link for Tony) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-06 20:54 +0100
                Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still an idiot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 15:10 -0500
                  Re: Rocky the stalker raves on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 21:03 +0000
                  Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still an idiot) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-06 23:02 +0100
                    Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still a big idiot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 17:04 -0500
                      Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still a big idiot) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-07 18:46 +0100
                        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still a big idiot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 12:56 -0500
                          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Tony is still a big idiot) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-07 20:04 +0100
              Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Link for Tony) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-06 22:00 +0000
                Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Michael gives me a laugh) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 17:18 -0500
                  Re: Rocky continues to babble jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 22:38 +0000
                  Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (Michael gives me a laugh) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:07 -0500
              Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero  (Link for Tony) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-07 03:21 +0200
          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (answers 4 d Ediot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 09:19 -0500
            Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (answers 4 d Ediot & dmaster) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 17:16 -0500
              Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (answers 4 d Ediot & dmaster) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:53 -0500
    Re: Rocky continues crazy raving jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 00:08 +0000
      Re: Rocky continues crazy raving "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-05 08:11 -0400
        Re: Rocky continues crazy raving moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-05 15:36 +0000
        Re: Rocky continues crazy raving jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 18:40 +0000
          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 02:41 -0500
            Re: Rocky thinks cameas are seismographs jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:55 +0000
          Re: Rocky continues crazy raving "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 11:43 -0400
            Re: Rocky continues crazy raving "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 10:58 -0500
              Re: Rocky's one wing delusion jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:59 +0000
                Re: Rocky's one wing delusion "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:58 -0500
            Re: Rocky continues crazy raving "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:17 -0500
              Re: Rocky hammers K the Krazy "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 11:39 -0500
                Re: Rocky spews more delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 17:04 +0000
                Re: Rocky hammers the Ediot "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:18 -0500
                  Re: Rocky raves against reality again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 18:41 +0000
                    Re: Rocky hammers jimp again "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 14:29 -0500
                      Re: Rocky will run away from the TRUTH. Yes, again. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:00 -0500
                        Re: Rocky will run away from the TRUTH. Yes, again. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-07 03:00 +0200
                      Re: Rocky doesn't get it jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 21:06 +0000
                  Re: Rocky hammers the Ediot "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:00 -0500
                    Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (k kaught in more lies) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 17:43 -0500
                      Re: The Earth moves for Rocky jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 23:01 +0000
                      Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (k kaught in more lies) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:07 -0500
                Re: Rocky is exposed for the pathological liar he is. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:55 -0500
            Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 10:08 -0500
      Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-05 10:25 -0500
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-05 18:39 +0100
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-05 19:37 +0200
          Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 16:39 -0500
        Re: Rocky's delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 18:45 +0000
        Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 16:37 -0500
    Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 06:00 -0500

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

#519278 — Re: Rocky hammers K the Krazy

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:dopouatub7ibv98lcohesb67orte1ae6k2@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:43:02 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated
>>>>>> away after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of
>>>>>> this post until now.
>>>>>
>>>>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>>>>>
>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the
>>>>> planet.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>>>>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
>>>>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were
>>>>> detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than
>>>>> 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such
>>>>> events.
>>>>>
>>>>> A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a
>>>>> fact that is widely known and trivial to verify.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it
>>>>> has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data.
>>>>>
>>>>> Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available
>>>>> on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources.
>>>>>
>>>>> Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any
>>>>> governmental agency.
>>>>>
>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Be sure to follow all the links in the above links.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip remaining kook babble
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yup,...your links sure are credble sources.....NOT
>>>
>>> You didn't read the links within the provided links, did you?
>>>
>>> There are LOTS of places, many of them outside the USA, where seismic
>>> data is archived and publically available, so anyone can do the
>>> research and find there were no nuclear events recorded anywhere
>>> on the planet on 9/11 and multiple nuclear events would have been
>>> recorded everywhere.
>>>
>>> <snip remaining nonsense>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>It's already widely noted that none of the towers that fell created 
>>anywhere
>>near the expected ground vibrations that would have been expected for 
>>their
>>mass.
>>And WTC 7 barely made the ground shake when it "came down"
>>
>>Of course I've noticed that you conveniently skipped right over that fact.
>>
>
>     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>     Good job. There is hope for you yet.

WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the 
ground very hard either.  DUH.

And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized how 
would the media have explained that?

Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 to 
make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.

Rocky 

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

#519290 — Re: Rocky spews more delusions

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the 
> ground very hard either.  DUH.

There were no partially vaporized buildings, kook.

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the Pentagon
and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

Rantings about specially treated dirt is kook babble.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.


<snip remaining kook babble>




-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519302 — Re: Rocky hammers the Ediot

<edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:f731cdc6-ca9f-43f3-a5cc-0fc001635d05@googlegroups.com...
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 12:37:39 PM UTC-4, Rocky wrote:
>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:dopouatub7ibv98lcohesb67orte1ae6k2@4ax.com...
>> > On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:43:02 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero 
>> >>>>>> floated
>> >>>>>> away after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end 
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> this post until now.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, 
>> >>>>> lunatic.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique 
>> >>>>> seismic
>> >>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the
>> >>>>> planet.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>> >>>>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two 
>> >>>>> towers
>> >>>>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were
>> >>>>> detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less 
>> >>>>> than
>> >>>>> 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such
>> >>>>> events.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a
>> >>>>> fact that is widely known and trivial to verify.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC 
>> >>>>> it
>> >>>>> has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available
>> >>>>> on the Internet from many government, academic, and private 
>> >>>>> sources.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any
>> >>>>> governmental agency.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>> >>>>> 9/11.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>> >>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>> >>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Be sure to follow all the links in the above links.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> <snip remaining kook babble
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yup,...your links sure are credble sources.....NOT
>> >>>
>> >>> You didn't read the links within the provided links, did you?
>> >>>
>> >>> There are LOTS of places, many of them outside the USA, where seismic
>> >>> data is archived and publically available, so anyone can do the
>> >>> research and find there were no nuclear events recorded anywhere
>> >>> on the planet on 9/11 and multiple nuclear events would have been
>> >>> recorded everywhere.
>> >>>
>> >>> <snip remaining nonsense>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>It's already widely noted that none of the towers that fell created
>> >>anywhere
>> >>near the expected ground vibrations that would have been expected for
>> >>their
>> >>mass.
>> >>And WTC 7 barely made the ground shake when it "came down"
>> >>
>> >>Of course I've noticed that you conveniently skipped right over that 
>> >>fact.
>> >>
>> >
>> >     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>> >     Good job. There is hope for you yet.
>>
>> WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the
>> ground very hard either.  DUH.
>>
>> And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized 
>> how
>> would the media have explained that?
>>
>> Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 to
>> make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.
>>
>> Rocky
>
> But the "bombs" going off should have made a massive seismic record. And 
> they didn't.

Bullshit because people at the scene described the ground shaking as if it 
were a 5.5 on the Richter scale and the fact the North Tower was filmed 
shaking is inconsistent with both the published seismic readings and the 
fact an EMP was recorded by WCBS at the exact same time the ground shook.

Don't forget the preponderance of the Evidence still says nukes because only 
an NCD can leave what was left of the Twin Towers and only an NCD could 
place so much debris from the Twin Towers into the air.

And do not forget the other issue with 9/11 and that is the shadows from the 
jets are inconsistent with the smoke clouds immediately after the ramming of 
the CGIs.

Rocky 

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

#519308 — Re: Rocky raves against reality again

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> Bullshit because people at the scene described the ground shaking as if it 
> were a 5.5 on the Richter scale and the fact the North Tower was filmed 
> shaking is inconsistent with both the published seismic readings and the 
> fact an EMP was recorded by WCBS at the exact same time the ground shook.

Local ground shaking takes very little energy, you raving lunatic.

A building shaking takes very little energy, you raving lunatic.

Nobody recorded an EMP and there would have been an EMP for EACH
bomb, you raving lunatic.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

<snip remaining lunatic raving>

 
-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519325 — Re: Rocky hammers jimp again

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:cvdubc-ca3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>
> Nobody recorded an EMP and there would have been an EMP for EACH
> bomb, you raving lunatic.

BZZZZZZZT

As I've stated before it took an AM receiver to catch the EMP that was 
detonated way under WTC3 and that nuke had to vaporize about 20 more floors 
of the North Tower than the nuke under WTC4 had to vaporize of the South 
Tower because the Twin Towers had to be vaporized up to the bogus impact 
area.

The reason why the nukes had to vaporize up the bogus impact area was to 
fool the John Q. Public into blaming the CGIs for their alleged collapse 
which in reality was really nothing more than a scattering of debris by 
floors that were not vaporized yet as they came down on floors that were 
vaporized only to end up being vaporized before they could reach the ground.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Seismic readings can obviously be bought and sold and we learned that with 
the 8.0 that hit California.  They modified that reading to a sub 8.0 so 
insurance companies didn't have to pay out so much.  And the fact the 
seismic readings did not have a reading for the 5.5 when the North Tower 
shook proves they were bought and sold too.

Funny how there was no shadow from Phantom Flight 11 on the North Tower and 
yet the following smoke cloud left a shadow and not only did it leave a 
shadow the shadow from that smoke is inconsistent with a sun in the east. 
See:

Strange Features Found in the Naudet Brothers First Strike Footage
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx68_HBCzgY

Rocky 

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

#519351 — Re: Rocky will run away from the TRUTH. Yes, again.

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 14:29:58 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>news:cvdubc-ca3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Nobody recorded an EMP and there would have been an EMP for EACH
>> bomb, you raving lunatic.
>
>BZZZZZZZT
>
>As I've stated before it took an AM receiver to catch the EMP that was 

     Once again, had there been an EMP, the video would have ceased at
the point of the EMP. The electronics in the camera would have fried.
The electronics in the receiver would have fried. There would be no
more video.
     The helicopters in the sky would have plummeted to the ground
since the electronics that are used to keep them in the air would have
been fried.
     WCBS, like all others, would have been using FM or VHF, not AM.
     How is it that you are still so unable to understand this?

>detonated way under WTC3 and that nuke had to vaporize about 20 more floors 
>of the North Tower than the nuke under WTC4 had to vaporize of the South 
>Tower because the Twin Towers had to be vaporized up to the bogus impact 
>area.

     And yet, they were no vaporized. Odd that.

>
>The reason why the nukes had to vaporize up the bogus impact area was to 
>fool the John Q. Public into blaming the CGIs for their alleged collapse 
>which in reality was really nothing more than a scattering of debris by 
>floors that were not vaporized yet as they came down on floors that were 
>vaporized only to end up being vaporized before they could reach the ground.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>

     That picture continues to prove your claims wrong. Sadly, your
low intellect and mental defect(s) make it impossible for you to
understand.
     I wish that were an insult rather than an accurate comment.

>Seismic readings can obviously be bought and sold and we learned that with 

     I eagerly await your evidence for this.

>the 8.0 that hit California.  They modified that reading to a sub 8.0 so 
>insurance companies didn't have to pay out so much.  

     I eagerly await your evidence for this as well.

>And the fact the 
>seismic readings did not have a reading for the 5.5 when the North Tower 
>shook proves they were bought and sold too.

     No. This proves your claim of nukes to be the product of a
delusional mind. Nothing more.

>
>Funny how there was no shadow from Phantom Flight 11 on the North Tower and 
>yet the following smoke cloud left a shadow and not only did it leave a 
>shadow the shadow from that smoke is inconsistent with a sun in the east. 
>See:
>
>Strange Features Found in the Naudet Brothers First Strike Footage
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx68_HBCzgY
>

     A shadow is seen. Quite clearly.

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc127/kwills_photo/shadow000_zpsn9tlqdeu.jpg

     Since you are unable to see the shadow (I admit it is more
visible in the video) here's the same picture with an arrow pointing
to it:

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc127/kwills_photo/shadow000_arrow_zpscidg7qef.jpg


     Now watch the video again and you'll see the shadow as clearly as
everyone else has. Not that you'll ever admit it, of course. Your
mental defect(s) will not allow you.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

#519451 — Re: Rocky will run away from the TRUTH. Yes, again.

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

K Wills (Shill #3), in
<news:kn6pua1ri42n82o9o5moj5aols2ftebgor@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 14:29:58 -0500, Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind
> the schizophrenic paranoid delusional woman-stalking truck
> crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>> news:cvdubc-ca3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...

>>> In sci.physics Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic
>>> paranoid delusional woman-stalking truck crashing kook)
>>> <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>>> Nobody recorded an EMP and there would have been an EMP for EACH
>>> bomb, you raving lunatic.

>> B<SMACKAKOOK!>

> Once again, had there been an EMP, the video would have ceased at
> the point of the EMP. The electronics in the camera would have fried.
> The electronics in the receiver would have fried. There would be no
> more video.
> The helicopters in the sky would have plummeted to the ground
> since the electronics that are used to keep them in the air would have
> been fried.
> WCBS, like all others, would have been using FM or VHF, not AM.
> How is it that you are still so unable to understand this?

Perhaps it'll help his broken brain to accept reality if we were to
differentiate between the modulation scheme used and the frequency
used.

Between the aircraft and satellite relay truck, they used VHF (Very
High Frequency), a shorter-range but less interference-prone to
natural EMI frequency.

Between the satellite relay truck and satellite, they used whichever
frequency that satellite required for uplink transmission.

They used QPSK or Quadrature Phase Shift Keying modulation. No AM
(Amplitude Modulation) or FM (Frequency Modulation) was used, it is a
digital modulation scheme with 4 phase shifts per cycle, making it
much more immune to terrestrial interference at the short ranges
between aircraft and satellite relay truck. They used the same
modulation scheme between satellite relay truck and satellite, since
having to remodulate the signal using another modulation scheme would
introduce processing overhead and loss of digital clarity with no
benefit.

-- 

Roger T.E. Wittekind
PO Box 471
167 40th Avenue
East Moline, IL 61244
309-755-6374
309-755-6394

Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East
Moline, IL.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID:
<e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of
widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're
off your meds, Roget Wittekind.

I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're
now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator"
that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no
EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon
proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind.

J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a
"nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your
magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to
silence them.

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

Kook. LOL

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

#519367 — Re: Rocky doesn't get it

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:cvdubc-ca3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Nobody recorded an EMP and there would have been an EMP for EACH
>> bomb, you raving lunatic.
> 
> BZZZZZZZT
> 
> As I've stated before it took an AM receiver to catch the EMP that was 

One EMP would have wiped out most of the electronics in the area and
3 EMPs, you do know each bomb creates and EMP, would have wiped out
all the electronics in the area, you raving lunatic.

Since no electronics was wiped out, there was no EMP.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

<snip remaining kook raving>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519352 — Re: Rocky hammers the Ediot

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:18:32 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

[...]

>>> >     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>>> >     Good job. There is hope for you yet.
>>>
>>> WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the
>>> ground very hard either.  DUH.
>>>
>>> And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized 
>>> how would the media have explained that?
>>>
>>> Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 to
>>> make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>
>> But the "bombs" going off should have made a massive seismic record. And 
>> they didn't.
>
>Bullshit because people at the scene described the ground shaking as if it 
>were a 5.5 on the Richter scale and the fact the North Tower was filmed 
>shaking is inconsistent with both the published seismic readings and the 
>fact an EMP was recorded by WCBS at the exact same time the ground shook.

     People aren't as accurate as seismographs. 
     I don't doubt many near the location of the collapses greatly
misjudged the seismic levels. I expect I would.
     And there was no EMP. You've helped to PROVE there was no EMP.
Since you helped to prove this truth, what do you believe you gain by
continuing to present the lie?

>
>Don't forget the preponderance of the Evidence still says nukes because only 
>an NCD can leave what was left of the Twin Towers and only an NCD could 
>place so much debris from the Twin Towers into the air.

     Very little of the debris was in the air. What was present was
pulverized concrete, drywall, asbestos, and the like. Most of it
settled on the island. Some settled in other parts of New York.
     The amount that floated away was, and is, statistically
insignificant.

>
>And do not forget the other issue with 9/11 and that is the shadows from the 
>jets are inconsistent with the smoke clouds immediately after the ramming of 
>the CGIs.

     There were no CGIs. What do you believe you gain by repeating
this lie of yours?

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

#519413 — Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (k kaught in more lies)

alt.astronomy restored
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:gq6puapefuu67d1gmlp636b3ect9hp1r9c@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:18:32 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> >     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>>>> >     Good job. There is hope for you yet.
>>>>
>>>> WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the
>>>> ground very hard either.  DUH.
>>>>
>>>> And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized
>>>> how would the media have explained that?
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 
>>>> to
>>>> make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.
>>>>
>>>> Rocky
>>>
>>> But the "bombs" going off should have made a massive seismic record. And
>>> they didn't.
>>
>>Bullshit because people at the scene described the ground shaking as if it
>>were a 5.5 on the Richter scale and the fact the North Tower was filmed
>>shaking is inconsistent with both the published seismic readings and the
>>fact an EMP was recorded by WCBS at the exact same time the ground shook.
>
>     People aren't as accurate as seismographs.

There is a clear line of how people describe earthquakes between a 4.9 and a 
5.5 and you would know it if you ever checked out:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_magnitude_scale#Richter_magnitudes

The primary description used by people in Nuke York City was it felt like a 
freight train under their feet and there are other places that claim that 
description fits a 5.5 on the Richter scale.  And you would know that if you 
ever watched:

Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition [Complete / Full Length]
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lec9giab90I

And your other piece of bullshit was:
"Very little of the debris was in the air. What was present was pulverized 
concrete, drywall, asbestos, and the like. Most of it settled on the 
island."

And your proof if that is what?  <G>

"Some settled in other parts of New York.  The amount that floated away was, 
and is, statistically insignificant"

But nothing else can make ultra fine debris other than nukes so if it was 
ultra fine debris that floated away then you just supported a nuke theory. 
<G>

And back to the OP since nothing has changed *****

Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated away
after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of this post
until now.

And keep in mind if there was absolutely no radiation recorded at Ground
Zero then that is a smoking gun too because there is radiation everywhere.
<G>

And don't give me any seismic readings bullshit because buildings don't just
shake and shake and shake at a consistent rate if a tripod was bumped.  Plus
a bumped tripod does not explain why WCBS recorded a simultaneous EMP and
why people started running at the exact same event.  <G>

And to this very date NIST has never used their Cartoon Physics to explain
why so much at the very bottom of the Twin Towers were left standing and not
just standing but standing with survivors.  <G>

http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

And then why are their so many inconsistencies between real jets and the
Phantom Flight 175?

 http://911planeshoax.com


Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

Rocky

Now for the link that shows Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero
 http://smg.photobucket.com/user/youricarma/media/NineOneOne/GJS-WTC46.jpg.html

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

#519423 — Re: The Earth moves for Rocky

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> There is a clear line of how people describe earthquakes between a 4.9 and a 
> 5.5 and you would know it if you ever checked out:

The description of what was felt in a very small area has no relationship
to seismic signatures, babbling kook. Had there acutally been the
shaking of a 5.5 event, the destruction would not have been limited
to the Trade Center area, you delusional kook.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

How do you explain the fact that there is video of New York when an
EMP would have killed all the cameras in the area and EACH nuclear
bomb would create it's own EMP?

Either everyone in New York had EMP hardened cameras or there was no
EMP because there was no nuclear bomb.

<snip remaining delusional babble of a jobless stalker>

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519511 — Re: Post Nuke Photos of Ground Zero (k kaught in more lies)

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 17:43:06 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>alt.astronomy restored

     And removed.
     You have a very unhealthy OBSESSION with an unrelated group. Seek
the professional mental health care you NEED for this very real
OBSESSION.


>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:gq6puapefuu67d1gmlp636b3ect9hp1r9c@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:18:32 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> >     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>>>>> >     Good job. There is hope for you yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the
>>>>> ground very hard either.  DUH.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized
>>>>> how would the media have explained that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 
>>>>> to make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rocky
>>>>
>>>> But the "bombs" going off should have made a massive seismic record. And
>>>> they didn't.
>>>
>>>Bullshit because people at the scene described the ground shaking as if it
>>>were a 5.5 on the Richter scale and the fact the North Tower was filmed
>>>shaking is inconsistent with both the published seismic readings and the
>>>fact an EMP was recorded by WCBS at the exact same time the ground shook.
>>
>>     People aren't as accurate as seismographs.
>
>There is a clear line of how people describe earthquakes between a 4.9 and a 
>5.5 and you would know it if you ever checked out:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_magnitude_scale#Richter_magnitudes
>

     People aren't as accurate as seismographs. Nothing in the link
proves your position that they are.

>The primary description used by people in Nuke York City was it felt like a 
>freight train under their feet and there are other places that claim that 
>description fits a 5.5 on the Richter scale.  And you would know that if you 
>ever watched:
>

     And people are not as accurate as seismographs. You need to
accept this truth and move on. But I don't think you will ever be
able.

>Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition [Complete / Full Length]
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lec9giab90I
>
>>     I don't doubt many near the location of the collapses greatly
>>misjudged the seismic levels. I expect I would.
>>     And there was no EMP. You've helped to PROVE there was no EMP.
>>Since you helped to prove this truth, what do you believe you gain by
>>continuing to present the lie?

Rocky? Is an honest answer to my question really as difficult as you
present?

>
>And your other piece of bullshit was:
>>     Very little of the debris was in the air. What was present was
>>pulverized concrete, drywall, asbestos, and the like. 
>
>And your proof if that is what?  <G>

     The reports of the construction material used. DUH.

>
>>>Most of it
>>>settled on the island. Some settled in other parts of New York.
>>>     The amount that floated away was, and is, statistically
>>>insignificant.
>
>But nothing else can make ultra fine debris other than nukes so if it was 
>ultra fine debris that floated away then you just supported a nuke theory. 
><G>

     You may lie as often as your mental defect(s) demand. The truth
remains that what did float away was, and is, statistically
insignificant.  Further, since no nukes exploded anywhere on earth on
9/11/01, it's impossible that anything that floated away was due to a
nuke. 
     Keep lying, if your mental defect(s) demand it of you. I will
continue to expose you for the mentally ill liar you are. 
     No need to thank me. 

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

#519347 — Re: Rocky is exposed for the pathological liar he is.

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:39:46 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:dopouatub7ibv98lcohesb67orte1ae6k2@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:43:02 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated
>>>>>>> away after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of
>>>>>>> this post until now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the
>>>>>> planet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>>>>>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
>>>>>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were
>>>>>> detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than
>>>>>> 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such
>>>>>> events.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a
>>>>>> fact that is widely known and trivial to verify.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it
>>>>>> has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available
>>>>>> on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any
>>>>>> governmental agency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>>>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>>>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Be sure to follow all the links in the above links.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip remaining kook babble
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup,...your links sure are credble sources.....NOT
>>>>
>>>> You didn't read the links within the provided links, did you?
>>>>
>>>> There are LOTS of places, many of them outside the USA, where seismic
>>>> data is archived and publically available, so anyone can do the
>>>> research and find there were no nuclear events recorded anywhere
>>>> on the planet on 9/11 and multiple nuclear events would have been
>>>> recorded everywhere.
>>>>
>>>> <snip remaining nonsense>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It's already widely noted that none of the towers that fell created 
>>>anywhere
>>>near the expected ground vibrations that would have been expected for 
>>>their mass.
>>>And WTC 7 barely made the ground shake when it "came down"
>>>
>>>Of course I've noticed that you conveniently skipped right over that fact.
>>
>>     You just destroyed Rocky's claim of nukes.
>>     Good job. There is hope for you yet.
>
>WRONG ASSHOLE.  Because a partially vaporized building will not hit the 
>ground very hard either.  DUH.
>

     While surely true, no buildings were vaporized on 9/11. As such,
the way in which you present this claim is just another example of
your mental defect(s) forcing you to lie.

>And if WTC7 had been vaporized just like the Twin Towers were vaporized how 
>would the media have explained that?

     Since the towers were not vaporized, your position that #7 was
vaporized just like them is *technically* accurate. Not in the highly
deceptive way in which your mental defects demand you present the
claim, but technically.

>
>Don't forget that the media needed and used the debris pile from WTC7 to 
>make it look like the Twin Towers also had a big debris pile.

     No, they did not. And no amount of your lying will make your
claim true.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

#519546

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:mshmqr$5ti$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated
>>>>> away after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of
>>>>> this post until now.
>>>>
>>>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>>>>
>>>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>>>>
>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the
>>>> planet.
>>>>
>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>>>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
>>>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were
>>>> detected by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than
>>>> 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such
>>>> events.
>>>>
>>>> A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a
>>>> fact that is widely known and trivial to verify.
>>>>
>>>> Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it
>>>> has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data.
>>>>
>>>> Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available
>>>> on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources.
>>>>
>>>> Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any
>>>> governmental agency.
>>>>
>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>> 9/11.
>>>>
>>>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>>>>
>>>> Be sure to follow all the links in the above links.
>>>>
>>>> <snip remaining kook babble
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yup,...your links sure are credble sources.....NOT
>>
>> You didn't read the links within the provided links, did you?
>>
>> There are LOTS of places, many of them outside the USA, where seismic
>> data is archived and publically available, so anyone can do the
>> research and find there were no nuclear events recorded anywhere
>> on the planet on 9/11 and multiple nuclear events would have been
>> recorded everywhere.
>>
>> <snip remaining nonsense>
>
>
>
>
> It's already widely noted that none of the towers that fell created 
> anywhere near the expected ground vibrations that would have been expected 
> for their mass.
> And WTC 7 barely made the ground shake when it "came down"
>
> Of course I've noticed that you conveniently skipped right over that fact.

The two CGIs made a .7 and a .9 and the destruction of WTC7 only made a .6 
so that shows something was messed up because WTC7 had a lot more potential 
than a lightweight CGI going 3 times the speed of sound.

Dig this:

West Point professors plan to bomb newsrooms, colleges stems from 9/11 Big 
Lie
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/08/31/bradford/

And it just so happens I've been pushing one of the 9/11 big lie videos 
myself.  <G>

Rocky 

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

#519091

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated away
>> after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of this post
>> until now.
>
> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.

Dude, you are a complete idiot and you proved that with your statement above 
and your statement below.

> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?

ROTFLMAO because you are wrong, wrong, wrong and again, if a jury of my 
peers believed what you did at least one of them would have voted against me 
but there were none.  And not only that but I obviously made my case in 
court because the Prosecuting attorney and judge would not let Beverly bring 
any more charges against me.  <G>

> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.

And all you had to do to see the seismic signature of a nuke was look at the 
way the North Tower vibrated.  It had a sudden start just like a nuke.  <G>

> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
> by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the
> Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events.

Whatever.  Just don't forget that the only type of jet that can fly with 
disappearing wings is a CGI or Phantom Flight 175.

And if the media could le about the jets why shouldn't others lie about the 
seismic readings when the North Tower gave us it's final shake.


> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html

ROTFLMAO because if the Twin Towers were not vaporized by nukes then explain 
why so much of them floated away and why what was left of the Twin Towers 
was left standing.  <See>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

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

#519110

On 05/09/2015 16:25, Rocky wrote:
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
> news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated away
>>> after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of this post
>>> until now.
>>
>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>
> Dude, you are a complete idiot and you proved that with your statement above
> and your statement below.
>
>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>
> ROTFLMAO because you are wrong, wrong, wrong and again, if a jury of my
> peers believed what you did at least one of them would have voted against me
> but there were none.  And not only that but I obviously made my case in
> court because the Prosecuting attorney and judge would not let Beverly bring
> any more charges against me.  <G>
>
>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
>
> And all you had to do to see the seismic signature of a nuke was look at the
> way the North Tower vibrated.  It had a sudden start just like a nuke.  <G>
>

So a shaking building is a seismic signiture, what a quaint idea.

>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
>> by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the
>> Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events.
>
> Whatever.  Just don't forget that the only type of jet that can fly with
> disappearing wings is a CGI or Phantom Flight 175.
>
> And if the media could le about the jets why shouldn't others lie about the
> seismic readings when the North Tower gave us it's final shake.
>
>
>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>
> ROTFLMAO because if the Twin Towers were not vaporized by nukes then explain
> why so much of them floated away and why what was left of the Twin Towers
> was left standing.  <See>
>   http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
> Rocky
>
>


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

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

#519113

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

Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
woman-stalking truck crashing kook), in
<news:GeGdnWml8rNmlXbInZ2dnUU7-V2dnZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...

>> In sci.physics Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the
>> schizophrenic paranoid-delusional woman-stalking
>> truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>>> O<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.

> Du<SMACKAKOOK!>
 
>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?

No, he hasn't. He hasn't even tried, because he knows his broken
little retard monkeybrain won't let him keep a job... deep down, Roger
Wittekind knows he's insane. Too insane to hold a job.

<snicker>

> RO<SMACKAKOOK!>

You stalked a woman for nearly 20 years because she wore the same
color pants as you (let me guess... blue? LOL), and read into that a
lot of stuff that wasn't there. She displayed no interest in you, she
was just trying to avoid hurting your feelings because some people are
nice like that... if it weren't for your incessant obsessive stalking
of her, you wouldn't have ever entered her thoughts even once.

Then, when her mother recognized that you're a mental case and
attempted to protect her daughter from you, you attempted to
obsessively harass her via the court system, for which you were
officially sanctioned and fined $1500 after your kooksoot was
dismissed.

After the court system slapped you for being a retarded obsessive
kook, you then created *seven* kooksites, on which you misquoted, took
out of context and outright altered court transcripts in an attempt to
paint yourself as the victim after you'd stalked that woman for nearly
20 years... and you've kept those websites up for more than a decade
after your kooksoot was dismissed.

Then you got a job driving truck... and immediately got into quarrels
with management because you're such a delusional kook you think you
know better than anyone else. Your truck broke down several times
because you didn't listen to people smarter than you, you got your
sign-on bonus taken away from you, you had to pay a towing fee, then
you got fired after you rolled your tanker truck and got charged with
failure to maintain control of your vehicle.

So now you're an unemployable kook spewing retarded and utterly
impossible conspiracy theory blather as you become more and more irate
at the US government you blame for 9/11 because your broken brain
believes all that retarded shit you spew.

Your paranoid-delusional mind has graduated from merely obsessive OCD
stalking to outright schizophrenia.

It won't be long before your mental illness compels you to commit some
heinous act for which you'll receive a long jail sentence. You're a
future danger to civilized society, a ticking time bomb. As in all
cases of mental illness, yours is progressive, and will eventually
culminate in your becoming a danger to society. Therefore, you're now
on the radar of law enforcement on a local and federal level.

You can expect a visit from mental health professionals at some time
in the future.

Yer welcome, Roger.

<snicker>

> Rocky

Moron. LOL

-- 

Roger T.E. Wittekind
PO Box 471
167 40th Avenue
East Moline, IL 61244
309-755-6374
309-755-6394

Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East
Moline, IL.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID:
<e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of
widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're
off your meds, Roget Wittekind.

I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're
now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator"
that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no
EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon
proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind.

J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a
"nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your
magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to
silence them.

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

Kook. LOL

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

#519169

On Sat,  5 Sep 2015 19:37:30 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
>Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
>woman-stalking truck crashing kook), in
><news:GeGdnWml8rNmlXbInZ2dnUU7-V2dnZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>> news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>
>>> In sci.physics Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the
>>> schizophrenic paranoid-delusional woman-stalking
>>> truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>>> O<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
>>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>
>> Du<SMACKAKOOK!>
> 
>>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>
>No, he hasn't. He hasn't even tried, because he knows his broken
>little retard monkeybrain won't let him keep a job... deep down, Roger
>Wittekind knows he's insane. Too insane to hold a job.
>
><snicker>
>
>> RO<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
>You stalked a woman for nearly 20 years because she wore the same
>color pants as you (let me guess... blue? LOL), and read into that a
>lot of stuff that wasn't there. She displayed no interest in you, she
>was just trying to avoid hurting your feelings because some people are
>nice like that... if it weren't for your incessant obsessive stalking
>of her, you wouldn't have ever entered her thoughts even once.
>

     I imaging the stream of consciousness Roger had was along these
lines:

     "Whoa! She's wearing a shirt. I wore a shirt yesterday. I'm
wearing one today. If she shows up for class tomorrow wearing a shirt,
then it is absolute proof that she wants me!"

The next day:

     "WOW! She's wearing a shirt. And pants. AND shoes! I wore all
those same things yesterday. This chick *wants* me!"

>Then, when her mother recognized that you're a mental case and
>attempted to protect her daughter from you, you attempted to
>obsessively harass her via the court system, for which you were
>officially sanctioned and fined $1500 after your kooksoot was
>dismissed.
>

     Ah, but, you see, that was a conspiracy. The idea that a lawyer
would know the rules of evidence better than Roger is foolish,
dontchyaknow? 
     Just ask Roger, who has thus far refused to point out exactly
what the defense attorney was to have gotten wrong. He only points out
that Mack v First Security Bank of Chicago proves his case.
     According to Roger, the mom and step-dad calling him "fagot" when
he was, and is, heterosexual is 100% equal to calling Voy Mack, a
black woman, the "N" word.

>After the court system slapped you for being a retarded obsessive
>kook, you then created *seven* kooksites, on which you misquoted, took
>out of context and outright altered court transcripts in an attempt to
>paint yourself as the victim after you'd stalked that woman for nearly
>20 years... and you've kept those websites up for more than a decade
>after your kooksoot was dismissed.
>
>Then you got a job driving truck... and immediately got into quarrels
>with management because you're such a delusional kook you think you
>know better than anyone else. Your truck broke down several times
>because you didn't listen to people smarter than you, you got your
>sign-on bonus taken away from you, you had to pay a towing fee, then
>you got fired after you rolled your tanker truck and got charged with
>failure to maintain control of your vehicle.
>

     If I recall correctly, he even allowed his truck to run out of
fuel two or three times. I really want to state three, but it may have
only been two. I'm too lazy to look up the actual number.
     Of course one time would have alerted any rational person that
they need to keep an eye on the fuel gauge. But then, most would know
that already. It's sort of a common sense kind of thing. Sadly, Roger
lacks even that much sense, based on his posts.

>So now you're an unemployable kook spewing retarded and utterly
>impossible conspiracy theory blather as you become more and more irate
>at the US government you blame for 9/11 because your broken brain
>believes all that retarded shit you spew.
>
>Your paranoid-delusional mind has graduated from merely obsessive OCD
>stalking to outright schizophrenia.
>
>It won't be long before your mental illness compels you to commit some
>heinous act for which you'll receive a long jail sentence. You're a
>future danger to civilized society, a ticking time bomb. As in all
>cases of mental illness, yours is progressive, and will eventually
>culminate in your becoming a danger to society. Therefore, you're now
>on the radar of law enforcement on a local and federal level.
>
>You can expect a visit from mental health professionals at some time
>in the future.
>
>Yer welcome, Roger.
>
><snicker>
>
>> Rocky
>
>Moron. LOL

     "Friends of the Morons" are holding for you on line three. They
seem very upset that you would associate the likes of Roger with the
proud morons of the world.

<Giggle>

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

#519119 — Re: Rocky's delusions

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated away
>>> after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of this post
>>> until now.
>>
>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
> 
> Dude, you are a complete idiot and you proved that with your statement above 
> and your statement below.
> 
>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
> 
> ROTFLMAO because you are wrong, wrong, wrong and again, if a jury of my 
> peers believed what you did at least one of them would have voted against me 
> but there were none.  And not only that but I obviously made my case in 
> court because the Prosecuting attorney and judge would not let Beverly bring 
> any more charges against me.  <G>

If you weren't a batshit crazy, delusional fuckwit and a stalker, you
would not have been in court in the first place, kook.

Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?

>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
> 
> And all you had to do to see the seismic signature of a nuke was look at the 
> way the North Tower vibrated.  It had a sudden start just like a nuke.  <G>

A seismic signature is something recorded by a seismograph, you batshit
crazy, demented stalker.

<snip remaining delusional nonsense>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519168

On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 10:25:43 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>news:rdopbc-66h.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>> Ok, I've recently been saying that buildings at Ground Zero floated away
>>> after being nuked but I didn't use the link at the very end of this post
>>> until now.
>>
>> No one cares about your crackpot links or crackpot theoriies, lunatic.
>
>Dude, you are a complete idiot and you proved that with your statement above 
>and your statement below.
>
>> Have you found a job yet, you batshit crazy, demented stalker?
>
>ROTFLMAO because you are wrong, wrong, wrong and again, if a jury of my 
>peers believed what you did at least one of them would have voted against me 
>but there were none.  

     When you raised reasonable doubt regarding the mom's testimony,
the whole of her testimony was disregarded, as it should have been.
This doesn't mean none believed you were harassing the daughter. It
only means you raised reasonable doubt. And that was all the jury
needed to reach a verdict of not guilty.

>And not only that but I obviously made my case in 
>court because the Prosecuting attorney and judge would not let Beverly bring 
>any more charges against me.  <G>
>

     Why do you keep presenting this same lie? 
     Any harassment that occurred prior to your being charged could
not and can not be brought up as a new charge. To any reasonably
prudent person, this is what they told you. Sadly, you're so messed
up, the truth is completely alien to you.

>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
>
>And all you had to do to see the seismic signature of a nuke was look at the 
>way the North Tower vibrated.  It had a sudden start just like a nuke.  <G>
>

     The north tower did not container a seismograph, stupid.

>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
>> seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
>> as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
>> by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the
>> Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events.
>
>Whatever.  Just don't forget that the only type of jet that can fly with 
>disappearing wings is a CGI or Phantom Flight 175.
>

     It is fortunate no wings disappeared then. You'll recall I proved
this using the video you used to link to, until I proved the wing
didn't disappear.
     Why is it you ceased using it after I used it to prove you wrong?

>And if the media could le about the jets why shouldn't others lie about the 
>seismic readings when the North Tower gave us it's final shake.
>

     Whereas the media didn't lie about the jets, though you're still
free to prove such a lie was presented, there is no reason to believe
the media lied about the seismic readings.

>
>> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html
>
>ROTFLMAO because if the Twin Towers were not vaporized by nukes then explain 
>why so much of them floated 

     What floated away was, and is, statistically insignificant.
Accept this truth and move on with your life. Unless, of course, your
mental defect(s) will not permit you.

>away and why what was left of the Twin Towers 
>was left standing.  <See>

     This PROVES no nukes were used. But you already know that.

> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>

     Sigh.
     That picture proves your claims wrong. I can offer a detailed
explanation as to why, again, if you'd like. Of course, you'll refuse
to acknowledge it, just like last time.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

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

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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web