Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #576669 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-09 06:48 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-05-11 03:56 -0500 |
| Articles | 6 on this page of 26 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-09 06:48 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-09 14:32 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-09 09:45 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-09 15:15 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-10 10:50 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 17:18 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-10 15:11 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 22:52 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-10 17:02 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 23:28 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-11 20:27 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 16:18 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 03:55 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 03:54 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2016-05-09 09:01 -0700
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 04:01 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 17:19 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-10 16:47 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 22:56 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-11 06:40 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-11 22:38 +0100
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-12 03:23 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 08:47 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 03:56 -0500
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-11 19:31 +0000
Re: Why You Should Care About Nukes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 03:56 -0500
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-11 22:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nh08ic$kao$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #577192 |
On 11/05/2016 12:40, Rocky wrote: > "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:ngtl7e$1c3$2@dont-email.me... >> On 10/05/2016 22:47, Rocky wrote: >>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >>> news:ngt1f4$j99$4@dont-email.me... >>>> On 10/05/2016 10:01, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 9 May 2016 06:48:29 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ne3t19$kpg$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ne3n4i$20g$1@pcls7.std.com... >>>>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Wow, Roger, you ran away twice, in one post!!! No, three times!!! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Even if that were true you are unable to show me any other >>>>>>>>>> buildings >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> collapse with "Surviving Corners" so you have not been able to >>>>>>>>>> prove >>>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>>> bullshit about the Twin Towers. <G> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You didn't answer when you were asked for another example of a >>>>>>>>> building >>>>>>>>> that had been "nuked", so we could compare it to the WTC buildings. >>>>>>>>> You ran away, instead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You are the one running away because you are unable to prove that >>>>>>>> collapsing >>>>>>>> buildings should leave "Surviving Corners" the way they were left >>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> Twin Towers were MRR nuked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> K00ktard, we've been waiting for MONTHS for you to get back to us >>>>>>> about >>>>>>> the mass spectrometry of the WTC dust sample, that would prove they >>>>>>> were >>>>>>> nuked by the presence of the two substances in equal quantity that >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> only be made by nuclear explosions. All you do is snip the question >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> RUN AWAY!!!!!! >>>>>> >>>>>> ROTFLMAO because you can not prove the Twin Towers were not nuked. >>>>>> Don't >>>>>> forget this only happens one way: >>>>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >>>>>> >>>>>> ROTFLMAO >>>>> >>>>> Hey, k00k. When will you show us the results of the mass >>>>> spectrometry of the WTC dust sample that, according to you, shows the >>>>> presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can only be made >>>>> by nuclear explosions? >>>>> You've been asked for it many times over many, many months. Yet >>>>> all you've ever done is live up to your name of Run Away Roger. >>>>> Will you answer it now, or continue to admit the WTC was not >>>>> nuked? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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]! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "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> >>>>> >>>> >>>> He can't explain it, it was probably something he was told (so it must >>>> be >>>> true). >>> >>> I see t-ANNOY is back at it. >>> >>> Dude, I don't have to do squat because this photo says something else >>> destroyed the Twin Towers besides the rumored "global collapse." >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >>> >>> The above photo says the Twin Towers had to be vaporized before they >>> could >>> crush the "Surviving Corners." <G> >>> >>> And that is all I have to post because posters will have to deal with >>> that >>> hurdle before they can do anything else. DUH >>> >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >>> >>> Rocky >>> >>> >> >> Thank you for confirming that you have no evidence to back up what you >> posted. > > ROTFLMAO because you just can't figure out there are some things that talk > for themselves and there is absolutly no way a "global collapse" could leave > surviving corners and craters where the MRR nukes were detonated. DUH > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > Rocky > > So still no answers, keep running. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-12 03:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <t9f8jb5veso9c4poskp2p5gi6lldrms6md@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #577192 |
On Wed, 11 May 2016 06:40:03 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:ngtl7e$1c3$2@dont-email.me...
>> On 10/05/2016 22:47, Rocky wrote:
>>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ngt1f4$j99$4@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 10/05/2016 10:01, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 9 May 2016 06:48:29 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:ne3t19$kpg$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:ne3n4i$20g$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Wow, Roger, you ran away twice, in one post!!! No, three times!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Even if that were true you are unable to show me any other
>>>>>>>>>> buildings that collapse with "Surviving Corners" so you have not been able to
>>>>>>>>>> prove your bullshit about the Twin Towers. <G>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You didn't answer when you were asked for another example of a
>>>>>>>>> building
>>>>>>>>> that had been "nuked", so we could compare it to the WTC buildings.
>>>>>>>>> You ran away, instead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are the one running away because you are unable to prove that
>>>>>>>> collapsing buildings should leave "Surviving Corners" the way they were left
>>>>>>>> when the Twin Towers were MRR nuked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> K00ktard, we've been waiting for MONTHS for you to get back to us
>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>> the mass spectrometry of the WTC dust sample, that would prove they
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> nuked by the presence of the two substances in equal quantity that
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> only be made by nuclear explosions. All you do is snip the question
>>>>>>> and RUN AWAY!!!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ROTFLMAO because you can not prove the Twin Towers were not nuked.
>>>>>> Don't forget this only happens one way:
>>>>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ROTFLMAO
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey, k00k. When will you show us the results of the mass
>>>>> spectrometry of the WTC dust sample that, according to you, shows the
>>>>> presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can only be made
>>>>> by nuclear explosions?
>>>>> You've been asked for it many times over many, many months. Yet
>>>>> all you've ever done is live up to your name of Run Away Roger.
>>>>> Will you answer it now, or continue to admit the WTC was not
>>>>> nuked?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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]!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "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>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He can't explain it, it was probably something he was told (so it must
>>>> be
>>>> true).
>>>
>>> I see t-ANNOY is back at it.
>>>
>>> Dude, I don't have to do squat because this photo says something else
>>> destroyed the Twin Towers besides the rumored "global collapse."
>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>
>>> The above photo says the Twin Towers had to be vaporized before they
>>> could crush the "Surviving Corners." <G>
>>>
>>> And that is all I have to post because posters will have to deal with
>>> that hurdle before they can do anything else. DUH
>>>
>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for confirming that you have no evidence to back up what you
>> posted.
>
>ROTFLMAO because you just can't figure out there are some things that talk
>for themselves and there is absolutly no way a "global collapse" could leave
>surviving corners and craters where the MRR nukes were detonated. DUH
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
Hey, k00k. When will you show us the results of the mass
spectrometry of the WTC dust sample that, according to you, shows the
presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can only be made
by nuclear explosions?
You've been asked for it many times over many, many months.
Yet all you've ever done is live up to your name of Run Away Roger.
Will you answer it now, or continue to admit the WTC was not
nuked?
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]!
"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]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-11 08:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ngvd5a$1tst$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #577094 |
On 5/10/2016 4:56 PM, Tony Dragon wrote: > > Thank you for confirming that you have no evidence to back up what you > posted. > To help you I will repost the question asked of you. Nutjobs take the stance: "I don't have to prove anything! You have to convince me otherwise!" -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-11 03:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dts5jbhf4sb3e3lj8709fvl0io1gpn566a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #577091 |
On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:47:18 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>> ROTFLMAO because you can not prove the Twin Towers were not nuked.
>>>> Don't forget this only happens one way:
>>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>>
>>>> ROTFLMAO
>>>
>>> Hey, k00k. When will you show us the results of the mass
>>> spectrometry of the WTC dust sample that, according to you, shows the
>>> presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can only be made
>>> by nuclear explosions?
>>> You've been asked for it many times over many, many months. Yet
>>> all you've ever done is live up to your name of Run Away Roger.
>>> Will you answer it now, or continue to admit the WTC was not
>>> nuked?
>>
>> He can't explain it, it was probably something he was told (so it must be
>> true).
>
>I see t-ANNOY is back at it.
>
>Dude, I don't have to do squat because this photo says something else
>destroyed the Twin Towers besides the rumored "global collapse."
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
>The above photo says the Twin Towers had to be vaporized before they could
>crush the "Surviving Corners." <G>
>
>And that is all I have to post because posters will have to deal with that
>hurdle before they can do anything else. DUH
>
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
Hey there Run Away Roger. When are you going to post the results
regarding the "mass spectrometry analysis of the dust samples" of the
WTC showing "two items in equal parts that only exist after nuclear
detonations"?
You made the claim many months ago, but each time you're asked
about it, you run away.
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]!
"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]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-11 19:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nh019q$f1p$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #577091 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >news:ngt1f4$j99$4@dont-email.me... >> >> He can't explain it, it was probably something he was told (so it must be >> true). >Dude, I don't have to do squat because this photo says something else >destroyed the Twin Towers besides the rumored "global collapse." Thank you for finally admitting that there was no mass spectrometry of the WTC dust samples that shows the presence of two substances in equal quantity that can only be made by nuclear explosions. Thank you for finally admitting that there was no unusual seismic activity regarding the collapses of the buildings. Thank you for admitting that there is no such thing as "MRR nukes", even though everyone knew that because there is no such thing as magic. We know all this is true since you pulled the classic "I don't have to!" response when asked to support your kookclaims, rather than actually provide actual support. On Usenet that is an admission of defeat. You lived up to your well-earned reputation as "Run Away Roger" once again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-11 03:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0ss5jb91vd16uuit4djpblhpquciij3qqb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #577035 |
On Tue, 10 May 2016 17:19:02 +0100, Tony Dragon
<tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On 10/05/2016 10:01, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 May 2016 06:48:29 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ne3t19$kpg$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ne3n4i$20g$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow, Roger, you ran away twice, in one post!!! No, three times!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even if that were true you are unable to show me any other buildings
>>>>>>> that collapse with "Surviving Corners" so you have not been able to prove
>>>>>>> your bullshit about the Twin Towers. <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You didn't answer when you were asked for another example of a building
>>>>>> that had been "nuked", so we could compare it to the WTC buildings.
>>>>>> You ran away, instead.
>>>>
>>>>> You are the one running away because you are unable to prove that
>>>>> collapsing buildings should leave "Surviving Corners" the way they were left when the
>>>>> Twin Towers were MRR nuked.
>>>>
>>>> K00ktard, we've been waiting for MONTHS for you to get back to us about
>>>> the mass spectrometry of the WTC dust sample, that would prove they were
>>>> nuked by the presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can
>>>> only be made by nuclear explosions. All you do is snip the question and
>>>> RUN AWAY!!!!!!
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO because you can not prove the Twin Towers were not nuked. Don't
>>> forget this only happens one way:
>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO
>>
>> Hey, k00k. When will you show us the results of the mass
>> spectrometry of the WTC dust sample that, according to you, shows the
>> presence of the two substances in equal quantity that can only be made
>> by nuclear explosions?
>> You've been asked for it many times over many, many months. Yet
>> all you've ever done is live up to your name of Run Away Roger.
>> Will you answer it now, or continue to admit the WTC was not
>> nuked?
>>
>>
>> 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]!
>>
>>
>> "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>
>>
>
>He can't explain it, it was probably something he was told (so it must
>be true).
Run Away Roger's claim about the "mass spectrometry analysis of
the dust samples" of the WTC showing "two items in equal parts that
only exist after nuclear detonations" has been a sore point for him
for a while now. At this point, everyone reading is aware that he
lied.
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web