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


Groups > sci.physics > #513795 > unrolled thread

Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...

Started byFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
First post2015-08-15 07:46 +0200
Last post2015-08-16 08:35 -0500
Articles 20 on this page of 105 — 14 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-15 07:46 +0200
    Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 23:00 -0700
    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 16:26 -0700
    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-15 18:26 -0500
      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-15 23:37 +0000
        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-15 18:55 -0500
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-16 01:09 +0000
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-16 09:50 -0400
            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 09:21 -0500
      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-16 04:22 +0200
        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-15 21:39 -0500
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 19:47 -0700
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-16 07:12 +0200
            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 00:34 -0500
              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-16 21:17 +0200
                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 18:35 -0500
                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 00:09 +0000
                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 17:46 -0700
                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-17 04:19 +0200
                    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 22:04 -0500
                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 23:24 -0400
                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-16 20:41 -0700
                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 20:56 -0700
                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-16 20:56 -0700
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 03:43 -0700
                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 23:28 -0500
                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 05:03 +0000
                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-08-17 09:26 -0400
                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 09:20 -0500
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-08-17 10:28 -0400
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 09:37 -0500
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 17:38 +0000
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-08-17 17:41 -0400
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-17 08:04 -0700
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( Checkmated checkmate ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 10:26 -0500
                                    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( Checkmated checkmate ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 17:39 +0000
                                    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( Checkmated checkmate ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 16:43 -0500
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 16:43 -0500
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-08-17 19:46 -0400
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( to Sarah #2 ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 17:35 +0000
                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 04:56 +0000
                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-17 08:09 +0200
                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE Perimeter Walls ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 06:48 -0500
                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE Perimeter Walls ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-17 17:05 +0200
                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE credentials ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 10:23 -0500
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE credentials ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-17 19:27 +0200
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE is a complete idiot ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 12:45 -0500
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE is a complete idiot ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-18 05:00 +0200
                                    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-18 11:17 -0500
                                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-18 17:10 +0000
                                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-18 14:27 -0400
                                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-18 18:37 +0000
                                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-19 10:34 -0500
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-19 16:35 +0100
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-19 18:14 +0200
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-19 17:53 +0000
                                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-19 17:33 -0500
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 18:05 -0500
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-20 00:07 +0100
                                                    Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-21 14:15 -0400
                                                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-21 19:55 +0100
                                                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 16:05 -0500
                                                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 16:17 -0500
                                                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-21 21:31 +0000
                                                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-21 23:51 +0100
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  jim + seismographs ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-19 23:07 +0000
                                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-18 15:07 -0400
                                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-18 18:07 -0500
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-18 23:28 +0000
                                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-19 08:25 -0400
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-19 17:55 +0000
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 18:05 -0500
                                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfoolery ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-19 09:21 -0500
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfoolery ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-19 17:57 +0000
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  TVfolery ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 04:06 -0500
                                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-19 08:07 -0400
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 08:25 -0400
                                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-19 09:46 -0400
                                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-19 09:15 -0500
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-19 16:37 +0100
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-19 17:59 +0000
                                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 14:11 -0500
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 18:05 -0500
                                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-19 19:51 -0400
                                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 04:06 -0500
                                      Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-19 04:16 +0200
                                        Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-19 08:32 -0500
                                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE has to subtract 14 ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-19 17:35 +0200
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE credentials ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 17:42 +0000
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE credentials ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 16:39 -0500
                            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 14:36 -0500
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 20:58 +0000
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-17 16:17 -0500
                                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 23:00 +0000
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 16:40 -0500
                                Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-18 07:22 +0200
                              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE avoided the Perimeter Walls ) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-18 07:05 +0200
                          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  (  FNVWE Perimeter Walls ) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-17 17:41 +0000
                  Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong...  ( more 4 FNVWE ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 04:17 -0500
            Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... (laughing at FNVWE) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-16 09:14 -0500
              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... (laughing at FNVWE) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 12:53 -0500
              Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... (laughing at FNVWE) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-16 21:17 +0200
            yo, dOOds noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 11:41 -0700
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-16 05:52 +0000
          Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 08:35 -0500

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


#515602 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-08-21 19:55 +0100
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<mr7s3n$2tg$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515589
On 21/08/2015 19:15, Bast wrote:
> Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 19/08/2015 23:33, Rocky wrote:
>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>> news:0eseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:mjacac-3n1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>>>>>>> vanish,
>>>>>>> just by denying their existence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As there are thousands of seismographs world wide with many of them
>>>>>> connected to the Internet in real time, it should be trivial for you
>>>>>> to show the unique signatures of the supposed nuclear explosions
>>>>>> which would have registered on seismographs world wide.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok Jim, I'll get right to the issue and it is based on the shaking
>>>>> of the North Tower about 12 seconds before it was vaporized and the
>>>>> shaking is shown in the following video:
>>>>
>>>> A video is not a seismograph, kook.
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO  because it is evidence that the ground just started shaking
>>> with no build up just like a nuke.
>>>
>>> And yet you claim that was not recorded by seismographs?  Now the
>>> question is why not especially when the 'quake was so big it was even
>>> caught on video?  <G>  Link put back in since you removed it.
>>>
>>> 9/11: North Tower Collapse (Etienne Sauret)
>>>    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
>>>
>>> Dude, you are the one that is insane to think the Twin Towers were
>>> reduced to piles of rubble maybe 8 feet high if you don't count the
>>> "Surviving Corners" without a nuclear device is absurd.
>>>    http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>
>>> And you failed to address the most obvious lie told by our media about
>>> the Pentagon and that was that a sparrow and a 757 both fold their
>>> wings back to go into small holes.  <G>
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'll ask the questions again that you refused to answer.
>> What type of radiation was present?
>> What type of Geiger counters were used? (You inferred that they were
>> cheap).
>
>
>
>
>
> New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside'
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_UKdqoa_o
>
>

And what has that (true or not) got to do with the questions?

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

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


#515626 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-08-21 16:05 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<lridnV7LyrAxD0rInZ2dnUU7-LednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#515589
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:mr7por$psu$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 19/08/2015 23:33, Rocky wrote:
>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>> news:0eseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:mjacac-3n1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>>>>>>> vanish,
>>>>>>> just by denying their existence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As there are thousands of seismographs world wide with many of them
>>>>>> connected to the Internet in real time, it should be trivial for you
>>>>>> to show the unique signatures of the supposed nuclear explosions
>>>>>> which would have registered on seismographs world wide.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok Jim, I'll get right to the issue and it is based on the shaking
>>>>> of the North Tower about 12 seconds before it was vaporized and the
>>>>> shaking is shown in the following video:
>>>>
>>>> A video is not a seismograph, kook.
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO  because it is evidence that the ground just started shaking
>>> with no build up just like a nuke.
>>>
>>> And yet you claim that was not recorded by seismographs?  Now the
>>> question is why not especially when the 'quake was so big it was even
>>> caught on video?  <G>  Link put back in since you removed it.
>>>
>>> 9/11: North Tower Collapse (Etienne Sauret)
>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
>>>
>>> Dude, you are the one that is insane to think the Twin Towers were
>>> reduced to piles of rubble maybe 8 feet high if you don't count the
>>> "Surviving Corners" without a nuclear device is absurd.
>>>   http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>
>>> And you failed to address the most obvious lie told by our media about
>>> the Pentagon and that was that a sparrow and a 757 both fold their
>>> wings back to go into small holes.  <G>
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'll ask the questions again that you refused to answer.
>> What type of radiation was present?
>> What type of Geiger counters were used? (You inferred that they were
>> cheap).
>
>
> New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside'
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_UKdqoa_o

Thanks for the video and yes there were most definitely explosives in the 
Twin Towers and there is no doubt about that because they wanted to have 
people make the wrong assumptions.

But the Twin Towers were not reduced to "dust" because they were reduced to 
ultra fine debris instead and only a nuke can do that.

And the size of explosives needed to vaporize the 5" core columns in the 
lower floors of the Twin Towers would have destroyed a lot more of the 
surrounding buildings than they did.  Nope, they had to vaporize everything 
from below just like they did.

And yes, the explosives went off in basements of the Twin Towers before the 
first CGi ever hit because by starting a fire in the basement all the water 
that would have been used to stop fires in the floors above ended up being 
redirected to the basement instead.

Rocky 

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


#515637 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-21 16:17 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<m75ftap65f5tquavnfo8sprc96cr7r7f88@4ax.com>
In reply to#515626
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 16:05:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:mr7por$psu$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 19/08/2015 23:33, Rocky wrote:
>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:0eseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:mjacac-3n1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>>>>>>>> vanish,
>>>>>>>> just by denying their existence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As there are thousands of seismographs world wide with many of them
>>>>>>> connected to the Internet in real time, it should be trivial for you
>>>>>>> to show the unique signatures of the supposed nuclear explosions
>>>>>>> which would have registered on seismographs world wide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok Jim, I'll get right to the issue and it is based on the shaking
>>>>>> of the North Tower about 12 seconds before it was vaporized and the
>>>>>> shaking is shown in the following video:
>>>>>
>>>>> A video is not a seismograph, kook.
>>>>
>>>> ROTFLMAO  because it is evidence that the ground just started shaking
>>>> with no build up just like a nuke.
>>>>
>>>> And yet you claim that was not recorded by seismographs?  Now the
>>>> question is why not especially when the 'quake was so big it was even
>>>> caught on video?  <G>  Link put back in since you removed it.
>>>>
>>>> 9/11: North Tower Collapse (Etienne Sauret)
>>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
>>>>
>>>> Dude, you are the one that is insane to think the Twin Towers were
>>>> reduced to piles of rubble maybe 8 feet high if you don't count the
>>>> "Surviving Corners" without a nuclear device is absurd.
>>>>   http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>>
>>>> And you failed to address the most obvious lie told by our media about
>>>> the Pentagon and that was that a sparrow and a 757 both fold their
>>>> wings back to go into small holes.  <G>
>>>>
>>>> Rocky
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll ask the questions again that you refused to answer.
>>> What type of radiation was present?
>>> What type of Geiger counters were used? (You inferred that they were
>>> cheap).
>>
>>
>> New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside'
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_UKdqoa_o
>
>Thanks for the video and yes there were most definitely explosives in the 
>Twin Towers and there is no doubt about that because they wanted to have 
>people make the wrong assumptions.
>

     So "they" wanted the Troofer religion to come about? Really?

>But the Twin Towers were not reduced to "dust" because they were reduced to 
>ultra fine debris instead and only a nuke can do that.
>

     A lot of the towers were pulverized into dust.

>And the size of explosives needed to vaporize the 5" core columns in the 
>lower floors of the Twin Towers would have destroyed a lot more of the 
>surrounding buildings than they did.  Nope, they had to vaporize everything 
>from below just like they did.

     But nothing was vaporized.

>
>And yes, the explosives went off in basements of the Twin Towers before the 
>first CGi ever hit because by starting a fire in the basement all the water 
>that would have been used to stop fires in the floors above ended up being 
>redirected to the basement instead.
>

     So you have NO idea how fire suppressants work. I'm not
surprised.

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

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


#515645 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-08-21 21:31 +0000
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<lthkac-5uh.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#515626
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> But the Twin Towers were not reduced to "dust" because they were reduced to 
> ultra fine debris instead and only a nuke can do that.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
by nearby seismographs.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html

<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#515675 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-08-21 23:51 +0100
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<mr89td$qsq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515626
On 21/08/2015 22:05, Rocky wrote:
> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:mr7por$psu$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 19/08/2015 23:33, Rocky wrote:
>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:0eseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:mjacac-3n1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>>>>>>>> vanish,
>>>>>>>> just by denying their existence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As there are thousands of seismographs world wide with many of them
>>>>>>> connected to the Internet in real time, it should be trivial for you
>>>>>>> to show the unique signatures of the supposed nuclear explosions
>>>>>>> which would have registered on seismographs world wide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok Jim, I'll get right to the issue and it is based on the shaking
>>>>>> of the North Tower about 12 seconds before it was vaporized and the
>>>>>> shaking is shown in the following video:
>>>>>
>>>>> A video is not a seismograph, kook.
>>>>
>>>> ROTFLMAO  because it is evidence that the ground just started shaking
>>>> with no build up just like a nuke.
>>>>
>>>> And yet you claim that was not recorded by seismographs?  Now the
>>>> question is why not especially when the 'quake was so big it was even
>>>> caught on video?  <G>  Link put back in since you removed it.
>>>>
>>>> 9/11: North Tower Collapse (Etienne Sauret)
>>>>    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo
>>>>
>>>> Dude, you are the one that is insane to think the Twin Towers were
>>>> reduced to piles of rubble maybe 8 feet high if you don't count the
>>>> "Surviving Corners" without a nuclear device is absurd.
>>>>    http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>>>
>>>> And you failed to address the most obvious lie told by our media about
>>>> the Pentagon and that was that a sparrow and a 757 both fold their
>>>> wings back to go into small holes.  <G>
>>>>
>>>> Rocky
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll ask the questions again that you refused to answer.
>>> What type of radiation was present?
>>> What type of Geiger counters were used? (You inferred that they were
>>> cheap).
>>
>>
>> New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside'
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_UKdqoa_o
>
> Thanks for the video and yes there were most definitely explosives in the
> Twin Towers and there is no doubt about that because they wanted to have
> people make the wrong assumptions.
>
> But the Twin Towers were not reduced to "dust" because they were reduced to
> ultra fine debris instead and only a nuke can do that.
>
> And the size of explosives needed to vaporize the 5" core columns in the
> lower floors of the Twin Towers would have destroyed a lot more of the
> surrounding buildings than they did.  Nope, they had to vaporize everything
> from below just like they did.
>
> And yes, the explosives went off in basements of the Twin Towers before the
> first CGi ever hit because by starting a fire in the basement all the water
> that would have been used to stop fires in the floors above ended up being
> redirected to the basement instead.
>
> Rocky sheeple
>
>

I'll ask the questions again that you refused to answer.
What type of radiation was present?
What type of Geiger counters were used? (You inferred that they were
cheap).

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

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


#515323 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-08-19 23:07 +0000
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( jim + seismographs )
Message-ID<qqefac-qgq.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#515303
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:0eseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mjacac-3n1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>>>>> vanish,
>>>>> just by denying their existence.
>>>>
>>>> As there are thousands of seismographs world wide with many of them
>>>> connected to the Internet in real time, it should be trivial for you
>>>> to show the unique signatures of the supposed nuclear explosions which
>>>> would have registered on seismographs world wide.
>>>
>>> Ok Jim, I'll get right to the issue and it is based on the shaking of the
>>> North Tower about 12 seconds before it was vaporized and the shaking is
>>> shown in the following video:
>>
>> A video is not a seismograph, kook.
> 
> ROTFLMAO  because it is evidence that the ground just started shaking with 
> no build up just like a nuke.

When there is a nuclear explosion, the ground doesn't start shaking, it
heaves up very quickly, kook.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers was detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#515099 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

FromBDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
Date2015-08-18 15:07 -0400
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<MPG.303d4c9562ee3cb998c22e@news.giganews.com>
In reply to#515088
In article <mqvtbo$fo1$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
> 
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> You really need to learn about underground nukes because even though
> >> they can get through rock in the process they also compress the rock
> >> making it harder to blast through it.  So what we really have it is
> >> took the deep underground nukes about 12 seconds to work through maybe
> >> 50 meters of rock.
> >
> > There were no nukes, kook.
> >
> > See below for the response to your kookery, kook.
> >
> > The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
> >
> > Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
> > which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
> > almost 2 hours later.
> >
> > One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
> > western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
> >
> > Everything else is kook babble.
> >
> > That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.
> >
> > That there is missing rubble is kook babble.
> >
> > That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.
> >
> > That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.
> >
> > That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
> > devices is kook babble.
> >
> > That there was an EMP is kook babble.
> >
> > That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
> > seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.
> >
> > That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
> > to do with what happened is kook babble.
> >
> > That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.
> >
> > That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
> > or Nagasaki is kook babble.
> >
> > That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
> > is kook babble.
> >
> > That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance
> > and still be expected to work is kook babble.
> >
> > That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
> > bombs is kook babble.
> >
> > That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
> > airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.
> >
> > That all the video was CGI is kook babble.
> >
> > That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook
> > babble.
> >
> > That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
> > windows is kook babble.
> >
> > That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.
> >
> > That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
> > is kook babble.
> >
> > There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
> > ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.
> >
> > Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.
> >
> > When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
> > that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
> >
> > There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
> > collapse of the two towers was detected.
> >
> > This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.
> >
> > Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.
> >
> >
> > <snip remaining kook babble>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems vanish, 
> just by denying their existence.

How nice it must be to just make up shit (Troofer pages) and have 
gullible idiots (That would be you and the other Troofers) swallow it 
and have it become a religion.

> Hey,....Try and see if that works when it's time to do your income tax.

Income tax is a sad reality that I know all too well. Trooferism is 
bullshit, through and through.

> 
> If it does you can even make a fortune as a TV preacher.

Another version of Troofery is any other religion.




-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, and future Psychotronic World Dominator. 
Master of Remote Viewing. Level 5 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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


#515134 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-08-18 18:07 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<nsidnUoJPPdOJ07InZ2dnUU7-fednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#515099
"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message 
news:MPG.303d4c9562ee3cb998c22e@news.giganews.com...
>
> Another version of Troofery is any other religion.

No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a large 
congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.  Or how about 
CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?

It is just too bad that some of us were not fooled by the story of a 757 
that folded it's wings back like a sparrow after flight so it didn't leave 
any scrap metal parts on the lawn of the Pentagon.  <G>

And then with a little more observation we find out there was no 757 at the 
Pentagon, no 757 at Pranksville and after a little more time no 767s in Nuke 
York City just bad CGIs that couldn't even keep their wings on.

See:

9/11 PLANE WING DISAPPEARS AS IT HITS TRADE CENTER TOWER! CGI HOLOGRAM?
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL_x9NsxJlg

And who are you going to believe about why the wing disappeared?  The dozens 
of homebrewed stories or someone that figured out how to easily recreate 
that vanishing wing anomaly with 3D software?  <G>

Even though there were some real deaths with the Great 9/11 Hoax because the 
Great 9/11 Hoax was really a Psychological Operation nearly every part of 
was designed to get to your emotions.

Rocky 

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


#515137 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-08-18 23:28 +0000
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<8lrcac-uk3.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#515134
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a large 
> congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.  Or how about 
> CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?

Pure kook babble.

See below for the response to your kookery, kook.

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers was detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.


<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#515202 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-08-19 08:25 -0400
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<mr1sge$4vk$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515137

jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a
>> large congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.
>> Or how about CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?
>
> Pure kook babble.
>
> See below for the response to your kookery, kook.
>
> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>
> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
> which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
> almost 2 hours later.
>
> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
> western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
>
> Everything else is kook babble.
>
> That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.
>
> That there is missing rubble is kook babble.
>
> That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.
>
> That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.
>
> That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
> devices is kook babble.
>
> That there was an EMP is kook babble.
>
> That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
> seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.
>
> That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
> to do with what happened is kook babble.
>
> That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.
>
> That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
> or Nagasaki is kook babble.
>
> That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
> is kook babble.
>
> That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance
> and still be expected to work is kook babble.
>
> That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
> bombs is kook babble.
>
> That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
> airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.
>
> That all the video was CGI is kook babble.
>
> That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook
> babble.
>
> That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
> windows is kook babble.
>
> That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.
>
> That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
> is kook babble.
>
> There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
> ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.
>
> Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.
>
> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
> that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>
> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
> collapse of the two towers was detected.
>
> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.
>
> Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
> kook babble.
>
> Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.
>
>
> <snip remaining kook babble>







"kook babble" ?
...That's your complete answer for anyone who presents logic  and facts 
about 9/11 ???
... Critiquing typing and not a message ????

And you think any rational person will take you seriously ?????

Hey,...How about multiple Question Marks,.....????????????
Does that get your participle dangling ?

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


#515258 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-08-19 17:55 +0000
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<qhseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#515202
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
 
> "kook babble" ?
> ...That's your complete answer for anyone who presents logic  and facts 
> about 9/11 ???

No, that is my answer to an obvious kook.

<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#515312 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-19 18:05 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<1u2atal72021ou47v9ar6gae34mclhl2bl@4ax.com>
In reply to#515202
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:25:24 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

[...]

>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
>> that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>
>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>> collapse of the two towers was detected.
>>
>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.
>>
>> Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
>> kook babble.
>>
>> Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.
>>
>>
>> <snip remaining kook babble>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"kook babble" ?

     Would k00k rant be more to your liking? 
     It doesn't really matter what terminology is used regarding the
disinformation you Troofer spew. 

>...That's your complete answer for anyone who presents logic  and facts 
>about 9/11 ???

     When, in reality please, has a Troofer ever presented logic
and/or facts?

>... Critiquing typing and not a message ????
>
>And you think any rational person will take you seriously ?????
>

     He is taken seriously.

>Hey,...How about multiple Question Marks,.....????????????
>Does that get your participle dangling ?

     Did someone not get their nap in yet? 

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

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


#515216 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfoolery )

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-08-19 09:21 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfoolery )
Message-ID<_7idnVuWw-kRDUnInZ2dnUU7-UGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#515137
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:8lrcac-uk3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a 
>> large
>> congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.  Or how 
>> about
>> CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?
>
> Pure kook babble.
>
> See below for the response to your kookery, kook.

Wow, I see you are melting down again and you can not get out of repeat mode 
again.

Have a good day. 

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


#515259 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfoolery )

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-08-19 17:57 +0000
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfoolery )
Message-ID<okseac-3ho.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#515216
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:8lrcac-uk3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a 
>>> large
>>> congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.  Or how 
>>> about
>>> CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?
>>
>> Pure kook babble.
>>
>> See below for the response to your kookery, kook.
> 
> Wow, I see you are melting down again and you can not get out of repeat mode 
> again.

By "melting down" I assume you mean that your dim kook brain can not
process the following:

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers was detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#515188 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-19 04:06 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( TVfolery )
Message-ID<1oh8ta5tlucntekpme5tp2ptjb64noog6a@4ax.com>
In reply to#515134
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:07:27 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message 
>news:MPG.303d4c9562ee3cb998c22e@news.giganews.com...
>>
>> Another version of Troofery is any other religion.
>
>No, your religion would be called TVfoolery and you certainly have a large 
>congregation of people worshipping every word your TV states.  Or how about 
>CNNites or Foxites or CBSites?
>

     Your dedication to your Troofer religion is admirable. When there
is absolute evidence that it's wrong, most will abandon a religion.
You hold fast.

>It is just too bad that some of us were not fooled by the story of a 757 
>that folded it's wings back like a sparrow after flight so it didn't leave 
>any scrap metal parts on the lawn of the Pentagon.  <G>

     Your lying about flight 77 is not the benefit you believe it to
be.

>
>And then with a little more observation we find out there was no 757 at the 
>Pentagon, no 757 at Pranksville and after a little more time no 767s in Nuke 
>York City just bad CGIs that couldn't even keep their wings on.
>

     There were no CGIs.

>See:
>
>9/11 PLANE WING DISAPPEARS AS IT HITS TRADE CENTER TOWER! CGI HOLOGRAM?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL_x9NsxJlg
>

     The wing is still visible. The plane's banking reduces the wing's
silhouette, but to the rational mind, this isn't the same as
disappearing.

>And who are you going to believe about why the wing disappeared?  The dozens 

     Since it did not disappear, there is no one to believe.

>of homebrewed stories or someone that figured out how to easily recreate 
>that vanishing wing anomaly with 3D software?  <G>
>

     Using software even I can make the wing of a plane disappear.
This is not the least bit impressive.

>Even though there were some real deaths with the Great 9/11 Hoax because the 
>Great 9/11 Hoax was really a Psychological Operation nearly every part of 
>was designed to get to your emotions.
>

     No, it was not. But you're still free to produce evidence that it
was.
    I'm (still) waiting...

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

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


#515200 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-08-19 08:07 -0400
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<mr1rfk$16b$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515099

BDK wrote:
> In article <mqvtbo$fo1$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
>>
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You really need to learn about underground nukes because even though
>>>> they can get through rock in the process they also compress the rock
>>>> making it harder to blast through it.  So what we really have it is
>>>> took the deep underground nukes about 12 seconds to work through
>>>> maybe 50 meters of rock.
>>>
>>> There were no nukes, kook.
>>>
>>> See below for the response to your kookery, kook.
>>>
>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>
>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
>>> which weakened the central support columns and the buildings
>>> collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>
>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of
>>> the western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
>>>
>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there is missing rubble is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
>>> devices is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there was an EMP is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
>>> seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
>>> to do with what happened is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
>>> or Nagasaki is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
>>> is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance
>>> and still be expected to work is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
>>> bombs is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
>>> airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That all the video was CGI is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook
>>> babble.
>>>
>>> That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
>>> windows is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.
>>>
>>> That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
>>> is kook babble.
>>>
>>> There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
>>> ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.
>>>
>>> Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.
>>>
>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
>>> that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>
>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>>> collapse of the two towers was detected.
>>>
>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>> 9/11.
>>>
>>> Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.
>>>
>>>
>>> <snip remaining kook babble>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> How wonderful it must be to just be able to make all your problems
>> vanish, just by denying their existence.
>
> How nice it must be to just make up shit (Troofer pages) and have
> gullible idiots (That would be you and the other Troofers) swallow it
> and have it become a religion.
>
>> Hey,....Try and see if that works when it's time to do your income tax.
>
> Income tax is a sad reality that I know all too well. Trooferism is
> bullshit, through and through.
>
>>
>> If it does you can even make a fortune as a TV preacher.
>
> Another version of Troofery is any other religion.






You just don't get it do you ?
Religion teaches followers to ignore what as an individual, they think and 
see.
And miracles like 3 towers falling down only on one specific day, and all 
the other things written in the holy book, are just to be accepted as 
miracles, and NEVER questioned.

So just send your money to the 9/11 commission, reject your rights,  and 
they shall save you from the eviillls of the boogie man.
(As puppet mercenaries like Al-quida and ISIS cost the big boys a lot of 
money to keep running)


1st rule of business,.....create a problem that doesn't yet exist,.....then 
be the only one to market the solution.

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


#515201 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

FromHVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com>
Date2015-08-19 08:25 -0400
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<mr1sdl$43b$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515200
On 8/19/2015 8:07 AM, Bast wrote:
>
> You just don't get it do you ?
> Religion teaches followers to ignore what as an individual, they think and
> see.
> And miracles like 3 towers falling down only on one specific day, and all
> the other things written in the holy book, are just to be accepted as
> miracles, and NEVER questioned.
>
> So just send your money to the 9/11 commission, reject your rights,  and
> they shall save you from the eviillls of the boogie man.
> (As puppet mercenaries like Al-quida and ISIS cost the big boys a lot of
> money to keep running)


Blast agrees with Rocko that the WTCs were nuked.

His bible is that gay truth site.

His god is Hillary.

His prayer is "Bush did it".

BJ is down with all of it.


-- 
"Are we going to fight or are we going to stand around all day?"
https://goo.gl/TU0Xr6

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


#515208 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

From"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
Date2015-08-19 09:46 -0400
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<mr218l$n46$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515201

HVAC wrote:
> On 8/19/2015 8:07 AM, Bast wrote:
>>
>> You just don't get it do you ?
>> Religion teaches followers to ignore what as an individual, they think
>> and see.
>> And miracles like 3 towers falling down only on one specific day, and
>> all the other things written in the holy book, are just to be accepted
>> as miracles, and NEVER questioned.
>>
>> So just send your money to the 9/11 commission, reject your rights, and 
>> they shall save you from the eviillls of the boogie man.
>> (As puppet mercenaries like Al-quida and ISIS cost the big boys a lot
>> of money to keep running)
>
>
> Blast agrees with Rocko that the WTCs were nuked.



STRAWMAN.
I NEVER sad that,....so shaddap you lying drone.
I will acknowledge that it is very possible, until it can be conclusively 
disproved.
...Saying it's "kook babble"is not a valid argument,....unless you are 3 
years old.



>
> His bible is that gay truth site.
>
> His god is Hillary.
>
> His prayer is "Bush did it".
>
> BJ is down with all of it.



Now you just make me want some of the same drugs you are taking
On second thought,....no I don't. 

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


#515214 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-08-19 09:15 -0500
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<CZCdnWG1T_rfEknInZ2dnUU7-cudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#515201
"HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mr1sdl$43b$1@dont-email.me...
> On 8/19/2015 8:07 AM, Bast wrote:
>>
>> You just don't get it do you ?
>> Religion teaches followers to ignore what as an individual, they think 
>> and
>> see.
>> And miracles like 3 towers falling down only on one specific day, and all
>> the other things written in the holy book, are just to be accepted as
>> miracles, and NEVER questioned.
>>
>> So just send your money to the 9/11 commission, reject your rights,  and
>> they shall save you from the eviillls of the boogie man.
>> (As puppet mercenaries like Al-quida and ISIS cost the big boys a lot of
>> money to keep running)
>
>
> Blast agrees with Rocko that the WTCs were nuked.

"Blast?"  I doubt that but the remains of the Twin Towers are not consistent 
with a collapse of a Controlled Demolition so that only leaves a nuke.  And 
it has to be a buried nuke or it would have taken a lot of Manhattan Island 
with it.

As for AE911truth.  They stay focused on WTC7 and stay away from the remains 
of the Twin Towers because they can't say why they ended up like that.  Or 
this:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

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


#515223 — Re: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2015-08-19 16:37 +0100
SubjectRe: Here, Rocky... prove yourself wrong... ( FNVWE has to subtract 14 )
Message-ID<mr27pf$g3c$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#515214
On 19/08/2015 15:15, Rocky wrote:
> "HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mr1sdl$43b$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 8/19/2015 8:07 AM, Bast wrote:
>>>
>>> You just don't get it do you ?
>>> Religion teaches followers to ignore what as an individual, they think
>>> and
>>> see.
>>> And miracles like 3 towers falling down only on one specific day, and all
>>> the other things written in the holy book, are just to be accepted as
>>> miracles, and NEVER questioned.
>>>
>>> So just send your money to the 9/11 commission, reject your rights,  and
>>> they shall save you from the eviillls of the boogie man.
>>> (As puppet mercenaries like Al-quida and ISIS cost the big boys a lot of
>>> money to keep running)
>>
>>
>> Blast agrees with Rocko that the WTCs were nuked.
>
> "Blast?"  I doubt that but the remains of the Twin Towers are not consistent
> with a collapse of a Controlled Demolition so that only leaves a nuke.  And
> it has to be a buried nuke or it would have taken a lot of Manhattan Island
> with it.
>
> As for AE911truth.  They stay focused on WTC7 and stay away from the remains
> of the Twin Towers because they can't say why they ended up like that.  Or
> this:
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
> Rocky
>
>

I ask again the question you have refused to answer.

You say the event on 911 was consistent with a 'ncd', what NCD are you 
comparing it with?

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

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


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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web