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 7 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 14:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndjdec$g0o$8@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #566873 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes: >On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:02:06 +0000 (UTC), >moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: >>So where is that mass spectrometry analysis of the WTC dust? You know, the >>ones that prove there were nuclear detonations because they have two items >>in equal parts that only exist after nuclear detonations? >> >>What, it doesn't exist? >> >>You mean that someone lied to you that it did? And it wasn't the >>government that was lying to you? Was it some kooktard who made a >>kookvid that lied to you about the alleged mass spectrometry analysis? >>Well, duh-h-h! You proved to us a long time ago that all kookvids are >>lies! Every last one!! (Great job, BTW!!) >> >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >> >>You're still obsessed with that photo of that enormous pile of debris >>with the kookscribbles all over it? The one that proves that no nukes >>were ever used? > Run Away Roger has made it very clear he's always known the >information at veteranstoday contains little more than lies. He's also >made it very clear he's always known the picture he obsessively links >to proves all of his claims wrong. > Something interesting. Run Away Roger would whine and cry about >not including all the groups a specific post was sent to when >replying. Yet he removed alt.conspiracy when he replied to you. LOL! Yes that is a nice bit of hypocrisy. He was always complaining when I would remove unrelated "alt.astronomy" from the Newsgroups: line whenever I responded to him and he would add it back, yet here he is, removing alt.conspiracy to try to hide his response from you. Nice creative way to run away, Roger!! > I guess he didn't realize you would bring up his claim about the >analysis in a different group. He absolutely knows I'll bring it up >each and every time he posts his deceptions regarding 9/11. >Brave Sir [Roger] ran away >Bravely ran away, away >When [the TRUTH] reared its ugly head >He bravely turned his tail and fled >Yes, brave Sir [Roger] turned about >And gallantly he chickened out >Bravely taking to his feet >He beat a very brave retreat >Bravest of the brave, Sir [Roger]! I repeat myself: Spot on!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 07:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c0e25216-3b14-4a88-9261-051cd42c2afe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #566923 |
And then Susan Lindauer starts touring with all the names and you don't have a clue about Physics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 15:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #566924 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >And then Susan Lindauer starts >touring with all the names >and you don't have a clue >about Physics So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but are you that kooky?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 09:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pumdnUDU-fSY4J_KnZ2dnUU7-c_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #566932 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: > >>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>touring with all the names >>and you don't have a clue >>about Physics > > So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to > destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but are > you that kooky? Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR nukes which are the only things that can do that much damage with very little seismic activity and don't forget, if it hadn't been for the President's visit that whole area would have been off limits to everybody for 3 days when the radiation was the worst. Again, not only have you failed to prove where the debris ended up but you have continually failed to explain why 100+ floors of debris could not crush the Surviving Corners. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 18:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #567845 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >> >>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>touring with all the names >>>and you don't have a clue >>>about Physics >> >> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to >> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but are >> you that kooky? > > Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR nukes MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 14:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <hrmdnbyc7dO1XJ_KnZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #567883 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>touring with all the names >>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>about Physics >>> >>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to >>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but are >>> you that kooky? >> >> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR >> nukes > > MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. Prove it. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 20:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8duatc-s12.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #567907 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>>touring with all the names >>>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>>about Physics >>>> >>>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to >>>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but are >>>> you that kooky? >>> >>> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR >>> nukes >> >> MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. > > Prove it. Trivially obvious to any non-kook that understands what MRR actually means. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-07 16:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <H6mdnfvBt6PHVpvKnZ2dnUU7-f_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #567920 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:8duatc-s12.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >> news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>>>touring with all the names >>>>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>>>about Physics >>>>> >>>>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to >>>>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but >>>>> are >>>>> you that kooky? >>>> >>>> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR >>>> nukes >>> >>> MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. >> >> Prove it. > > Trivially obvious to any non-kook that understands what MRR actually > means. Why do you keep dancing around the facts? The facts are the seismic readings when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the ground were comparable to buildings 80+ floors smaller and the seismic reading when WTC7 hit the ground was comparable to a jackhammer and you have not explained why either. <G> It makes sense if you know that they were vaporized before they had a chance to hit the ground just like some of the videos prove. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-07 21:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dq0jtc-5ms.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #568700 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:8duatc-s12.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>> news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>>>>touring with all the names >>>>>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>>>>about Physics >>>>>> >>>>>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes to >>>>>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but >>>>>> are >>>>>> you that kooky? >>>>> >>>>> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used MRR >>>>> nukes >>>> >>>> MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. >>> >>> Prove it. >> >> Trivially obvious to any non-kook that understands what MRR actually >> means. > > The facts are the seismic readings when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the ground were Exactly what one would expect from falling buildings and no trace of an explosion of any kind. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-07 17:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <PrOdnY2ij7wlRJvKnZ2dnUU7-YvNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #568720 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:dq0jtc-5ms.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >> news:8duatc-s12.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>> news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>>>>>touring with all the names >>>>>>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>>>>>about Physics >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> you that kooky? >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used >>>>>> MRR >>>>>> nukes >>>>> >>>>> MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. >>>> >>>> Prove it. >>> >>> Trivially obvious to any non-kook that understands what MRR actually >>> means. >> >> The facts are the seismic readings when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the ground were > > Exactly what one would expect from falling buildings and no trace of an > explosion of any kind. ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT because as fast as WTC7 went down it should have hit the ground with more force than a jackhammer but it didn't. <G> And don't forget if debris from the Twin Towers ended up in the basement then how did it get by the Surviving Corners and why did it leave so many holes in the ground that should have been filled with debris? ROTFLMAO http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-07 22:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <po4jtc-41t.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #568727 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:dq0jtc-5ms.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>> news:8duatc-s12.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:31oatc-pc1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ndjg5l$qok$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>And then Susan Lindauer starts >>>>>>>>>touring with all the names >>>>>>>>>and you don't have a clue >>>>>>>>>about Physics >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So John, since you chimed in, do you believe that "they" used nukes >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> destroy the World Trade Center? We already know you are kooky, but >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> you that kooky? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael you are an ASSHOLE because they didn't use nukes they used >>>>>>> MRR >>>>>>> nukes >>>>>> >>>>>> MRR nukes have the same seismic signature as any other nuke, kook. >>>>> >>>>> Prove it. >>>> >>>> Trivially obvious to any non-kook that understands what MRR actually >>>> means. >>> >>> The facts are the seismic readings when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the ground were >> >> Exactly what one would expect from falling buildings and no trace of an >> explosion of any kind. > > ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT because as fast as WTC7 went down it should have hit the > ground with more force than a jackhammer but it didn't. I guess we have to add jackhammers to the vast list of things you know nothing about, kook. BTW kook, seismographs record energy, not force. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-09 13:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <neavva$bg8$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #568700 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >The facts are the seismic readings when WTC1 and WTC2 hit the ground were >comparable to buildings about 110 stories tall, just like the towers. Of course you have no evidence the seismic readings being too small. You just pulled that out of your butt. If you did have evidence, you would give it to us, but instead you'll just run away!!! > and the seismic reading when WTC7 >hit the ground was comparable to a building about 50 floors tall.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 04:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7dfsfb12u383ikpbbvmbulgtu9fra9enrt@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #566923 |
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:49:48 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
[...]
>> Something interesting. Run Away Roger would whine and cry about
>>not including all the groups a specific post was sent to when
>>replying. Yet he removed alt.conspiracy when he replied to you.
>
>LOL!
>
>Yes that is a nice bit of hypocrisy. He was always complaining when I
>would remove unrelated "alt.astronomy" from the Newsgroups: line whenever
>I responded to him and he would add it back, yet here he is, removing
>alt.conspiracy to try to hide his response from you.
>
>Nice creative way to run away, Roger!!
I find it more interesting to see how he will live up to his name
of Run Away Roger than the actual content of the drivel he posts to do
so.
>> I guess he didn't realize you would bring up his claim about the
>>analysis in a different group. He absolutely knows I'll bring it up
>>each and every time he posts his deceptions regarding 9/11.
>
>>Brave Sir [Roger] ran away
>>Bravely ran away, away
>>When [the TRUTH] reared its ugly head
>>He bravely turned his tail and fled
>>Yes, brave Sir [Roger] turned about
>>And gallantly he chickened out
>>Bravely taking to his feet
>>He beat a very brave retreat
>>Bravest of the brave, Sir [Roger]!
>
>I repeat myself: Spot on!
Thank you, but all credit really goes to the men of Monty Python.
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 12:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <If-dncFPs5a__mDLnZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #566814 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:ndi3ve$c5p$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > . . . > >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > You're still obsessed with that photo of that enormous pile of debris > with the kookscribbles all over it? The one that proves that no nukes > were ever used? "enormous?" If you wanted to see "enormous" you should have seen the size of the Twin Towers before they were nuked. Now those were "enormous." And again, we have no evidence whatsoever that any of the 19 alleged hijackers died on 9/11 or that all of those names were even real people. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 19:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndjtd3$q5g$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #566994 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:ndi3ve$c5p$1@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >. . . >> >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >> >> You're still obsessed with that photo of that enormous pile of debris >> with the kookscribbles all over it? The one that proves that no nukes >> were ever used? >"enormous?" If you wanted to see "enormous" you should have seen the size >of the Twin Towers before they were nuked. Now those were "enormous." Why yes, the towers were enormous! 110 stories tall!! And they left that HUGE pile of debris! 1.5 million tons of debris! Three Billion pounds! Piled all the way from the lowest sub-basement 70' below street level to several stories above it! It took them months and over 106,000 truckloads to remove it all!! >And again, we have no evidence whatsoever that any of the 19 alleged >hijackers died on 9/11 or that all of those names were even real people. So where is the mass spectrometry analysis of the WTC dust? Huh? A smart person would admit "I was fooled by this kookvid that claimed it existed but there isn't any such mass spectrometry analysis". A kooktard would evade the issue, try to change the subject or simply run away. So which are you? As if we don't already know the answer....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 09:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <VsGdnR6yfLBa4J_KnZ2dnUU7-f3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #567012 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:ndjtd3$q5g$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:ndi3ve$c5p$1@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>> >>. . . >>> >>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >>> >>> You're still obsessed with that photo of that enormous pile of debris >>> with the kookscribbles all over it? The one that proves that no nukes >>> were ever used? > >>"enormous?" If you wanted to see "enormous" you should have seen the size >>of the Twin Towers before they were nuked. Now those were "enormous." > > Why yes, the towers were enormous! 110 stories tall!! And they left that > HUGE pile of debris! 1.5 million tons of debris! Three Billion pounds! > Piled all the way from the lowest sub-basement 70' below street level to > several stories above it! It took them months and over 106,000 truckloads > to remove it all!! ROTFLMAO and yet with all that weight the debris could not crush the Surviving Corners of the Twin Towers and you still have no explaination for that but MRR nukes explain the Surviving Corners with no problem. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rest of your garbage was trashed since you have failed to address the above over and over and over. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 16:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndu3em$5f0$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #567846 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:ndjtd3$q5g$1@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>>> You're still obsessed with that photo of that enormous pile of debris >>>> with the kookscribbles all over it? The one that proves that no nukes >>>> were ever used? >> >>>"enormous?" If you wanted to see "enormous" you should have seen the size >>>of the Twin Towers before they were nuked. Now those were "enormous." >> >> Why yes, the towers were enormous! 110 stories tall!! And they left that >> HUGE pile of debris! 1.5 million tons of debris! Three Billion pounds! >> Piled all the way from the lowest sub-basement 70' below street level to >> several stories above it! It took them months and over 106,000 truckloads >> to remove it all!! >ROTFLMAO and yet Uh-oh, this lie must be a real doozy! > with all that weight the debris could not crush the >Surviving Corners of the Twin Towers and you still have no explaination for >that but MRR nukes explain the Surviving Corners with no problem. <G> So how is that description of the mass spectrometry dust samples coming? The ones proving nukes were used because of the two substances present in equal quantities that can only be produced by nuclear explosions? What, it doesn't exist? And it never did?? I see my prediction was spot on. You had a choice of realizing that you were LIED TO (and not by "the government"/Bush/Cheney/Silverstein/Wall Street Bankers/"the Jooz", either), or to take the kooktard route and continuing to BELIEVE in that crazy kookreligion of yours, where the Impossible is the explanation of the events on 9/11. Guess which route I predicted you'd take and which route you did take! > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Wow! All that debris! Three BILLION pounds of debris! Look at it all! Huge piles of it!!! It took them months and months to haul it all out, 108,000+ truckloads! I bet you wish you had a piece of that action, driving some of those 108,000+ truckloads. Probably union wages, too! But as a failed truck driver you wouldn't have been allowed to, of course. Look at all the kookscribbles added by insane people, too!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 14:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <q6CdnasM9acDXJ_KnZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #567860 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:ndu3em$5f0$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > Wow! All that debris! Three BILLION pounds of debris! Look at it all! Huge > piles of it!!! It took them months and months to haul it all out, 108,000+ > truckloads! I bet you wish you had a piece of that action, driving some of > those 108,000+ truckloads. Probably union wages, too! But as a failed > truck driver you wouldn't have been allowed to, of course. AND YET IT COULD NOT CRUSH THE SURVIVING CORNERS? ROTFLMAO 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 | 2016-04-04 21:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndumk2$5a4$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #567909 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:ndu3em$5f0$1@pcls7.std.com... >> >> Wow! All that debris! Three BILLION pounds of debris! Look at it all! Huge >> piles of it!!! It took them months and months to haul it all out, 108,000+ >> truckloads! I bet you wish you had a piece of that action, driving some of >> those 108,000+ truckloads. Probably union wages, too! But as a failed >> truck driver you wouldn't have been allowed to, of course. >AND YET IT COULD NOT CRUSH THE SURVIVING CORNERS? ROTFLMAO Asked and answered. 1) That portion of the building was extremely strong, since the lowest floors had to hold up 110 stories of towers. 2) By sheer luck, the heaviest/most damaging portions of falling debris missed those portions, plus as the outer walls broke away, where the standing corners were the final break was at the top (several stories up) and where there were no standing walls, the final break was at or near (or below) plaza level. Nothing unusual, just the randomness of how things break sometimes. Now, how about those mass spectrometry result of the WTC dust samples, showing us how nukes were used? C'mon, Roger, not even a pointer to a k00kvid on that topic?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 06:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <C5adnY1AW83LaJnKnZ2dnUU7-IXNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #567950 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:ndumk2$5a4$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:ndu3em$5f0$1@pcls7.std.com... >>> >>> Wow! All that debris! Three BILLION pounds of debris! Look at it all! >>> Huge >>> piles of it!!! It took them months and months to haul it all out, >>> 108,000+ >>> truckloads! I bet you wish you had a piece of that action, driving some >>> of >>> those 108,000+ truckloads. Probably union wages, too! But as a failed >>> truck driver you wouldn't have been allowed to, of course. > >>AND YET IT COULD NOT CRUSH THE SURVIVING CORNERS? ROTFLMAO > > Asked and answered. > > 1) That portion of the building was extremely strong, since the lowest > floors had to hold up 110 stories of towers. > > 2) By sheer luck, the heaviest/most damaging portions of falling debris > missed those portions Keep going because you forgot to list where your physics came from that buildings do not fall straight down. <G> And don't forget that NIST never ever tried to explain why there were Surviving Corners to both the Twin Towers or why 8 floors of WTC 7 fell at free fall speed as if it had been nuked too. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web