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

Groups > sci.physics > #526624 > unrolled thread

Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-17 17:44 -0500
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-17 18:05 -0500
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-17 23:24 +0000
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 19:56 -0400
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 11:19 +1100
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-17 22:18 -0500
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-17 23:50 -0400
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-18 08:23 -0400
        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-18 07:34 -0500
          Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 15:00 -0400
        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 14:55 -0400
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-18 06:44 +0000
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-18 06:08 +0200
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 10:39 -0500
        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 15:01 -0400
          Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 03:46 -0500
            Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-19 14:53 -0400
              Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 03:53 -0500
                Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-20 17:50 +0200
                  Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 20:42 -0500
                Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-21 11:44 -0400
          Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-19 17:48 +0200
            Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 03:52 -0500
            Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-21 13:14 -0400
              Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-22 06:03 +0200
                Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-22 21:57 -0400
                  Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-23 09:30 +0200
                    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-27 00:33 -0400
                      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-27 08:31 +0100
                        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-10-28 05:52 +0100
                        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-11-01 19:50 -0500
                          Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-11-02 05:04 +0100
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-18 12:37 -0700
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Notroll2015" <notroll2015@charter.net> - 2015-10-18 15:58 -0500
        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 19:00 -0400
      Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-18 16:35 -0500
        Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-18 19:03 -0400
          Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 19:32 -0700
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-19 14:53 -0400
    Re: Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-19 14:54 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#526624 — Why there are no supersonic flights at airshows

Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real sonic 
bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster than the 
speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you heard one.

Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
speed of sound period.

Here is a quote:
"Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"

From:
Why We Don't Have an SST
  http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#526626

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message 
news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real 
> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster 
> than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you 
> heard one.
>
> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than 
> the speed of sound period.
>
> Here is a quote:
> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>
> From:
> Why We Don't Have an SST
> 
> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
>

Oh but the 9/11 hoaxsters could have easily used an SST to ram both the Twin 
Towers since the jets they used to ram the Twin Towers were only CGIs with 
no crash dynamics at all.

Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
( Indexed to start at "MISSING WING" )
 https://youtu.be/p1D1C94eE8U?t=56m56s

And not only were the two jets in Nuke York City on 9/11 inconsistent with 
real jets but the alleged Kerosene Collapses where also inconsistent with 
real "Kerosene Collapses.:"
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

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

#526631

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real sonic 
> bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster than the 
> speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you heard one.
> 
> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
> speed of sound period.
> 
> Here is a quote:
> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"

Yes, in general supersonic flight without prior permisson is banned in
continental US airspace.

However, getting such permission is trivial, especially for the military.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#526633

On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 17:44:31 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:


>Here is a quote:
>"Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"

False.   

The Blackbird did it.   Not repeatedly but often enough to pissed off
Robert  Schuller when they shattered the glass in his Crystal
Cathedral.  Lockheed used to routinely get bills and angry notes from
Schuller.   :)   

One Blackbird  sonic boomed overland 4 times setting four speed
records, you idiotic nincompoop.   

"When the SR-71 was retired in 1990, one Blackbird was flown from its
birthplace at United States Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale,
California, to go on exhibit at what is now the Smithsonian
Institution's Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia.[97] 

On 6 March 1990, Lt. Col. Raymond E. "Ed" Yielding and Lt. Col. Joseph
T. "JT" Vida piloted SR-71 S/N 61-7972 on its final Senior Crown
flight and set four new speed records in the process.

1.Los Angeles, CA, to Washington, D.C., distance 2,299.7 miles
(3,701.0 km), average speed 2,144.8 miles per hour (3,451.7 km/h), and
an elapsed time of 64 minutes 20 seconds.[95]

2.West Coast to East Coast, distance 2,404 miles (3,869 km), average
speed 2,124.5 miles per hour (3,419.1 km/h), and an elapsed time of 67
minutes 54 seconds.

3.Kansas City, Missouri, to Washington, D.C., distance 942 miles
(1,516 km), average speed 2,176 miles per hour (3,502 km/h), and an
elapsed time of 25 minutes 59 seconds.

4.St. Louis, Missouri, to Cincinnati, Ohio, distance 311.4 miles
(501.1 km), average speed 2,189.9 miles per hour (3,524.3 km/h), and
an elapsed time of 8 minutes 32 seconds.


Roger you certainly work hard at being "stupid".   

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

#526639

On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 19:56:17 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 17:44:31 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Here is a quote:
>>"Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>
>False.   

Yep.

https://youtu.be/1KPBhDc-55Y

http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/jamie-hyneman-grounded/

Rockhead is a usenet pigeon.

Shill #2
--
http://i462.photobucket.com/albums/qq341/govshill/Rocky-1.jpg

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

#526658

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message 
news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real 
> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster 
> than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you 
> heard one.
>
> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than 
> the speed of sound period.
>
> Here is a quote:
> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>
> From:
> Why We Don't Have an SST
> 
> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist

And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G> 

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

#526663

On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:18:53 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message 
>news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
>> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real 
>> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster 
>> than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you 
>> heard one.
>>
>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than 
>> the speed of sound period.
>>
>> Here is a quote:
>> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>>
>> From:
>> Why We Don't Have an SST
>> 
>> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
>
>And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G> 

You weren't talking about air shows, dipshit.  What you said was
"Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and
Europe".   

And again, you were proven wrong.  

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

#526681

Rocky wrote:
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message
> news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
>> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real
>> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly
>> faster than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not
>> forget if you heard one.
>>
>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than
>> the speed of sound period.
>>
>> Here is a quote:
>> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>>
>> From:
>> Why We Don't Have an SST
>>
>> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
>
> And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G>





I see sarah sweetcheeks is still haunting.
You would think she would be to busy getting her broom shined-up for 
halloween 

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

#526682

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:n002sq$u9l$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> Rocky wrote:
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
>>> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real
>>> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly
>>> faster than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not
>>> forget if you heard one.
>>>
>>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than
>>> the speed of sound period.
>>>
>>> Here is a quote:
>>> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>>>
>>> From:
>>> Why We Don't Have an SST
>>>
>>> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
>>
>> And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G>
>
>
>
>
>
> I see sarah sweetcheeks is still haunting.
> You would think she would be to busy getting her broom shined-up for 
> halloween

lol and I doubt if she has to worry about doing too much for Halloween since 
she probably always wears a black outfit with a big hat.  And maybe she 
keeps her broom waxed up like people do with cars they like.

BTW I was in Chicago for an air show up there and even though the SR-71 that 
flew in that air show was over water it still flew in slow flight with it's 
nose up in the air and was still the loudest jet of all of the jets in that 
air show.

Rocky 

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

#526713

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 07:34:46 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:


>BTW I was in Chicago for an air show up there and even though the SR-71 that 
>flew in that air show was over water it still flew in slow flight with it's 
>nose up in the air and was still the loudest jet of all of the jets in that 
>air show.

How do you think all those Chicago people would like having their
windows shattered?

Send a note to the folks at the Crystal Cathedral and ask them how
many times the Blackbird shattered their glass.  It was often enough
that Ben Rich took note of it and mentioned the issues.  

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

#526712

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 08:23:53 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>
>Rocky wrote:
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
>>> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real
>>> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly
>>> faster than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not
>>> forget if you heard one.
>>>
>>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than
>>> the speed of sound period.
>>>
>>> Here is a quote:
>>> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>>>
>>> From:
>>> Why We Don't Have an SST
>>>
>>> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
>>
>> And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G>
>
>I see sarah sweetcheeks is still haunting.
>You would think she would be to busy getting her broom shined-up for 
>halloween 

Awww, Bast is feeling threatened.  I've got you Bast.   I've got you
cornered by your own words.   And you'll notice, even Ramjet Roger
knows you're a lunatic.  

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

#526686

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message 
> news:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com...
>> Obviously there are a lot of people here that have never heard a real 
>> sonic bomb from when jets in the United States were allowed to fly faster 
>> than the speed of sound.  BTW that is something you will not forget if you 
>> heard one.
>>
>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than 
>> the speed of sound period.
>>
>> Here is a quote:
>> "Overland supersonic flight is banned in the United States and Europe"
>>
>> From:
>> Why We Don't Have an SST
>> 
>> http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/Search-for-Quiet-SST-180952125/?no-ist
> 
> And again, there are no supersonic flights at air shows.  <G> 
 
And again, you miss the point that supersonic flight *WITHOUT PRIOR
PERMISSION* is what is banned, raving, lunatic, kook. 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#526665

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:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> Ob<SMACKAKOOK!>
> 
> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
> speed of sound period.

You've tried that lie before, RockyRetard, and you've been proven
wrong. Why is your broken little brain so impervious to clue? You're
dumber than Emmett Gulley. LOL

> He<SMACKAKOOK!>

Note the height of a couple hundred feet above the water.

Note the supersonic shock cone.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogtjBcIjrjc>

Note that Roger Wittekind is a lie-blathering 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.

K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID:
<YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in
the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic]
nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your
thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger.

L) In further expanding your delusion, your broken brain has k'lamed
that the reason for the WTC Memorial Lights is to cover up Cherenkov
radiation at the WTC site as a result of a nuclear detonation, kook
blather which I utterly destroy here: MID:
<1f304ece6ae3cd30c1bee10ad300b720@dizum.com> by proving that Cherenkov
radiation in air can only happen with highly energetic beta radiation;
that beta particles due to nuclear fission aren't energetic enough to
cause Cherenkov radiation in air; and that even with beta particles of
maximum possible energy, the Cherenkov radiation in air would only
extend ~2 meters above the ground. That's not taking into account that
the WTC Memorial Lights are currently at the *top* of the 7-story
Battery Parking Garage on Morris Street and are lit only once a year
on 11 Sep. Before the new Goldman Sachs building was built, the lights
were in vacant lot 26 on West Side Highway near the WTC site (on which
the new Goldman Sachs building now sits). They were *never* at the WTC
site. Moron. LOL

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

Moron. LOL

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

#526704

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 06:08:08 +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:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> Ob<SMACKAKOOK!>
>> 
>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
>> speed of sound period.
>
>You've tried that lie before, RockyRetard, and you've been proven
>wrong. Why is your broken little brain so impervious to clue? You're
>dumber than Emmett Gulley. LOL
>

     Wow.
     I don't know if Roger is able to understand the level of that
insult.

[Note to Roger: You have been completely and totally insulted. At a
level rarely seen in the halls of Usenet. To give you a rough idea as
to how deep this insult goes; at no time in our history have FNVW or I
felt the need or desire to compare the other to Emmett, let alone
claim either us dumber than Emmett. If you know anything of our past
before the truce, you will understand my meaning.]

>> He<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
>Note the height of a couple hundred feet above the water.
>
>Note the supersonic shock cone.
>
><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogtjBcIjrjc>
>
>Note that Roger Wittekind is a lie-blathering moron. LOL

     If not for the fact that he's not pretending to be stump stupid,
it would be somewhat funny.

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

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

#526714

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:39:21 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
<compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 06:08:08 +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:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>>head first into the wood chipper again:
>>
>>> Ob<SMACKAKOOK!>
>>> 
>>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
>>> speed of sound period.
>>
>>You've tried that lie before, RockyRetard, and you've been proven
>>wrong. Why is your broken little brain so impervious to clue? You're
>>dumber than Emmett Gulley. LOL
>>
>
>     Wow.
>     I don't know if Roger is able to understand the level of that
>insult.
>
>[Note to Roger: You have been completely and totally insulted. At a
>level rarely seen in the halls of Usenet. To give you a rough idea as
>to how deep this insult goes; at no time in our history have FNVW or I
>felt the need or desire to compare the other to Emmett, let alone
>claim either us dumber than Emmett. If you know anything of our past
>before the truce, you will understand my meaning.]

RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     

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

#526809

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 15:01:01 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:39:21 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 06:08:08 +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:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>>>head first into the wood chipper again:
>>>
>>>> Ob<SMACKAKOOK!>
>>>> 
>>>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
>>>> speed of sound period.
>>>
>>>You've tried that lie before, RockyRetard, and you've been proven
>>>wrong. Why is your broken little brain so impervious to clue? You're
>>>dumber than Emmett Gulley. LOL
>>
>>     Wow.
>>     I don't know if Roger is able to understand the level of that
>>insult.
>>
>>[Note to Roger: You have been completely and totally insulted. At a
>>level rarely seen in the halls of Usenet. To give you a rough idea as
>>to how deep this insult goes; at no time in our history have FNVW or I
>>felt the need or desire to compare the other to Emmett, let alone
>>claim either us dumber than Emmett. If you know anything of our past
>>before the truce, you will understand my meaning.]
>
>RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     

     Except that Emmett ended up in prison for his stalking. But then,
his victim's mom didn't lie under oath, allowing reasonable doubt to
set in. That is where Roger got lucky.


"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."

Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>

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

#526894

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 03:46:55 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
<compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 15:01:01 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:39:21 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 06:08:08 +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:IKGdne7nHNYNUr_LnZ2dnUU7-YfOydjZ@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>>>>head first into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>> Ob<SMACKAKOOK!>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fact is jets at air shows in the United States will not fly faster than the 
>>>>> speed of sound period.
>>>>
>>>>You've tried that lie before, RockyRetard, and you've been proven
>>>>wrong. Why is your broken little brain so impervious to clue? You're
>>>>dumber than Emmett Gulley. LOL
>>>
>>>     Wow.
>>>     I don't know if Roger is able to understand the level of that
>>>insult.
>>>
>>>[Note to Roger: You have been completely and totally insulted. At a
>>>level rarely seen in the halls of Usenet. To give you a rough idea as
>>>to how deep this insult goes; at no time in our history have FNVW or I
>>>felt the need or desire to compare the other to Emmett, let alone
>>>claim either us dumber than Emmett. If you know anything of our past
>>>before the truce, you will understand my meaning.]
>>
>>RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     
>
>     Except that Emmett ended up in prison for his stalking. 

For a second time.    :)

>But then,his victim's mom didn't lie under oath, allowing reasonable doubt to
>set in. That is where Roger got lucky.

Emmett finally picked on a victim who wasn't young and afraid.  "R"
took the appropriate steps to get him put away for at least 3 years.  
Not that I believe Emutt will ever change his behavior.  

Is that dopey Neil Warren/Greg Hall still pretending to be  * Emmett
from prison* ?   


>"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
>belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
>
>Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
>on 9/11/01 in
>Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>

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

#527017

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:53:06 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

[...]

>>>RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     
>>
>>     Except that Emmett ended up in prison for his stalking. 
>
>For a second time.    :)
>

     Good point.

>>But then,his victim's mom didn't lie under oath, allowing reasonable doubt to
>>set in. That is where Roger got lucky.
>
>Emmett finally picked on a victim who wasn't young and afraid.  "R"
>took the appropriate steps to get him put away for at least 3 years.  
>Not that I believe Emutt will ever change his behavior.  
>

     He won't. If he didn't learn the first time, he isn't going to
learn now. 

>Is that dopey Neil Warren/Greg Hall still pretending to be  * Emmett
>from prison* ?   

     I didn't know he was doing so.
     How sad is one's life that they want to pretend to be Emmett?

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

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

#527041

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

K Wills (Shill #3), in
<news:k70c2bdfqcvuavo4rckqnsfd3ahtrfmiln@4ax.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:53:06 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
> wrote:

>>>> RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     

>>> Except that Emmett ended up in prison for his stalking. 

Roger 'RockyRetard' Wittekind ended up in court for his stalking.

>> For a second time.    :)

> Good point.

>>> But then,his victim's mom didn't lie under oath, allowing reasonable doubt to
>>> set in. That is where Roger got lucky.

>> Emmett finally picked on a victim who wasn't young and afraid.  "R"
>> took the appropriate steps to get him put away for at least 3 years.  
>> Not that I believe Emutt will ever change his behavior.  

> He won't. If he didn't learn the first time, he isn't going to
> learn now. 

Emmett's behavior is ingrained within his personality. He could no
more stop stalking women than he could grow a second toof. LOL

>> Is that dopey Neil Warren/Greg Hall still pretending to be  * Emmett
>> from prison* ?   

> I didn't know he was doing so.
> How sad is one's life that they want to pretend to be Emmett?

I don't believe it's the sadness in the life of Craptain Kneel Whorin'
the Pusillanimous Pail-Pooping Pooter Pirate of the SS TrannyScow that
makes him impersonate Emmett, because Craptain Kneel Whorin'
apparently drinks himself happy with Andre's Pink Champagne then if
that doesn't work, tries to drown his sorrows in trannyjism... I'm
sure you've seen his brain-bending take on homosexuality that lets him
suck trannydick and get fucked in the ass by trannies, but that makes
him straight and the trannies gay. LOL

No, I think the reason Gargles impersonates Emmett is that he knows
that if he can strive for the level of futility that Emmett
experienced in his life, he just might have something to live for.

<snicker>

-- 

Chimpy likes tickling pickles.
His picklecycle is a classic.
He visited Greg, who showed him his peg,
but Chimpy only likes Vlasics.

"It's no Vlasic for sure,
but my poor closet door",
said Chimpy as he kneeled on one knee,
"is already broken
so I'll get to throatin',
but after this I get to pee!"

But Gargles had one more condition
before being sucked to perdition.
"Put on this dress
and I'll do the rest,
imagining you're in transition."

The nickel slot glowed furiously hot
and slurping drowned out the sea noise.
Soon Gargles was done, he'd had all his fun.
It was quick because Gargles likes boys.

When Chimpy was done he smacked Gargles' ass
and said, "Now *that's* how to suck it!"
But no Golden Showers for Chimpy, alas.
Greg went to play with his bucket!

Bucket play done Gargles wanted more fun
so he told Chimpy it was his turn.
Chimpy didn't demur, Gargles dropped to the floor
and his throat got a case of cock burn!

"Not to worry", was heard from the retarded turd,
fapping blindingly fast like a fool.
"We'll put everything right by the end of the night.
Just swallow this, trust me, it's cool."

Gargles guzzled for hours before hitting the showers.
"How's the throat?" was the query. "No pain!
So when I am done, we'll have some more fun,
my throat's good so let's do it again!"

On into the night as the waves lapped the boat,
sounds of gagging and slurping and juice.
In that gay little boat, Chimpy battered on throat
'til Gargles said, "Let's call a truce!"

"I can't take any more! You've outgayed me for sure"
Gargles cried as he sat all defeated.

Chimpy beamed victory,
"You can't beat me, you see?
My gayness is just half depleted!"

<snicker>

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

#527158

On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 17:50:13 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
>K Wills (Shill #3), in
><news:k70c2bdfqcvuavo4rckqnsfd3ahtrfmiln@4ax.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:53:06 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>
>>>>> RockyRetard also shares stalking activities with Emutt.     
>
>>>> Except that Emmett ended up in prison for his stalking. 
>
>Roger 'RockyRetard' Wittekind ended up in court for his stalking.
>

     True, but he was found not guilty. All because the mom lied.
     While I understand her motivation (she was willing to do anything
to keep Roger away from her daughter), her lying raised reasonable
doubt. And that was all Roger needed to secure a verdict of not
guilty.

>>> For a second time.    :)
>
>> Good point.
>
>>>> But then,his victim's mom didn't lie under oath, allowing reasonable doubt to
>>>> set in. That is where Roger got lucky.
>
>>> Emmett finally picked on a victim who wasn't young and afraid.  "R"
>>> took the appropriate steps to get him put away for at least 3 years.  
>>> Not that I believe Emutt will ever change his behavior.  
>
>> He won't. If he didn't learn the first time, he isn't going to
>> learn now. 
>
>Emmett's behavior is ingrained within his personality. He could no
>more stop stalking women than he could grow a second toof. LOL
>

<Giggle>

>>> Is that dopey Neil Warren/Greg Hall still pretending to be  * Emmett
>>> from prison* ?   
>
>> I didn't know he was doing so.
>> How sad is one's life that they want to pretend to be Emmett?
>
>I don't believe it's the sadness in the life of Craptain Kneel Whorin'
>the Pusillanimous Pail-Pooping Pooter Pirate of the SS TrannyScow that
>makes him impersonate Emmett, because Craptain Kneel Whorin'
>apparently drinks himself happy with Andre's Pink Champagne then if
>that doesn't work, tries to drown his sorrows in trannyjism... I'm
>sure you've seen his brain-bending take on homosexuality that lets him
>suck trannydick and get fucked in the ass by trannies, but that makes
>him straight and the trannies gay. LOL
>

     I haven't seen them, but it's very easy to accept that he's
posted them.

>No, I think the reason Gargles impersonates Emmett is that he knows
>that if he can strive for the level of futility that Emmett
>experienced in his life, he just might have something to live for.
>
><snicker>

     That's just too pathetic for words. Well, maybe one.

"<Giggle>"

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

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web