Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #566498 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-29 12:34 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-03-31 14:13 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 154 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Why You Should Care About Nukes Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 12:34 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 12:37 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-29 12:59 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 11:25 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 05:08 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 12:33 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-02 15:07 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-02 20:24 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-03 06:07 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-03 16:37 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-03 12:33 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-03 18:06 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-03 21:28 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 05:45 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 09:36 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 18:18 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 14:30 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 20:10 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 06:34 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:23 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-06 17:52 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 13:10 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-06 18:37 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:29 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-06 19:59 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 17:05 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-06 22:18 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 07:14 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 18:41 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 14:46 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 20:21 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 15:56 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 21:39 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 17:00 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 22:46 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-08 03:35 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-08 18:04 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:02 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-10 16:19 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 12:16 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-10 17:51 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 00:57 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 18:04 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 14:16 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 19:44 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 15:21 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 20:57 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 06:51 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 17:09 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 12:42 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 10:51 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 14:56 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 18:29 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 16:02 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 21:23 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 16:36 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 21:41 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 21:19 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:34 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:07 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 14:34 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 11:57 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 10:12 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 14:09 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 15:00 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 21:10 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 06:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 15:47 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 12:49 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 19:32 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 16:19 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:18 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:28 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 07:52 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 12:20 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 11:00 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 01:20 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-10 17:53 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 01:00 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 18:06 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 14:12 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 19:47 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 15:27 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-11 20:58 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-12 12:53 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 11:14 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 14:59 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-12 18:31 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 14:49 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 12:00 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 12:53 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 16:09 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 16:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-06 22:08 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 16:00 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 21:40 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 17:02 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 22:47 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-08 03:39 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-08 18:05 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:11 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-10 16:20 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 12:23 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-10 17:54 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-11 14:23 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:39 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:15 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 14:39 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:21 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-10 04:18 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 14:44 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 13:43 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 21:28 -0400
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-04-02 23:27 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-29 18:07 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-03-29 14:00 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-30 14:24 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-03-30 15:21 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 03:02 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 04:07 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 14:49 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 07:59 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 15:36 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 09:41 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 18:22 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 14:31 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 20:11 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 16:04 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 21:42 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-07 17:05 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-07 22:49 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:27 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 04:22 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-03-31 12:49 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 19:22 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 09:44 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 16:06 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-04 14:33 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 21:33 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 06:38 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-06 12:54 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-06 14:27 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 12:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-06 19:31 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-06 19:13 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:32 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-06 20:54 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-06 23:39 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 04:45 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-04 18:25 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 04:01 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 04:23 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes vishnushelat@gmail.com - 2016-03-31 12:28 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-31 14:13 -0700
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 14:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569398 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:neb0d1$bg8$4@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>>>> ROTFLMAO because the truth is they never crashed to the ground >>>> >>>> Then what were those many tons of debris dug out of the basement levels >>>> and hualed away from, kook? >> >>>Why don't you show me there was ever any debris in the basement you >>>asshole. >> >> There's this from the very same kooksite that hosts that photo with the >> kookscribbles that you obsessively post about. >> >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg >> >> Isn't it a weird ooincidence that the parts in pink that are "collapsed >> or heavy damage" are immediately below the towers, but the "mostly >> intact" areas weren't. >> >> Now run away (again) from this evidence, Run Away Roger. >ROTFLMAO because you have to be so cryptic with your evidence. What is so cryptic about a diagram showing where the basement levels were collapsed or relatively intact? >The fact remains, there were surviving corners to both the Twin Towers and >you are telling me that the debris went through the surviving corners and >ended up in the basement? What shit have you been smoking to think I'd fall >for your bullshit? According to those diagrams, most of the collapse was directly inside the footprints of the towers. Where areas outside the footprints were also collapsed, the corners did not survive. So, quite simply, those corners survived because the majority of the mass fell INSIDE the towers and missed the corners, while where it didn't fall as much inside, the corners did not survive. Nothing strange about that! >The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings that were >vaporized before they could crash to the ground prove that they were >vaporized before they could crash to the ground. DUH The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings show NO indications of the distinctive nuclear explosion signatures thus completely ruling out nuclear explosives. DUH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 11:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Z7ydnYuhVtUJSpbKnZ2dnUU7-XPNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569699 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:neb0d1$bg8$4@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>> >>>>>> ROTFLMAO because the truth is they never crashed to the ground >>>>> >>>>> Then what were those many tons of debris dug out of the basement >>>>> levels >>>>> and hualed away from, kook? >>> >>>>Why don't you show me there was ever any debris in the basement you >>>>asshole. >>> >>> There's this from the very same kooksite that hosts that photo with the >>> kookscribbles that you obsessively post about. >>> >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg >>> >>> Isn't it a weird ooincidence that the parts in pink that are "collapsed >>> or heavy damage" are immediately below the towers, but the "mostly >>> intact" areas weren't. >>> >>> Now run away (again) from this evidence, Run Away Roger. > >>ROTFLMAO because you have to be so cryptic with your evidence. > > What is so cryptic about a diagram showing where the basement levels were > collapsed or relatively intact? > >>The fact remains, there were surviving corners to both the Twin Towers and >>you are telling me that the debris went through the surviving corners and >>ended up in the basement? What shit have you been smoking to think I'd >>fall >>for your bullshit? > > According to those diagrams, most of the collapse was directly inside the > footprints of the towers. Where areas outside the footprints were also > collapsed, the corners did not survive. So, quite simply, those corners > survived because the majority of the mass fell INSIDE the towers and > missed the corners, while where it didn't fall as much inside, the corners > did not survive. > > Nothing strange about that! > >>The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings that were >>vaporized before they could crash to the ground prove that they were >>vaporized before they could crash to the ground. DUH > > The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings show > NO indications of the distinctive nuclear explosion signatures thus > completely ruling out nuclear explosives. DUH You are completely ignoring the issue. The issue is when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 "collapsed" they left very small seismic records compared to their size and the seismic record that WTC7 left behind was comparable to a jackhammer with no P-waves or S-waves. <G> So if MRR nukes were not used to vaporize parts of three buildings before they could crash to the ground then what was used? Oh and the photo that you can not explain with your absolute bullshit: http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 10:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <22c22545-4abd-49c8-ae86-2f078a3af887@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569747 |
Rocko says "Michael Moroney" <mor...@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com... - show quoted text - You are completely ignoring the issue. -------------- Rocko, the issue is the state of your mental competence. Please share with the group the medications you are currently being prescribed. Good luck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 14:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <eLGdnfClI9T1a5bKnZ2dnUU7-LHNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569754 |
"HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message news:22c22545-4abd-49c8-ae86-2f078a3af887@googlegroups.com... > Rocko says > > "Michael Moroney" <mor...@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com... > - show quoted text - > You are completely ignoring the issue. > -------------- > > Rocko, the issue is the state of your mental competence. Please share with > the group the medications you are currently being prescribed. Hijack threads often?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 15:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9f15da4e-f93c-4643-968b-e650ce0f0f8b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569781 |
Rocko says > Rocko, the issue is the state of your mental competence. Please share with > the group the medications you are currently being prescribed. Hijack threads often? ---------------- Rocko, if the question upsets you I'll withdraw it
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 21:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <neh3se$eq2$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569747 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com... >>>The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings that were >>>vaporized before they could crash to the ground prove that they were >>>vaporized before they could crash to the ground. DUH >> >> The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings show >> NO indications of the distinctive nuclear explosion signatures thus >> completely ruling out nuclear explosives. DUH >You are completely ignoring the issue. The issue is when WTC1, WTC2 and >WTC7 "collapsed" they left very small seismic records compared to their size >and the seismic record that WTC7 left behind was comparable to a jackhammer >with no P-waves or S-waves. <G> Yup. The seismic records were so small that there was NO evidence of the distinctive nuclear signature always seen on seismometers after any nuclear detonation. None whatsoever!! None!!! No Nukes on 9/11, just like you proved! >So if MRR nukes were not used to vaporize parts of three buildings before >they could crash to the ground then what was used? SInce 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out that also proves that nothing (other than a tiny amount) was vaporized. Even more proof no nukes were used on 9/11!! >Oh and the photo that you can not explain with your absolute bullshit: > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Why do you keep linking to that photo (with added kookscribbles) that proves your claims wrong? (Look at all that debris!!!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 06:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IrudnVB4J_7Xf5HKnZ2dnUU7-b3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569806 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:neh3se$eq2$2@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:negcl7$hu8$2@pcls7.std.com... > >>>>The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings that >>>>were >>>>vaporized before they could crash to the ground prove that they were >>>>vaporized before they could crash to the ground. DUH >>> >>> The fact remains the seismic records for three of the buildings show >>> NO indications of the distinctive nuclear explosion signatures thus >>> completely ruling out nuclear explosives. DUH > >>You are completely ignoring the issue. The issue is when WTC1, WTC2 and >>WTC7 "collapsed" they left very small seismic records compared to their >>size >>and the seismic record that WTC7 left behind was comparable to a >>jackhammer >>with no P-waves or S-waves. <G> > > Yup. The seismic records were so small that there was NO evidence of the > distinctive nuclear signature always seen on seismometers after any > nuclear detonation. None whatsoever!! None!!! No Nukes on 9/11, just > like you proved! ROTFLMAO because the small seismic readings when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 hit the ground prove they were vaporized before they could crash to the ground with full force. If you don't want to admit nukes were used then what was used because jet fuel can't vaporize buildings unless if you live in the twilight zone which you must. jet fuel can't leave behind "Surviving Corners" but deep underground nukes can. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nej5b3$mia$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569889 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:neh3se$eq2$2@pcls7.std.com... >> Yup. The seismic records were so small that there was NO evidence of the >> distinctive nuclear signature always seen on seismometers after any >> nuclear detonation. None whatsoever!! None!!! No Nukes on 9/11, just >> like you proved! >ROTFLMAO because the small seismic readings when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 hit the >ground prove that no nukes could possibly have been used on 9/11, because the nuclear seismic signature left by the alleged exploding nukes was too small (as in ZERO) not once, not twice, but three times! And that 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out proves that nothing was vaporized, other than a trivial amount of smoke. Roger, you are such a genius! Providing even more proof that no nukes were used that day!! >If you don't want to admit nukes were used then what was used because jet >fuel can't vaporize buildings Nobody, anywhere, ever believed jet fuel "vaporized" anything. Not even kooktards believe that, and kooktards are stupid enough to believe anything, as long as it's in a kookvid. Especially since we know the WTC weighed about 1.5 million tons before destruction and about 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 12:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ce-dnSxZ3cLYqJDKnZ2dnUU7-cvNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569913 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:nej5b3$mia$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:neh3se$eq2$2@pcls7.std.com... > >>> Yup. The seismic records were so small that there was NO evidence of the >>> distinctive nuclear signature always seen on seismometers after any >>> nuclear detonation. None whatsoever!! None!!! No Nukes on 9/11, just >>> like you proved! > >>ROTFLMAO because the small seismic readings when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 hit >>the >>ground prove > > that no nukes could possibly have been used on 9/11, because the nuclear > seismic signature left by the alleged exploding nukes was too small (as in > ZERO) not once, not twice, but three times! And your explanation for the very small seismic readings for when WTC7 appeared to crash to the ground is what? > And that 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out proves that nothing > was vaporized, other than a trivial amount of smoke. Don't forget how much was hauled in to help cover up the radiation and that shit was hauled in before anything was ever hauled out too. And why don't you compare the seismic signature of an American made nuke with an MRR nuke. ROTFLMAO And again something you can't explain with your debris in the basement but not enough debris to crush the Surviving Corners bullshit. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 19:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nejifq$ir2$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569942 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:nej5b3$mia$1@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>>ROTFLMAO because the small seismic readings when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 hit >>>the >>>ground prove >> >> that no nukes could possibly have been used on 9/11, because the nuclear >> seismic signature left by the alleged exploding nukes was too small (as in >> ZERO) not once, not twice, but three times! >And your explanation for the very small seismic readings for when WTC7 >appeared to crash to the ground is what? And your explanation for the very small (that is, ZERO) seismic readings for the distinctive nuclear explosive signatures when the buildings crashed to the ground is what? And your answer to why there was still 1.5 million tons of debris to be hauled out even after the buildings were supposedly "vaporized" is what? >> And that 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out proves that nothing >> was vaporized, other than a trivial amount of smoke. >Don't forget how much was hauled in to help cover up the radiation and that >shit was hauled in before anything was ever hauled out too. You already told us that. 200 truckloads of DE to absorb leaking toxic liquids. Compared to 108,342 truckloads hauled out. So a difference of 108,142 truckloads of WTC debris. Those 200 truckloads reduce the 1.5 million tons by how much? Less than 40 tons max per truckload, or under 8,000 tons of DE was brought in. So, 1,500,000 tons minus 8,000 tons is how much? I know you flunked math so I'll do it for you. 1,492,000 tons of actual WTC debris. >And why don't you compare the seismic signature of an American made nuke >with an MRR nuke. ROTFLMAO Nukes don't care where they were made. So the answer is the same seismic signature! Obviously!! >And again something you can't explain with your debris in the basement but >not enough debris to crush the Surviving Corners bullshit. Asked and answered.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 16:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Jqydne07sK70-5DKnZ2dnUU7-dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569960 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:nejifq$ir2$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:nej5b3$mia$1@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>> >>>>ROTFLMAO because the small seismic readings when WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 hit >>>>the >>>>ground prove >>> >>> that no nukes could possibly have been used on 9/11, because the nuclear >>> seismic signature left by the alleged exploding nukes was too small (as >>> in >>> ZERO) not once, not twice, but three times! > >>And your explanation for the very small seismic readings for when WTC7 >>appeared to crash to the ground is what? > > And your explanation for the very small (that is, ZERO) seismic readings > for the distinctive nuclear explosive signatures when the buildings > crashed to the ground is what? BULLSHIT. Even the background seismic activity is higher than ZERO you idiot. And an the detonation of an MRR nuked could hide in the background seismic activity. DUH. > And your answer to why there was still 1.5 million tons of debris to be > hauled out even after the buildings were supposedly "vaporized" is what? And your explaination for why that much weight could not crush the "Surviving Corners" is what? Your failure to provide a valid explanation for that and from NIST proves you are full of shit just like NIST. Once again what you or NIST can't explain and what you can not deal with so you keep deleting it from your replies. ROTFLMAO http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > >>> And that 1.5 million tons of debris was hauled out proves that nothing >>> was vaporized, other than a trivial amount of smoke. > >>Don't forget how much was hauled in to help cover up the radiation and >>that >>shit was hauled in before anything was ever hauled out too. > > You already told us that. 200 truckloads of DE to absorb leaking toxic > liquids. Compared to 108,342 truckloads hauled out. So a difference of > 108,142 truckloads of WTC debris. Those 200 truckloads reduce the 1.5 > million tons by how much? Less than 40 tons max per truckload, or under > 8,000 tons of DE was brought in. So, 1,500,000 tons minus 8,000 tons is > how much? I know you flunked math so I'll do it for you. 1,492,000 tons > of actual WTC debris. If your number were true then why couldn't that much weight crush the "Surviving Corners?" It is because someone is lying and I doubt if it is the photo of the "Surviving Corners." ROTFLMAO http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >>And why don't you compare the seismic signature of an American made nuke >>with an MRR nuke. ROTFLMAO > > Nukes don't care where they were made. So the answer is the same seismic > signature! Obviously!! America doesn't make MRR nukes so American nukes were not used to vaporize most of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7. >>And again something you can't explain with your debris in the basement but >>not enough debris to crush the Surviving Corners bullshit. > > Asked and answered. But certainly not by NIST and you know damn well NIST is just a government agency covering up for other government agencies. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-09 13:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <neavg3$bg8$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #568410 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: ><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >news:ae6gtc-7gj.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>> But those 80 floors didn't disappear they floated away >> >> Nope, they wound up in the basement levels for the most part, kook. >ROTFLMAO because the seismic records do not prove 110 floors of the Twin >Towers hit the ground but only 20-26 floors so why didn't the other 80+ >floors hit the ground? <G> Those seismic records prove once and for all that no nukes of any sort were used, because if there were, the distinctive nuclear explosion signature would have been seen on seismic records all over the world! However seismic records did record the actual collapses, and even the plane impacts. Of course you have no seismic records of any nuclear detonations, because none exist. And you have no support for your kookclaim that the seismic records of the collapses were too small somehow. Not even a kookvid reference. That's because you don't have any evidence for it, either. This has been explained to you many many times. All you did was to live up to your well-earned nickname of "Run Away Roger" and Run Away!!! Cue Monty Python!!!! >You or NIST can not explain the crime scene photos but MRR nukes can. <G> Nope. If nukes were used, we'd see it in seismic records from all over the world, just like we see when North Korea sets off tests. Just like how the US and USSR kept track of each other's nuclear tests.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-10 04:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <-pKdnUfREIFUgZfKnZ2dnUU7-LfNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569201 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:neavg3$bg8$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>news:ae6gtc-7gj.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > >>>> But those 80 floors didn't disappear they floated away >>> >>> Nope, they wound up in the basement levels for the most part, kook. > >>ROTFLMAO because the seismic records do not prove 110 floors of the Twin >>Towers hit the ground but only 20-26 floors so why didn't the other 80+ >>floors hit the ground? <G> > > Those seismic records prove once and for all that no nukes of any > sort were used, FOCUS ON THE SEISMIC RECORDS WHEN THEY CRASHED TO THE GROUND INSTEAD AND TRY TO TELL ME THAT THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH TWO 100 STORY BUILDINGS AND A 47 STORY BUILDING. <G> Fact is those seismic record prove they were vaporized before they could crash to the ground or crush the "Surviving Corners". ROTFLMAO See the "Surviving Corners" here: http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-10 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ec96f189-036e-4d2f-bc77-7f9c751c7144@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569402 |
Rocko. How long are you going to ride the 9/11 nuke scooter? I mean, it was a successful troll... Congratulations. But don't just be a one trick pony. Come up with some new material.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-10 12:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <gIWdnWSiJeH5FpfKnZ2dnUU7-dnNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569446 |
"HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ec96f189-036e-4d2f-bc77-7f9c751c7144@googlegroups.com... > > Rocky. How long are you going to ride the 9/11 nuke scooter? > > I mean, it was a successful troll... Congratulations. But don't just be a > one trick pony. Come up with some new material. You are not very smart are you? We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings floated to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading that prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the ground. <G> And do not forget to notice that Michael claims the Twin Towers ended up in the basements without crushing the "Surviving Corners." ROTFLMAO http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-10 11:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dbe9d9e9-6895-4d57-bfc9-f992e92b02f3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569480 |
Rock O says We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings floated to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading that prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the ground. <G> ----------------- But so far only you and BJ are kooky enough to believe a nuke took down the WTC's. Why do you suppose it's just you two? Any ideas, Rocko?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 01:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <BuGOy.15118$iS2.12399@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #569483 |
On 04/10/2016 02:00 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Rock O says
> We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings floated
> to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading that
> prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the ground.
> <G>
> -----------------
>
> But so far only you and BJ are kooky enough to believe a nuke took down the WTC's.
>
> Why do you suppose it's just you two? Any ideas, Rocko?
>
HVAC is still lying. Is there anyone stupid enough to believe his insane
fantasies? His "ESP" is failing when he says I "believe in Nukes and
WTC. He knows I believe it was "building depression" where Building 7
got so sad at losing it's two pals that it just had to collapse from
grief even when not hit by planes!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-10 17:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tggqtc-t2o.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #569480 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > "HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ec96f189-036e-4d2f-bc77-7f9c751c7144@googlegroups.com... >> >> Rocky. How long are you going to ride the 9/11 nuke scooter? >> >> I mean, it was a successful troll... Congratulations. But don't just be a >> one trick pony. Come up with some new material. > > We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings floated > to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading that > prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the ground. Vaporized things don't generate seismograph readings, unless you are talking about nuclear explosions which do, but no seismograph recorded any explosions of any kind. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 01:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <2KSdnQ5so7HgoJbKnZ2dnUU7-N3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #569485 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:tggqtc-t2o.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >> "HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:ec96f189-036e-4d2f-bc77-7f9c751c7144@googlegroups.com... >>> >>> Rocky. How long are you going to ride the 9/11 nuke scooter? >>> >>> I mean, it was a successful troll... Congratulations. But don't just be >>> a >>> one trick pony. Come up with some new material. >> >> We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings >> floated >> to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading >> that >> prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the >> ground. > > Vaporized things don't generate seismograph readings, unless you are > talking about nuclear explosions which do, but no seismograph recorded > any explosions of any kind. So you are telling me that WTC7 was vaporized because the seismic records from that hitting the ground are consistent with a jackhammer? If you are then you are finally on the right track. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 18:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1n5ttc-ji3.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #569633 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:tggqtc-t2o.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> "HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:ec96f189-036e-4d2f-bc77-7f9c751c7144@googlegroups.com... >>>> >>>> Rocky. How long are you going to ride the 9/11 nuke scooter? >>>> >>>> I mean, it was a successful troll... Congratulations. But don't just be >>>> a >>>> one trick pony. Come up with some new material. >>> >>> We are not talking about seismograph reading before three buildings >>> floated >>> to the ground we are talking about the very small seismograph reading >>> that >>> prove something vaporized 3 buildings before they could crash to the >>> ground. >> >> Vaporized things don't generate seismograph readings, unless you are >> talking about nuclear explosions which do, but no seismograph recorded >> any explosions of any kind. > > So you are telling me that WTC7 was vaporized because the seismic records > from that hitting the ground are consistent with a jackhammer? No, I am telling you the seismic record of the collapse of WTC7 is consistant with the energy of a building the size of WTC7 collapsing. Seismographs record energy; jackhammers have little energy. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web