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


Groups > sci.physics > #524744 > unrolled thread

Debunking Popular Mechanics

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

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

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

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


#525659

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-10 20:13 -0400
Message-ID<o9aj1bh41gctfl9iv6vhqvmg7g8kh7iqd9@4ax.com>
In reply to#525466
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:39:43 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>
>Rocky wrote:
>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>> news:mv8c2a$gk0$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:13:57 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean,  Bast?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> WHAT PLANES?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, what does "spectrum" mean,  Bast?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spectrum.....plural of Spectre
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://jamesbond.wikia.com/wiki/SPECTRE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wrong.   A real electrical engineer would know the meaning of
>>>>>> "spectrum".
>>>>>
>>>>> WHY ?
>>>
>>>> Because it would be very familiar to you if you were in fact an
>>>> electrical engineer.
>>>
>>>> See here:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>>> Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>>> Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>>> into a liquid.
>>>> Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and
>>>>>>> you should know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism,
>>>>>> Revenge
>>>>>> and Extortion
>>>
>>>>> The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the
>>>>> answer immediately.
>>>
>>>>> You've demonstrated you've lied again.
>>>
>>>> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>>> job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>> engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>> someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>>
>>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>>
>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>> What else do you lie about?
>>

>I think the funniest part is why they would even care that I have any degree 
>at all.

You volunteered the information.   And now you're squirming because
we've caught you telling that lie.  

You have no credibility Bast.   Your cites have no credibility.   

You're a bumbling fool and a laughing stock.   

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


#525475

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-10-09 19:33 +0000
Message-ID<mv94qh$ksp$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#525420
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mv8c2a$gk0$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:

>>>Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>
>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>
>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>> What else do you lie about?

>You two are so funny because when you fell for all that crap about 19 
>hijackers all you did was prove you both are incapable of critical thinking.

>Rocky 

Wow, Rocky!  I just realized that you proved that Bast always lies!!
Remember when you said that because a reporter at the Pentagon lied and
said the wings folded back on Flight 77, that all the witnesses in NYC
must be lying when they said they saw planes hit the World Trade Center?  
And we applied this genius logic to prove all kookvids are lies because I
discovered the kookvid with the crane was faked?  Well, Sarah proved that
Bast lied about being an electrical engineer, and if we apply your
wonderful logic about the plane witnesses all being liars to her, this
proves that Bast is always lying!  I'll bet Bast will be mad that you
proved that to us! Maybe she will show you that's she's mad by being
extra nice to you. Because she will be lying, of course.

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


#525509

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-10-09 17:10 -0500
Message-ID<c-6dnW-2_uwYpoXLnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#525475
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mv94qh$ksp$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mv8c2a$gk0$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>>>Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>>engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>>someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>>
>>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>>
>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>> What else do you lie about?
>
>>You two are so funny because when you fell for all that crap about 19
>>hijackers all you did was prove you both are incapable of critical 
>>thinking.
>
>>Rocky
>
> Wow, Rocky!  I just realized that you proved that Bast always lies!!
> Remember when you said that because a reporter at the Pentagon lied and
> said the wings folded back on Flight 77, that all the witnesses in NYC
> must be lying when they said they saw planes hit the World Trade Center?

WRONG.  I'm saying their stories probably changed too.  Go ahead and find my 
quote.

Wow, you pulled a Popular Mechanics trick.  You substituted one argument for 
another.  What you did is called using a strawman argument and you are 
getting good at it.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Rocky 

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


#525532

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-09 19:54 -0400
Message-ID<mv9k0h$3ai$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#525509

Rocky wrote:
> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
> news:mv94qh$ksp$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mv8c2a$gk0$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>
>>>>> Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>>> engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>>> someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>>>
>>>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>>>
>>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical
>>>> engineer. What else do you lie about?
>>
>>> You two are so funny because when you fell for all that crap about 19
>>> hijackers all you did was prove you both are incapable of critical
>>> thinking.
>>
>>> Rocky
>>
>> Wow, Rocky!  I just realized that you proved that Bast always lies!!
>> Remember when you said that because a reporter at the Pentagon lied and
>> said the wings folded back on Flight 77, that all the witnesses in NYC
>> must be lying when they said they saw planes hit the World Trade
>> Center?
>
> WRONG.  I'm saying their stories probably changed too.  Go ahead and
> find my quote.
>
> Wow, you pulled a Popular Mechanics trick.  You substituted one
> argument for another.  What you did is called using a strawman argument
> and you are getting good at it.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
>
> Rocky








I see absolutely no reason why we have to agree on everything.
We don't have a holy book of the official 9/11 fairytale to refer to, like 
the DWEEBunkers

We only have hypothesis based on the evidence each of us has found.
And a commonality that we know the offical 9/11 fairytale makes no logical 
sense at all
Which is why we are forcing that a new proper and impartial investivation be 
held, where all the evidence can be compiled and scrutinized.

A fairly good attempt was made at the conference in Toronto on the 10th 
anniversary, where much of the newest evidence was presented
Much of this video (link below) deals with that conference




9/11: Decade of Deception (Full Film NEW 2015)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqqelDq4P48

Watch the video, and decide for yourself.

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


#525539

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-09 18:36 -0700
Message-ID<b902c075-24f3-480f-b939-392d3960387d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#525532
I am rolling upon the floor, and it is gOOd ... I mean,
do you have a problem with my rolling upon the flOOr

> I see absolutely no reason why we have to agree on everything.
> We don't have a holy book of the official 9/11 fairytale to refer to, like 
> the DWEEBunkers
> 
> We only have hypothesis based on the evidence each of us has found.
> And a commonality that we know the offical 9/11 fairytale makes no logical 
> sense at all
> Which is why we are forcing that a new proper and impartial investivation be 
> held, where all the evidence can be compiled and scrutinized.
> 
> A fairly good attempt was made at the conference in Toronto on the 10th 
> anniversary, where much of the newest evidence was presented
> Much of this video (link below) deals with that conference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9/11: Decade of Deception (Full Film NEW 2015)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqqelDq4P48
> 
> Watch the video, and decide for yourself.

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


#525572

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-10 04:37 -0500
Message-ID<12nh1b9iftctvqrbg3t3p2uqs3fba79gp5@4ax.com>
In reply to#525411
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

[...]

>>-----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>
>>From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>into a liquid.
>>Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>
>
>>Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and you
>>>>> should know it.
>>>>
>>>>Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>
>>>>SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge 
>>>>and Extortion
>
>>>The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the answer
>>>immediately.
>
>>>You've demonstrated you've lied again.   
>
>>As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>
>
>>-------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>
>
>
>>Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>someone between 9 and 12 years old.  
>
>hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>
>Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>What else do you lie about?

     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.

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

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


#525585 — Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-10-10 08:01 -0400
SubjectRe: Debunking DWEEBunkers
Message-ID<mvaui8$d8o$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#525572

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> -----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>>
>>> From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>> Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>> Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>> into a liquid.
>>> Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>>
>>
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>
>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and
>>>>>> you should know it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism,
>>>>> Revenge and Extortion
>>
>>>> The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the
>>>> answer immediately.
>>
>>>> You've demonstrated you've lied again.
>>
>>> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>> job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>>
>>
>>> -------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>> Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>> engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>> someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>
>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>
>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>> What else do you lie about?
>
>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
> of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
> this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.







But the point is,....I did not have to look it up.
And answered your question days ago.





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


#525613 — Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-10 13:34 -0500
SubjectRe: Debunking DWEEBunkers
Message-ID<nfmi1b9n019erhc8s38j588qmr6magi54t@4ax.com>
In reply to#525585
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 08:01:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> -----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>>> Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>>> Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>>> into a liquid.
>>>> Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and
>>>>>>> you should know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism,
>>>>>> Revenge and Extortion
>>>
>>>>> The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the
>>>>> answer immediately.
>>>
>>>>> You've demonstrated you've lied again.
>>>
>>>> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>>> job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>> engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>> someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>>
>>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>>
>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>> What else do you lie about?
>>
>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>> of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>> this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>
>
>
>
>But the point is,....I did not have to look it up.
>And answered your question days ago.

     I didn't ask the question. Sarah did. And you've not answered her
question.

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

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


#525658 — Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-10 20:11 -0400
SubjectRe: Debunking DWEEBunkers
Message-ID<c1aj1bhasb72lp45ikseg940tidfjh5nbu@4ax.com>
In reply to#525585
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 08:01:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>
>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> -----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>>> Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>>> Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>>> into a liquid.
>>>> Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and
>>>>>>> you should know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism,
>>>>>> Revenge and Extortion
>>>
>>>>> The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the
>>>>> answer immediately.
>>>
>>>>> You've demonstrated you've lied again.
>>>
>>>> As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>>> job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>> engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>> someone between 9 and 12 years old.
>>>
>>> hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>> But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>>
>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>> What else do you lie about?
>>
>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>> of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>> this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.

Bast never vets her cites either.  The most recent one where she
claims a so called " 9/11 expert is a pilot " when the truth is the
guy is an economist.  She's just a laughing stock.  


>But the point is,....I did not have to look it up.
>
>And answered your question days ago.

You're not an electrical engineer.   We know.  

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


#525688 — Re: Debunking DWEEBunkers

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-11 04:06 -0500
SubjectRe: Debunking DWEEBunkers
Message-ID<fj9k1blob4nal6s4o5c40j8i6qqmkhkjjb@4ax.com>
In reply to#525658
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:11:34 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

[...]

>>>> Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>>> What else do you lie about?
>>>
>>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>> of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>> this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>
>Bast never vets her cites either.  The most recent one where she
>claims a so called " 9/11 expert is a pilot " when the truth is the
>guy is an economist.  She's just a laughing stock.  
>

     I doubt she pays any attention to what she's linked to. It's
clear she doesn't actually watch the videos. The one where the
reporter states the plane crashed *into* the Pentagon as opposed to
near the Pentagon should stand as proof of this.

>
>>But the point is,....I did not have to look it up.
>>
>>And answered your question days ago.
>
>You're not an electrical engineer.   We know.  

     What's more, she first LIES and claims the question was mine
(Bast does seem to think you're me and BDK), then LIES and states it
was answered.

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

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


#525589

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-10-10 15:41 +0000
Message-ID<mvbbiv$gtb$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#525572
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:

>On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
>moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

>>Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>What else do you lie about?

>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.

I was thinking the same thing.  Maybe kooktard sheeple aren't allowed to
access the net except to watch officially approved kookvids and to do
their assigned roles of posting here.

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


#525616

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-10 13:35 -0500
Message-ID<qimi1b9v5ae24pgvitlep82mr1ejei7hs8@4ax.com>
In reply to#525589
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:41:19 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
>>moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>
>>>Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>>What else do you lie about?
>
>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>
>I was thinking the same thing.  Maybe kooktard sheeple aren't allowed to
>access the net except to watch officially approved kookvids and to do
>their assigned roles of posting here.

     Or Bast was, and is, too stupid to think of looking it up. Let's
be honest, Bast isn't exactly an intellectual giant.

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

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


#525649 — HOH versus OCO

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-10 16:38 -0700
SubjectHOH versus OCO
Message-ID<a413ab5e-4335-49ef-8127-a3fe2b6755da@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#525589
teh spectrum of the vapor of combustion,
is much larger than the ash of combustion

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


#525660

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-10 20:14 -0400
Message-ID<3eaj1bds6g7h5u6knd2o4h42cudhhhaf28@4ax.com>
In reply to#525572
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:37:18 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
<compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:31:06 +0000 (UTC),
>moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>-----BEGIN REPOST--------------------------------------------
>>
>>>From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>>>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,sci.physics
>>>Subject: Re: The Popular Mechanics Pentagon Myth where a 757 turned
>>>into a liquid.
>>>Message-ID: <mv4ooa$70m$1@pcls7.std.com>
>>
>>
>>>Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>
>>>>>> What does "spectrum" mean to you, Bast.  It is very specific and you
>>>>>> should know it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Of couse I know about your organization.
>>>>>
>>>>>SPECTRE  =  Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge 
>>>>>and Extortion
>>
>>>>The word is "spectrum".  Any electrical engineer would know the answer
>>>>immediately.
>>
>>>>You've demonstrated you've lied again.   
>>
>>>As an electrical engineer myself, I find this very clever.  Excellent
>>>job exposing Bast's lie, and thanks for the laugh!
>>
>>
>>>-------END Michael's Post------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>>Everyone agrees Bast, that you are a liar, you are not an electrical
>>>engineer.   Frankly your level of maturity is what I'd expect from
>>>someone between 9 and 12 years old.  
>>
>>hehehe... I'm still laughing....  I like the way you think, Sarah.
>>But don't insult 12 year olds by comparing Bast to them.
>>
>>Admit it, Bast.  You lied to us, you never were an electrical engineer.
>>What else do you lie about?
>
>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.

Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)

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


#525678

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-10-11 03:56 +0000
Message-ID<mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#525660
Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:

>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:37:18 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.

>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)

yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
9/11 kook...

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


#525679

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-10-10 23:07 -0500
Message-ID<_qOdnZq4ioIvfYTLnZ2dnUU7-QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#525678
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com...
> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:37:18 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>
>>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)
>
> yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
> 9/11 kook...

That coming from people that think an aluminum egg shell should leave 
roadrunner cutouts in the Twin Towers is hilarious.

THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

Rocky 

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


#525685

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2015-10-11 01:49 -0400
Message-ID<tvtj1bpr0mii3g9c4inq7tl9conbh5bf5f@4ax.com>
In reply to#525679
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 23:07:07 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>
>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:37:18 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>>><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>>>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>>>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>>
>>>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)
>>
>> yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
>> 9/11 kook...

Bast keep posting links to video's which support us.  Roger Rocky must
be ready to disown her.   :)

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


#525689

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-11 04:14 -0500
Message-ID<l3ak1bt8nqiasfi817v803dmkhli3n6l3m@4ax.com>
In reply to#525685
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:49:06 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 23:07:07 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>>news:mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 04:37:18 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>>>><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>     What I find most sad is how easy it is to look up the definition
>>>>>of spectrum as used in the field of electrical engineering. Yet even
>>>>>this was and is beyond Bast's abilities.
>>>
>>>>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)
>>>
>>> yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
>>> 9/11 kook...
>
>Bast keep posting links to video's which support us.  Roger Rocky must
>be ready to disown her.   :)

     Bast is the only person not pointing out how the videos Rocky
links to prove his claims wrong. He's not going to distance himself
from such a person any time soon.


"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]


#525701

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-10-11 13:28 +0000
Message-ID<mvdo5a$v21$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#525679
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:

>>>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)
>>
>> yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
>> 9/11 kook...

>That coming from people that think an aluminum egg shell should leave 
>roadrunner cutouts in the Twin Towers is hilarious.

K00ktard, at such speeds it's the momentum and the change of momentum 
(force) applied over a small area that determines what happens.  The mass
of the airplane at 500 mph applied to a relatively small area of cheap,
thin steel, there's no way for the steel to resist that.

The strength of the material just determines whether it's a solid airplane
or a mass of rubble that's flying through the inside of the tower.

BTW, not that it matters, but it has already been shown to you that
the aircraft aluminum is as strong or stronger than steel.

Did you ever consider what would happen if someone dropped a water balloon
onto your kooktarded head from the top of a tall building?  You'd just get 
wet, since a balloon is flimsy rubber and water is, just water?
How about a water balloon at 500 mph?
  
>THE NO PLANES MOVIE

Is that the one with the crane that I already proved has been tampered
with?  So I don't even need your "all kookvids are lies" proof to prove
it is a lie?

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


#526039

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-10-13 15:21 -0500
Message-ID<Y_Sdne_P-eWX9YDLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#525701
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mvdo5a$v21$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mvcml0$7l8$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> writes:
>
>>>>Bast is stupid.   And that's being kind.    :)
>>>
>>> yeah, having an IQ above room temperature disqualifies you from being a
>>> 9/11 kook...
>
>>That coming from people that think an aluminum egg shell should leave
>>roadrunner cutouts in the Twin Towers is hilarious.
>
> K00ktard, at such speeds it's the momentum and the change of momentum
> (force) applied over a small area that determines what happens.  The mass
> of the airplane at 500 mph applied to a relatively small area of cheap,
> thin steel, there's no way for the steel to resist that.

ROTFLMAO because the 500 mph at 1000 feet above sea level is bullshit.  Jets 
can not fly that fast where the air is thick and only CGIs could have done 
that.  Real jets would have either failed to make it to 500 mph or flown 
apart.  See

07 - The Key
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rml2TL5N8ds
...
THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

And there are a lot more videos that deal just with the bogus speed the jet 
was alleged to be at.


> Is that the one with the crane that I already proved has been tampered
> with?

NO.

> So I don't even need your "all kookvids are lies" proof to prove
> it is a lie?

ROTFLMAO because I just caught you in another bold faced lie.

Remember when you claimed that the jet was too high for Chopper 5?  Well you 
can hear the Camera 5 cameraman in this video claim the jet was low.  <G>
 https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=8m38s

So it was you that was caught up in more lies.  <G>

BTW you did not prove who tampered with the video with the crane and the 
disappearing wing or try to explain why the wing disappeared either.

And a lot of VCRs recorded the news giving us videos with the wing 
disappearing so despite what you think the media used that crap in real 
life.

And don't forget, you have failed to explain why there is nobody in the 
following photo or how a kerosene collapse could leave so much of the North 
Tower standing strong.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

The fact remains there are so many inconsistencies with the official ever 
changing stories that you have to lie to keep up with the governments BS.

Rocky 

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


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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web