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


Groups > sci.physics > #524744 > unrolled thread

Debunking Popular Mechanics

Started by"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
First post2015-10-05 15:31 -0500
Last post2015-10-06 12:09 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 158 — 13 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 15:31 -0500
    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 11:32 -0400
      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 13:11 -0400
        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 14:58 -0400
          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-06 16:16 -0500
      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 04:09 -0500
    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-06 10:41 -0700
      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 14:59 -0400
        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 15:50 -0400
          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-06 21:17 +0000
            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-06 16:50 -0500
            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-06 18:50 -0400
        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-06 16:32 -0500
          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 00:31 -0400
            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 18:11 +1100
              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 05:47 -0400
                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 17:54 -0400
                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 19:15 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 19:59 -0400
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 20:04 -0400
                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 21:17 -0400
                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 22:18 -0400
                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 15:59 -0500
                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 18:03 -0400
                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-08 20:18 -0400
                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:18 -0500
                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 23:54 -0400
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 05:21 -0400
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 10:31 -0400
                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 17:07 -0400
                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-08 17:13 -0400
                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 18:18 -0400
                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-08 20:23 -0400
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 23:58 -0400
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-09 12:54 +0000
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-09 09:09 -0500
                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 19:44 -0400
                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-09 12:31 +0000
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-09 09:04 -0500
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 14:39 -0400
                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 20:13 -0400
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-09 19:33 +0000
                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-09 17:10 -0500
                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 19:54 -0400
                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 18:36 -0700
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 04:37 -0500
                                      Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-10 08:01 -0400
                                        Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 13:34 -0500
                                        Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 20:11 -0400
                                          Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 04:06 -0500
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-10 15:41 +0000
                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 13:35 -0500
                                        HOH versus OCO noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 16:38 -0700
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 20:14 -0400
                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-11 03:56 +0000
                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-10 23:07 -0500
                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-11 01:49 -0400
                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 04:14 -0500
                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-11 13:28 +0000
                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-13 15:21 -0500
                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-13 17:03 -0400
                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-14 09:34 +1100
                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-15 02:52 -0400
                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-14 04:28 +0200
                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-15 02:50 -0400
                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-14 04:30 -0500
                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-15 02:50 -0400
                                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 03:55 -0500
                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-15 09:54 -0400
                                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-15 09:59 -0500
                                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-15 18:11 +0000
                                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-16 17:51 -0500
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-18 06:36 +0000
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-18 06:45 -0500
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-18 14:07 +0100
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-19 15:15 +0000
                                                                  p.m is cOOl noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 15:17 -0700
                                                                    Re: p.m is cOOl noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 19:24 -0700
                                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-17 18:17 -0500
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-18 06:53 +0000
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-18 07:11 -0500
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-18 14:07 +0100
                                                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 10:37 -0500
                                                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-18 11:27 -0500
                                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 14:54 -0400
                                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-18 20:21 +0100
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-19 14:45 +0000
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 10:37 -0500
                                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-15 20:18 +0200
                                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 03:46 -0500
                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-15 14:34 -0400
                                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-16 23:52 -0400
                                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 01:56 -0400
                                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-17 05:53 -0400
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-17 09:55 -0500
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-17 17:15 +0100
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-17 12:22 -0400
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 13:16 -0400
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 10:36 -0700
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 14:29 -0500
                                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 04:00 -0500
                                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-17 06:05 +0000
                                                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-17 10:56 -0400
                                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-17 17:21 +0100
                                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-17 14:47 -0400
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 15:07 -0400
                                                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-17 21:03 +0100
                                                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-17 16:16 -0400
                                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-17 23:19 +0100
                                                                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 18:20 -0400
                                                                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 15:43 -0700
                                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-13 21:18 +0000
                                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-15 02:54 -0400
                                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-14 13:52 -0700
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-10 19:45 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 21:43 -0500
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 00:01 -0400
                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 05:28 -0400
                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 04:39 -0500
                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 08:42 -0400
                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 04:37 -0500
              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 17:13 -0400
                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 10:25 +1100
                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 23:02 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:51 +1100
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-08 10:52 -0400
            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-07 17:12 -0400
              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 20:05 -0400
                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 21:13 -0400
                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-08 09:02 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-08 10:57 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 17:08 -0400
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 08:46 -0400
                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 10:30 -0400
                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 12:29 -0400
                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-09 13:48 -0400
                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-09 16:27 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:18 -0500
              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 20:40 -0400
                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 20:43 -0400
                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-07 21:16 -0400
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-07 22:23 -0400
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-08 03:02 +0000
                        Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:54 +1100
                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-08 04:58 +0000
                          Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-08 10:54 -0400
                            Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-08 16:55 +0000
                              Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-09 10:30 -0400
                                Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 04:37 -0500
                                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-10 11:44 -0400
                                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 13:35 -0500
                                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-11 10:20 -0400
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 09:32 -0500
                      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 17:07 -0400
                  Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 20:28 -0700
                    Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 15:38 -0500
      Re: Debunking Popular Mechanics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 04:09 -0500
    p.m noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 12:09 -0700

Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →


#526536

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-17 04:00 -0500
Message-ID<sf342b1n8dc6c00a4eavaq0esup03ioioa@4ax.com>
In reply to#526520
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:52:40 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:55:30 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>> <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 02:50:34 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>>> ROTFLMAO because the 500 mph at 1000 feet above sea level is
>>>>>>> bullshit.  Jets can not fly that fast where the air is thick
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You couldn't be any more ignorant, Roger.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Now you've issued a challenge that he will attempt to meet.
>>>>
>>>> LOL   He can't help himself.
>>>>
>>>>>> Ever see an air show?
>>>>>> Ever have the jets fly by at tree level and break the sound barrier?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just shut it.
>>>>>
>>>>>     If only he could.
>>>>>
>>>>>> You *never* know what you're talking about.
>>>>>
>>>>>      That's never stopped Roger. Not since I first became aware of
>>>>> his existence.
>>>>
>>>> I just became aware that Roger is in his 60's.   Is that true?   What
>>>> a loser.
>>>
>>>     I've known of his existence for about a year. It's 100% true.
>>
>> I don't know why I should be surprised.  The bat shit crazy Wrinklies
>> all seem to find their way to a computer and Usenet.
>
>
>
>I see you've missed me.
><ROTFLMAO>
>

     You should see a professional about your delusions. You weren't
even mentioned.

>You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not fall 
>apart ????
>
>LOL,....Oh my sides hurt from laughing so ard at that insanity.
>

     Your attempt to connect a plane flying low to the ground at about
50 MPH with flying at supersonic speed certainly does fit the layman's
definition of insanity. It's good that you recognize this.
     BTW, the Concorde was a supersonic passenger plane. Sadly, your
mental illness won't permit you to understand.

>BTW your 9/11 terrorists are now bombing hospitals
>Afghanistan Unravels As Obama Bombs Hospital in Desperation
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGCAYv79m_8
>
>And interestingly enough, the US doesn't want an investigation about that 
>either.

     Since you've made it clear that you are mentally ill, a truth you
admit above, your claim is viewed with that in mind.

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

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


#526552

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-10-17 06:05 +0000
Message-ID<i159fc-svs.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#526520
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not fall 
> apart ????

No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
airliners going supersonic, lunatic.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#526568

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-17 10:56 -0400
Message-ID<mvtneo$hkp$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526552

jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>> not fall apart ????
>
> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
> airliners going supersonic, lunatic.




You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5 minutes 
before you,......
Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest easy, 
that you seem to still be the most clueless.


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


#526571

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-10-17 17:21 +0100
Message-ID<mvtsej$4kk$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526568
On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>> not fall apart ????
>>
>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
>> airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>
>
>
>
> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5 minutes
> before you,......
> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest easy,
> that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>
>
>

Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
"You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not 
fall apart ????"

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

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


#526591

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-17 14:47 -0400
Message-ID<mvu4vm$5rr$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526571

Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>
>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
>>> airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>> minutes before you,......
>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not
> fall apart ????"








So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on 9/11 
????
...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.






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


#526596

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-17 15:07 -0400
Message-ID<c0752b94he4539okoqcs7i518admnpc3q9@4ax.com>
In reply to#526591
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 14:47:17 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>
>Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>>
>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
>>>> airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>>> minutes before you,......
>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not
>> fall apart ????"
>
>So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on 9/11 
>????

That would be stupid and that's why you've asked this question
already.  


>...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.


Hardly.  You're the dumbest person by a million fold in the
discussion.

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


#526604

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-10-17 21:03 +0100
Message-ID<mvu9fb$lid$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526591
On 17/10/2015 19:47, Bast wrote:
> Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>>
>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything about
>>>> airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>>> minutes before you,......
>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and not
>> fall apart ????"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on 9/11
> ????
> ...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.
>
>
>
>

Evasion noted.

Also why would I want to say concordes flew into buildings on 911?
Do please answer, if you can.


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

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


#526606

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-17 16:16 -0400
Message-ID<mvua6a$pjd$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526604

Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 17/10/2015 19:47, Bast wrote:
>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>>>
>>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything
>>>>> about airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>>>> minutes before you,......
>>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
>>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>> not fall apart ????"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on
>> 9/11 ????
>> ...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Evasion noted.
>
> Also why would I want to say concordes flew into buildings on 911?
> Do please answer, if you can.






I'm not sure as I have never professed to study abnormal psychology, but 
perhaps there are some mind readers in this group that can tell you what you 
are thinking, and why.

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


#526620

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-10-17 23:19 +0100
Message-ID<mvuhdv$n8r$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#526606
On 17/10/2015 21:16, Bast wrote:
> Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 17/10/2015 19:47, Bast wrote:
>>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything
>>>>>> about airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>>>>> minutes before you,......
>>>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>>>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
>>>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>> not fall apart ????"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on
>>> 9/11 ????
>>> ...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Evasion noted.
>>
>> Also why would I want to say concordes flew into buildings on 911?
>> Do please answer, if you can.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm not sure as I have never professed to study abnormal psychology, but
> perhaps there are some mind readers in this group that can tell you what you
> are thinking, and why.
>
>

Wriggle wriggle.

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

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


#526621

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-17 18:20 -0400
Message-ID<lai52bd8daboiu470so27dvqbd29vgu84e@4ax.com>
In reply to#526606
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 16:16:08 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 17/10/2015 19:47, Bast wrote:
>>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>>>>> not fall apart ????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything
>>>>>> about airliners going supersonic, lunatic.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
>>>>> minutes before you,......
>>>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
>>>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
>>>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
>>>> not fall apart ????"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on
>>> 9/11 ????
>>> ...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Evasion noted.
>>
>> Also why would I want to say concordes flew into buildings on 911?
>> Do please answer, if you can.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I'm not sure as I have never professed to study abnormal psychology,

Probably because you belong in a jar in the Loony bin.   :)

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


#526623

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-17 15:43 -0700
Message-ID<e61e30d1-9eca-4223-a9e2-d2f7a0c0bffb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#526621
On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 6:19:52 PM UTC-4, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 16:16:08 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
> >Tony Dragon wrote:
> >> On 17/10/2015 19:47, Bast wrote:
> >>> Tony Dragon wrote:
> >>>> On 17/10/2015 15:56, Bast wrote:
> >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
> >>>>>>> not fall apart ????
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No one other than the batshit crazy kooks like you said anything
> >>>>>> about airliners going supersonic, lunatic.

Jimp, there's always the superluminal possibilty? Fiction happens.

> >>>>> You better look at the other reply that shows being made about 5
> >>>>> minutes before you,......
> >>>>> Wow,...Your buddies are even stupider than you.....but you can rest
> >>>>> easy, that you seem to still be the most clueless.
> >>>>
> >>>> Or the post made about two hours before that, by you, quote below
> >>>> "You dumbasses now think that passenger planes can go supersonic and
> >>>> not fall apart ????"
> >>>
> >>> So you also are going to tell me that concordes flew into buildings on
> >>> 9/11 ????
> >>> ...Good God,....it seems to be infectious.
> >>
> >> Evasion noted.
> >>
> >> Also why would I want to say concordes flew into buildings on 911?
> >> Do please answer, if you can.
> >
> >I'm not sure as I have never professed to study abnormal psychology,
> 
> Probably because you belong in a jar in the Loony bin.   :)

You Sarah and your ilk are making me tired.
Either leave science dot physics or just stfu. Tia.
Do you watch TV, like the History or Discovery Channel?
I get to watch 9/11 and Nazi history on every hour per hour.
If you do not, why not?

-- Mahipal 'Bast be silent, let the know-it-alls post.'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JQpL1--0U8 more musical sorbet.  

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


#526049

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-10-13 21:18 +0000
Message-ID<3290fc-rvr.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#526039
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> ROTFLMAO because the 500 mph at 1000 feet above sea level is bullshit.  Jets 
> can not fly that fast where the air is thick and only CGIs could have done 
> that.  Real jets would have either failed to make it to 500 mph or flown 
> apart.

Utter, fucking nonsense like everything else you say, kook.

Airliners do not fly fast at low altitudes because the FAA speed limit
is 250 knots (KIAS) below 10,000 feet and jets are not fuel efficient
at lower altitudes.


<snip remaining kook nonsense>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#526239

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-15 02:54 -0400
Message-ID<aaju1b1quqv4k1iulak5n98a5djsh9k5bs@4ax.com>
In reply to#526049
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:18:27 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> ROTFLMAO because the 500 mph at 1000 feet above sea level is bullshit.  Jets 
>> can not fly that fast where the air is thick and only CGIs could have done 
>> that.  Real jets would have either failed to make it to 500 mph or flown 
>> apart.
>
>Utter, fucking nonsense like everything else you say, kook.
>
>Airliners do not fly fast at low altitudes because the FAA speed limit
>is 250 knots (KIAS) below 10,000 feet and jets are not fuel efficient
>at lower altitudes.

And there you have it from an expert.  Thanks jimp.   

><snip remaining kook nonsense>

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


#526173

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-14 13:52 -0700
Message-ID<6a1ea74f-fdd3-4159-8fe3-59b97823c1c2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#525679
the towers' primary beams were not a)
insulated with asbestos,
rrth's best refractant

> That coming from people that think an aluminum egg shell should leave 
> roadrunner cutouts in the Twin Towers is hilarious.
> 
> THE NO PLANES MOVIE
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
> 
> Rocky

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


#525655

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-10 19:45 -0400
Message-ID<bn8j1bhebqc5pdj6h9m976ghmqq2kjb03l@4ax.com>
In reply to#525411
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

>Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:13:57 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean,  Bast?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WHAT PLANES?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, what does "spectrum" mean,  Bast?
>>>>>
>>>>> Spectrum.....plural of Spectre
>>>>>
>>>>> http://jamesbond.wikia.com/wiki/SPECTRE
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.   A real electrical engineer would know the meaning of
>>>> "spectrum".
>>>
>>>WHY ? 
>
>>Because it would be very familiar to you if you were in fact an
>>electrical engineer.  
>
>>See here:  
>
>>-----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>
>>From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>into a liquid.
>>Message-ID: <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!
>
>
>>-------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>
>
>
>>Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>someone between 9 and 12 years old.  
>
>hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>
>Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>What else do you lie about?

Everything, by the looks of it.   

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


#525370

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 21:43 -0500
Message-ID<peae1blnlj3j3vtmb3jdcqgcdsjhe6dshf@4ax.com>
In reply to#525163
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:15:16 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

[...]

>>> You really are getting desperate to have to pull random quotes out of
>>> completely different threads to have something to comment
>>
>> You Troofers don't like having your idiocy thrown back in your faces.
>> Now isn't that just tough for you and Roger Rocky...
>
>
>
>I'm still waiting for you to throw my quotes back at me.
>
>But before you do,.....the answer is ,...."A GREEN ONE" 

     That's still a color and not a platform.

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

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


#525375

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-09 00:01 -0400
Message-ID<d0fe1btmctgtfottlhsgtbld7r24780i9c@4ax.com>
In reply to#525370
On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 21:43:41 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
<compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:15:16 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>> You really are getting desperate to have to pull random quotes out of
>>>> completely different threads to have something to comment
>>>
>>> You Troofers don't like having your idiocy thrown back in your faces.
>>> Now isn't that just tough for you and Roger Rocky...
>>
>>
>>
>>I'm still waiting for you to throw my quotes back at me.
>>
>>But before you do,.....the answer is ,...."A GREEN ONE" 
>
>     That's still a color and not a platform.

Makes you wonder where are all those green platforms Bast keeps
blubbering about.  

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


#525400

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-09 05:28 -0400
Message-ID<mv819k$rsh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#525375

Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 21:43:41 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
> <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:15:16 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> You really are getting desperate to have to pull random quotes out
>>>>> of completely different threads to have something to comment
>>>>
>>>> You Troofers don't like having your idiocy thrown back in your faces.
>>>> Now isn't that just tough for you and Roger Rocky...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still waiting for you to throw my quotes back at me.
>>>
>>> But before you do,.....the answer is ,...."A GREEN ONE"
>>
>>     That's still a color and not a platform.
>
> Makes you wonder where are all those green platforms Bast keeps
> blubbering about.




I Told you.
.....Behind the slurpee machine at the 7/11 

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


#525403

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-09 04:39 -0500
Message-ID<jp2f1bls0bahppbp5jhff8f5cgq8hce7la@4ax.com>
In reply to#525375
On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:01:26 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 21:43:41 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:15:16 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>>>> You really are getting desperate to have to pull random quotes out of
>>>>> completely different threads to have something to comment
>>>>
>>>> You Troofers don't like having your idiocy thrown back in your faces.
>>>> Now isn't that just tough for you and Roger Rocky...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm still waiting for you to throw my quotes back at me.
>>>
>>>But before you do,.....the answer is ,...."A GREEN ONE" 
>>
>>     That's still a color and not a platform.
>
>Makes you wonder where are all those green platforms Bast keeps
>blubbering about.  
>

     Well, Bast has claimed they're behind a slushy machine. I presume
they are very, very small if they all fit.

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

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


#525413

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-09 08:42 -0400
Message-ID<mv8cl1$602$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#525403

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 00:01:26 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 21:43:41 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>> <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:15:16 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>> You really are getting desperate to have to pull random quotes out
>>>>>> of completely different threads to have something to comment
>>>>>
>>>>> You Troofers don't like having your idiocy thrown back in your
>>>>> faces. Now isn't that just tough for you and Roger Rocky...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm still waiting for you to throw my quotes back at me.
>>>>
>>>> But before you do,.....the answer is ,...."A GREEN ONE"
>>>
>>>     That's still a color and not a platform.
>>
>> Makes you wonder where are all those green platforms Bast keeps
>> blubbering about.
>>
>
>     Well, Bast has claimed they're behind a slushy machine. I presume
> they are very, very small if they all fit.




Did  you go to 7/11 to look for it yet ? 

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


Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web