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

Groups > sci.physics > #521637 > unrolled thread

Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 10:03 -0500
    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 11:19 -0400
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:47 -0400
    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 16:32 +0000
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 12:11 -0500
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 09:04 -0400
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:31 -0400
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:39 -0400
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:04 -0500
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:15 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:07 -0400
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 09:56 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:35 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 15:57 +0100
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 15:28 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0100
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:05 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:21 -0500
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:22 -0400
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:32 +0000
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:21 -0400
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:38 +0000
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:27 +0000
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:38 -0500
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:15 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-17 17:57 +0000
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:28 -0500
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:09 -0500
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:25 -0500
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 19:45 +0100
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 15:30 -0400
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:36 +0000
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:02 -0400
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:35 +0000
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 09:39 -0400
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:28 +0000
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:48 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 22:28 +0000
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 16:53 -0400
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 17:34 -0400
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 21:48 +0000
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:57 -0400
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 20:17 -0400
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:29 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:13 +0000
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:36 +0000
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-19 13:20 +0000
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:54 -0500
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:19 -0400
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:38 -0500
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:52 -0400
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 12:08 -0500
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 18:53 +0000
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:17 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:53 +0000
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:35 -0400
                                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 05:32 +0000
                                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 12:29 -0400
                                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 17:07 +0000
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:39 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:50 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0000
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:44 +0000
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 20:33 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:57 +0000
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:34 -0400
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:52 -0500
                                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
                                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:19 -0400
                                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 21:54 -0500
                                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 03:59 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 08:53 -0500
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 15:35 -0500
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:58 -0400
                                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV!  ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:48 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 10:01 -0500
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:44 -0400
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:56 -0500
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:07 -0400
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-22 17:02 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:27 -0400
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 07:56 +0200
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 01:56 -0500
                                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:41 -0500
                                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-19 20:32 +0100
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:31 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:54 +0000
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-20 15:21 +0000
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-21 13:01 +0000
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:53 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:55 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:23 -0400
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 07:44 -0400
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:31 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:59 -0400
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:07 -0500
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 07:57 -0400
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:22 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:19 -0500
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:01 +0000
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:48 -0500
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:24 +0000
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:58 -0500
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 18:02 -0400
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:18 -0400
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:03 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:01 -0400
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 17:32 -0500
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 22:54 +0000
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 06:39 +0100
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:08 -0500
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:01 -0400
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:29 -0400
      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 14:05 +0000
        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:54 -0500
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:34 +0000
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:44 +0000
            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 14:02 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 00:34 +0000
                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:10 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:18 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 14:56 -0400
                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 22:09 -0400
                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 13:03 -0400
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 12:17 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 14:41 -0400
                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:44 -0400
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:53 -0400
                                Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:22 -0400
                                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 22:44 -0400
                                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 23:56 -0400
                                      Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:30 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 02:58 -0400
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 06:34 -0500
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                                            Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
                                          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
                              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:59 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:22 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:39 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( the Ediot forgets a link I gave him earlier ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:58 -0500
              Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 01:16 -0400
          Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500

Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9  Next page →

#522186

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 20:17:38 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtkav5$hr$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:
>>
>>>Rocky wrote:
>>
>>>> Boy are you stupid because if you think that 9/11 was pulled off by more
>>>> than one person than your version of 9/11 has to be a conspiracy also. 
>>>> DUH
>>>> Rocky
>>
>> It was a conspiracy, k00k.  Osama bin Laden, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, 19
>> hijackers and who knows how many others conspired to fly 4 hijacked planes
>> into 4 targets.
>>
>>>The 9/11 official fairytalers aren't stupid.
>>>They are simply going with the flow,....as lemmings.
>>
>> The 9/11 kooktard fairytalers are stupid.
>> They are simply going with the flow,....as sheeple.
>>
>>>No different from the bible thumpers who rally against gay marriage, even
>>>though their bible has no mention of gay marriage being forbidden.
>>>....but they FEEL it does, they are TOLD it does, so they never check for
>>>themselves, but comfortably accept it with blind faith.
>>
>> No different from the other kooktards who rally against hijackers, even
>> though their alternative conspiracies have no possibility of working.
>> ....but they FEEL it does, they are TOLD it does, so they never check for
>> themselves, but comfortably accept it with blind faith.
>
>Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers look like 
>the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>

     What NCD's have you used to compare 9/11 to that allows you to
claim the remains of the twin towers look like the remains of a NCD? 

>With walls still standing strong and people living below the vaporization 
>range of a nuke.  <G>
>

     An above ground nuke, yes. But not a below ground nuke.
     You are, of course, still free to prove your claim. Not that you
will. 

>And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters 
>Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too?

     I'm still waiting for your evidence that they lied about
anything. You've not offered anything that would support, let alone
prove, a claim that NIST has lied.


"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]

#522074

On 19/09/2015 16:54, Rocky wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM00052019BFECFFC0@aca425d0.ipt.aol.com...
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>>> collapsed
>>>>> they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>
>>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
>>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
>>>> they
>>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>>
>>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>>> never understand that.
>>>
>>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>>
>>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>>
>>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>>
>> Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>> radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>
> Boy are you stupid because if you think that 9/11 was pulled off by more
> than one person than your version of 9/11 has to be a conspiracy also.  DUH
>
> Rocky
>
>

You seem to be saying that the '911 conspiracy' was pulled off by one 
man, have you a name for this person?

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

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

#522136

"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
news:mtkd5e$t7f$1@dont-email.me...
> On 19/09/2015 16:54, Rocky wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00052019BFECFFC0@aca425d0.ipt.aol.com...
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>>>> collapsed
>>>>>> they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>>
>>>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is 
>>>>> used
>>>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
>>>>> they
>>>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>>>
>>>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>>>> never understand that.
>>>>
>>>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>>>
>>>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>>>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>>>
>>>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>>>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>>>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>>>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>>>
>>> Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>> radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>
>> Boy are you stupid because if you think that 9/11 was pulled off by more
>> than one person than your version of 9/11 has to be a conspiracy also. 
>> DUH
>>
>> Rocky
>>
>>
>
> You seem to be saying that the '911 conspiracy' was pulled off by one man, 
> have you a name for this person?

The point is, it is pointless to call 9/11 a conspiracy because it's a 
conspiracy despite how somebody looks at it.  DUH.

That conspiracy bullshit was started to try and deal with those that did not 
believe Oswald was a single shooter.

Rocky 

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

#522139

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> The point is, it is pointless to call 9/11 a conspiracy because it's a 
> conspiracy despite how somebody looks at it.

Lunatic gibberish.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#522190

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 01:54:42 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
>> The point is, it is pointless to call 9/11 a conspiracy because it's a 
>> conspiracy despite how somebody looks at it.
>
>Lunatic gibberish.

     I actually agree with Roger on this point. OBL, 19 hijackers, and
others, conspired to cause the events of 9/11/01/.

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

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

#522176

On 20/09/2015 02:31, Rocky wrote:
> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:mtkd5e$t7f$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 19/09/2015 16:54, Rocky wrote:
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM00052019BFECFFC0@aca425d0.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>>>>> collapsed
>>>>>>> they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is
>>>>>> used
>>>>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>>>>
>>>>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>>>>> never understand that.
>>>>>
>>>>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>>>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>>>>
>>>>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>>>>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>>>>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>>>>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>>>>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>>>>
>>>> Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>>> radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>>
>>> Boy are you stupid because if you think that 9/11 was pulled off by more
>>> than one person than your version of 9/11 has to be a conspiracy also.
>>> DUH
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You seem to be saying that the '911 conspiracy' was pulled off by one man,
>> have you a name for this person?
>
> The point is, it is pointless to call 9/11 a conspiracy because it's a
> conspiracy despite how somebody looks at it.  DUH.

So that flawed logic is the point you are trying to make, back to school 
for you.

>
> That conspiracy bullshit was started to try and deal with those that did not
> believe Oswald was a single shooter.
>
> Rocky
>
>


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

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

#522189

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 20:31:20 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtkd5e$t7f$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 19/09/2015 16:54, Rocky wrote:
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM00052019BFECFFC0@aca425d0.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>>>>> collapsed
>>>>>>> they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is 
>>>>>> used
>>>>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>>>>
>>>>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>>>>> never understand that.
>>>>>
>>>>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>>>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>>>>
>>>>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>>>>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>>>>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>>>>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>>>>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>>>>
>>>> Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>>> radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>>
>>> Boy are you stupid because if you think that 9/11 was pulled off by more
>>> than one person than your version of 9/11 has to be a conspiracy also. 
>>> DUH
>>
>> You seem to be saying that the '911 conspiracy' was pulled off by one man, 
>> have you a name for this person?
>
>The point is, it is pointless to call 9/11 a conspiracy because it's a 
>conspiracy despite how somebody looks at it.  DUH.
>

     You actually allowed some truth to be present in one of your
posts. Osama bin Laden, at least 19 hijackers, plus others, were all a
part of the conspiracy to hijack four planes and crash them into
things. Two hit the twin towers. One hit the Pentagon. One failed to
reach its intended target and crashed in Shanksville, PA.

>That conspiracy bullshit was started to try and deal with those that did not 
>believe Oswald was a single shooter.
>

     People still try to make the claim. This despite the overwhelming
evidence that he was alone and the lack of any evidence that anyone
else was involved.


"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]

#522023

On 19 Sep 2015 13:20:13 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7 collapsed
>>>>they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>
>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case, they
>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>
>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>> never understand that.
>>
>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>
>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>
>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>
>Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>

     Are you referring to "Somewhere in Time?" If so, they've been
replaying old episodes for years. On occasion, a show about 9/11 does
get aired, but the topics aren't exclusive to 9/11.

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

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

#522215

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On 19 Sep 2015 13:20:13 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> In sci.physics Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>>And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
collapsed
>>>>>they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>
>>>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
>>>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case, they
>>>> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>>
>>> Delusional lunatics with marginal thinking ability like Rocky will
>>> never understand that.
>>>
>>>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>>>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>>>
>>> If you did and gathered the lunatics to watch first hand, they would
>>> just say it was rigged because it didn't match their delusions.
>>>
>>> Once a delusional nut case becomes convinced of something, no matter
>>> how bizarre, improbable, or even impossible, there is no changing
>>> their minds without intensive therapy and probably medication for
>>> their damaged brain chemistry.
>>
>>Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>
>
>      Are you referring to "Somewhere in Time?" If so, they've been
> replaying old episodes for years. On occasion, a show about 9/11 does
> get aired, but the topics aren't exclusive to 9/11.

The kooks listen to them and the topic shows up here as "truth".
Do an analysis:  you can correlate the topics of those reruns
with posts in s.p.  The OPs think they have a brand new theory
and expend their time and money promoting it as science.

/BAH

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

#522369

On 20 Sep 2015 15:21:02 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

[...]

>>>Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>>radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>>
>>
>>      Are you referring to "Somewhere in Time?" If so, they've been
>> replaying old episodes for years. On occasion, a show about 9/11 does
>> get aired, but the topics aren't exclusive to 9/11.
>
>The kooks listen to them and the topic shows up here as "truth".

     In their defense, old Art episodes are better than what I've
heard of George's recent stuff.
    After Ian Punnett left, there wasn't much worth listening to until
John Wells joined. Once he was fired, the show really went down hill. 

>Do an analysis:  you can correlate the topics of those reruns
>with posts in s.p.  The OPs think they have a brand new theory
>and expend their time and money promoting it as science.

     Kind of scary if they think something brought up years ago is
brand new. But that's the mind of a k00k for you.

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

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

#522460

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On 20 Sep 2015 15:21:02 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>>Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>>>radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>>>
>>>
>>>      Are you referring to "Somewhere in Time?" If so, they've been
>>> replaying old episodes for years. On occasion, a show about 9/11 does
>>> get aired, but the topics aren't exclusive to 9/11.
>>
>>The kooks listen to them and the topic shows up here as "truth".
>
>      In their defense, old Art episodes are better than what I've
> heard of George's recent stuff.
>     After Ian Punnett left, there wasn't much worth listening to until
> John Wells joined. Once he was fired, the show really went down hill.

Coast-to-coast has gotten religion.  IOW, espousing Xtian religion
attracts more listeners.  This is not a good sign.

>
>>Do an analysis:  you can correlate the topics of those reruns
>>with posts in s.p.  The OPs think they have a brand new theory
>>and expend their time and money promoting it as science.
>
>      Kind of scary if they think something brought up years ago is
> brand new. But that's the mind of a k00k for you.
>
A "new" listener doesn't necessarily hear that it's a repeat.  The
notation is made quickly and not ofen during the entire broadcast.

What was really amusing to me is the year when Bell had 3 people
who touted 3 different kinds of "truths" having to do with
earthquakes.  You could buy kits from each of them.  All 3
views were touted as truth in this newsgroup.  One kook did
stop posting when I asked which kit he bought.  He didn't
know there had been 2 others.

I use the coast-to-caost as a broad indicator of general population
sentiment.  Lately, it's getting fucking scary.

/BAH

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

#522658

On 21 Sep 2015 13:01:28 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On 20 Sep 2015 15:21:02 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>Also note that Coast-to-Coast has been replaying the old Art Bell
>>>>>radio shows which were promoting this conspiracy hypothesis.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      Are you referring to "Somewhere in Time?" If so, they've been
>>>> replaying old episodes for years. On occasion, a show about 9/11 does
>>>> get aired, but the topics aren't exclusive to 9/11.
>>>
>>>The kooks listen to them and the topic shows up here as "truth".
>>
>>      In their defense, old Art episodes are better than what I've
>> heard of George's recent stuff.
>>     After Ian Punnett left, there wasn't much worth listening to until
>> John Wells joined. Once he was fired, the show really went down hill.
>
>Coast-to-coast has gotten religion.  IOW, espousing Xtian religion
>attracts more listeners.  This is not a good sign.
>

     I haven't listen to C2C at all since John was fired. As such, I
have no idea what is currently happening.

>>>Do an analysis:  you can correlate the topics of those reruns
>>>with posts in s.p.  The OPs think they have a brand new theory
>>>and expend their time and money promoting it as science.
>>
>>      Kind of scary if they think something brought up years ago is
>> brand new. But that's the mind of a k00k for you.
>>
>A "new" listener doesn't necessarily hear that it's a repeat.  The
>notation is made quickly and not ofen during the entire broadcast.
>

     It's been a while since I last listened to "Somewhere in Time."
It used to be that at the breaks there would be an announcement that
it was a rebroadcast from whatever date.
     It is certainly possible this is no longer the case.

>What was really amusing to me is the year when Bell had 3 people
>who touted 3 different kinds of "truths" having to do with
>earthquakes.  You could buy kits from each of them.  All 3
>views were touted as truth in this newsgroup.  One kook did
>stop posting when I asked which kit he bought.  He didn't
>know there had been 2 others.

     Too funny!

>
>I use the coast-to-caost as a broad indicator of general population
>sentiment.  Lately, it's getting fucking scary.

     Premier cares only about the money. Whatever content they think
will bring in the most is what they will have George present. And so
long as the checks don't bounce, George will do as they want.

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

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

#521842

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mthd76$24b$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7 collapsed
>>they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>
> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case, they
> used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>
> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)

That is exactly what NIST did with WTC1.  NIST rebuilt one floor of WTC1 at 
Underwriters Laboratory and tried to get the floor to fail the way they 
claimed it did and it didn't happen so they had to resort to the use of 
cartoons where they never gave people the values they used in their 
cartoons.

You can read more about what NIST did at:
"Guest Column by Kevin Ryan - Science Died On 9/11"
 http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/17/guest-column-kevin-ryan-science-died-911/ 

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

#521885

Rocky wrote:
> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
> news:mthd76$24b$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>
>> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
>> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
>> they used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
>>
>> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
>> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
>
> That is exactly what NIST did with WTC1.  NIST rebuilt one floor of
> WTC1 at Underwriters Laboratory and tried to get the floor to fail the
> way they claimed it did and it didn't happen so they had to resort to
> the use of cartoons where they never gave people the values they used
> in their cartoons.
>
> You can read more about what NIST did at:
> "Guest Column by Kevin Ryan - Science Died On 9/11"
> http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/17/guest-column-kevin-ryan-science-died-911/







I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make it show 
a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.

Too bad real life isn't a computer game, huh.

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

#521994

In article <mti14u$1p6$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
> 
> Rocky wrote:
> > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
> > news:mthd76$24b$1@pcls7.std.com...
> >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
> >>
> >>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
> >>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
> >>
> >> Those "cartoons" are the product of CAD software.  CAD software is used
> >> nowadays all the time in the design of new buildings.  In this case,
> >> they used it to model what happens in response to certain events.
> >>
> >> (Do you really expect them to build copies of WTC7 and WTC1, and fly a
> >> plane into the rebuilt WTC1 to see what happens to the rebuilt WTC7?)
> >
> > That is exactly what NIST did with WTC1.  NIST rebuilt one floor of
> > WTC1 at Underwriters Laboratory and tried to get the floor to fail the
> > way they claimed it did and it didn't happen so they had to resort to
> > the use of cartoons where they never gave people the values they used
> > in their cartoons.
> >
> > You can read more about what NIST did at:
> > "Guest Column by Kevin Ryan - Science Died On 9/11"
> > http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/17/guest-column-kevin-ryan-science-died-911/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make it show 
> a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.

~20 years and that's the best you can do?

> 
> Too bad real life isn't a computer game, huh.

Too bad Trooftardery doesn't make any sense, huh?

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521961

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:29:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Arc Michael" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
>news:4b19214a-b3a7-487b-8237-20dcc1cfa3e6@googlegroups.com...
>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> watch the videos faggot, building 7 is cut in half by the falling tower, 
>> you freak of nature as all saw and reported, turdo.
>
>What matters is that when WTC7 fell it fell at free fall speed for over 2 
>seconds and that does not just happen unless if cartoon physics is applied.
>

     Yes, in fact, it does.

>And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7 collapsed 
>they always have to show cartoons?  <G>

     Because building a new #7 just to prove your delusions wrong
would be too costly. 
     They used computer models, as any educated and mentally sound
person would expect.

"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]

#521984

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:29:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Arc Michael" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:4b19214a-b3a7-487b-8237-20dcc1cfa3e6@googlegroups.com...
>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> watch the videos faggot, building 7 is cut in half by the falling
>>> tower, you freak of nature as all saw and reported, turdo.
>>
>> What matters is that when WTC7 fell it fell at free fall speed for
>> over 2 seconds and that does not just happen unless if cartoon physics
>> is applied.
>>
>
>     Yes, in fact, it does.
>
>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>
>     Because building a new #7 just to prove your delusions wrong
> would be too costly.
>     They used computer models, as any educated and mentally sound
> person would expect.





I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....and I can make it show
a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.

Too bad real life isn't a computer game, huh.

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

#522024

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:44:39 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:29:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Arc Michael" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4b19214a-b3a7-487b-8237-20dcc1cfa3e6@googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> watch the videos faggot, building 7 is cut in half by the falling
>>>> tower, you freak of nature as all saw and reported, turdo.
>>>
>>> What matters is that when WTC7 fell it fell at free fall speed for
>>> over 2 seconds and that does not just happen unless if cartoon physics
>>> is applied.
>>
>>     Yes, in fact, it does.
>>
>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>
>>     Because building a new #7 just to prove your delusions wrong
>> would be too costly.
>>     They used computer models, as any educated and mentally sound
>> person would expect.
>
>
>
>I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....

     Good for you.

>and I can make it show
>a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.
>

     Good for you. In another 20 years you may learn how to do other
neat tricks with CAD. Probably not if this is all you've been able to
master in 20 years, but maybe.

>Too bad real life isn't a computer game, huh.

     Too bad what you claimed happened on 9/11/01 isn't real life,
huh?

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

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

#522049

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:44:39 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:29:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Arc Michael" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4b19214a-b3a7-487b-8237-20dcc1cfa3e6@googlegroups.com...
>>>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> watch the videos faggot, building 7 is cut in half by the falling
>>>>> tower, you freak of nature as all saw and reported, turdo.
>>>>
>>>> What matters is that when WTC7 fell it fell at free fall speed for
>>>> over 2 seconds and that does not just happen unless if cartoon
>>>> physics is applied.
>>>
>>>     Yes, in fact, it does.
>>>
>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>
>>>     Because building a new #7 just to prove your delusions wrong
>>> would be too costly.
>>>     They used computer models, as any educated and mentally sound
>>> person would expect.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....
>
>     Good for you.
>
>> and I can make it show
>> a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.
>>
>
>     Good for you. In another 20 years you may learn how to do other
> neat tricks with CAD. Probably not if this is all you've been able to
> master in 20 years, but maybe.







I know far more than that.
From both cad and even work I've done on computer games.

It's amazing how  apps allow you to manipulate or create completely new 
models of physics, that simply don't exist in the real world.

Of course allowing other to examine you models is always the way to let them 
see why your program works the way it does.

COMPUTER SIMULATIONS ARE WRITTEN AND CONTROLLED BY HUMANS.

Not by HAL from 2001......which ALSO never really existed in real life.

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

#522188

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:59:09 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:44:39 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:29:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Arc Michael" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4b19214a-b3a7-487b-8237-20dcc1cfa3e6@googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-7, Bast wrote:
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> watch the videos faggot, building 7 is cut in half by the falling
>>>>>> tower, you freak of nature as all saw and reported, turdo.
>>>>>
>>>>> What matters is that when WTC7 fell it fell at free fall speed for
>>>>> over 2 seconds and that does not just happen unless if cartoon
>>>>> physics is applied.
>>>>
>>>>     Yes, in fact, it does.
>>>>
>>>>> And talking about cartoons why is it when NIST explains why WTC7
>>>>> collapsed they always have to show cartoons?  <G>
>>>>
>>>>     Because building a new #7 just to prove your delusions wrong
>>>> would be too costly.
>>>>     They used computer models, as any educated and mentally sound
>>>> person would expect.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've been using CAD/CAM packages since the 1990's,....
>>
>>     Good for you.
>>
>>> and I can make it show
>>> a sphere, rotate into itself on a computer screen.
>>
>>     Good for you. In another 20 years you may learn how to do other
>> neat tricks with CAD. Probably not if this is all you've been able to
>> master in 20 years, but maybe.
>
>
>I know far more than that.

     What you know and what you can do may not be the same thing. In
this context, it's clear you still haven't learned how to do anything
else with CAD.

>From both cad and even work I've done on computer games.
>
>It's amazing how  apps allow you to manipulate or create completely new 
>models of physics, that simply don't exist in the real world.
>

     Not really all that amazing to anyone familiar with them.

>Of course allowing other to examine you models is always the way to let them 
>see why your program works the way it does.
>

     And many have been able to examine the models offered by NIST. In
fact, you've linked to a video that shows one of them. Roger has
linked to videos that show others.

>COMPUTER SIMULATIONS ARE WRITTEN AND CONTROLLED BY HUMANS.

     True. But when they use data from the real world, the mentally
sound accept the computer models are an accurate representation of
reality. The mentally ill are, sadly, unable.

>
>Not by HAL from 2001......which ALSO never really existed in real life.

     When has anyone claim it did?

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

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

Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web