Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #516417 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-24 08:38 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-08-24 16:42 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 148 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 08:38 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 15:54 +0200
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 09:15 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:23 +0200
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 09:37 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 09:43 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 09:57 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 10:51 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:12 +0100
re, nah noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:39 -0700
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 09:34 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 09:53 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 10:55 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-25 09:52 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 15:30 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 09:59 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 10:36 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-25 15:41 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:50 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-25 15:50 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 20:21 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 16:46 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 23:46 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:24 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 03:55 +0200
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:22 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:11 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 17:35 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 17:10 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 22:13 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (Jim need more help) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-26 17:31 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (Jim need more help) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 23:02 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (Jim need more help) gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-26 22:32 -0500
say dUh; thankyoiu noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 21:09 -0700
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-26 18:30 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-26 17:27 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 22:55 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-26 22:33 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 21:19 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:28 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:25 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 04:24 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-26 09:00 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:28 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-26 22:34 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 04:27 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-27 20:23 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-27 15:29 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-27 21:50 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-27 16:02 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 21:25 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-28 11:39 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-28 12:06 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-28 18:05 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (iimp is a complete idiot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-03 16:49 -0500
Re: Rocky is still batshit crazy and jobless jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-03 22:39 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a complete idiot) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 16:31 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a joke) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 22:45 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a joke) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-07 08:29 +0200
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a joke) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:12 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (K proves she is an asshole) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 09:12 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (K proves she is an asshole) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:44 -0500
Re: Rocky's latest delusion jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 05:53 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-28 02:35 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (More for Moroneyn) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-28 10:09 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (More for Moroneyn) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-28 15:51 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (More for Moroneyn) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-28 18:09 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (More for Moroneyn) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-28 21:06 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (More for Moroneyn) gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-28 15:11 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-28 21:05 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-28 15:41 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-28 22:01 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-27 16:13 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 21:32 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 21:12 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 20:51 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 16:35 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 21:58 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 23:12 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 distroys links "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 17:25 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 distroys links Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 23:52 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 distroys links gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 22:33 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 03:28 +0200
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 21:19 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-25 11:08 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:53 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:34 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-26 08:50 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:31 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-26 22:35 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 04:25 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:30 +0000
hah, may be not noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 13:13 -0700
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 04:24 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 12:39 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:42 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 10:19 -0500
two noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 09:29 -0700
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 20:51 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 06:49 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-26 22:03 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-29 17:41 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-29 22:03 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Reginald Ehrett <chasi@competence.org> - 2015-08-29 22:25 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-29 22:35 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 20:25 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-30 03:24 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Reginald Ehrett <chasi@competence.org> - 2015-08-30 10:31 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dumptrucks full of M291 resin) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-29 18:30 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dumptrucks full of M291 resin) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-30 01:26 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-29 23:20 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-29 18:42 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-30 01:27 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 04:26 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-25 14:20 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 09:40 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:55 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 10:17 -0700
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-26 11:01 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:39 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 20:50 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 22:38 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:48 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 13:58 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 13:07 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 16:59 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 22:40 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 00:27 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 09:50 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 09:31 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 11:31 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 11:35 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 12:49 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 13:07 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-26 10:00 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 13:11 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-26 17:39 +0000
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 09:47 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-24 10:23 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 10:12 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-24 13:41 -0400
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 09:17 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 09:44 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 10:56 -0500
Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:42 +0000
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-26 06:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mrk490$n1m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #516931 |
K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>> that >>> >>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>> >>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the >>> planet. >> >> >> Nope you are wrong. > > Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. > >> No seismic info will show a nuke as opposed to any other explosion. > > You clearly know nothing of seismographs. So please enlighten us with your wisdom, and actual citations form a credible source. .....I'm waiting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-26 17:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kc91bc-7ci.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #516975 |
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>>> that >>>> >>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>>> >>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the >>>> planet. >>> >>> >>> Nope you are wrong. >> >> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. >> >>> No seismic info will show a nuke as opposed to any other explosion. >> >> You clearly know nothing of seismographs. > > > So please enlighten us with your wisdom, and actual citations form a > credible source. > .....I'm waiting. OK, here's one in language a 5th grader can understand: http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea Add the additional fact that a 1 kiloton explosion will generate a signature of roughly 4 on the Richter scale and the differentiation becomes trivial. As the babbling fuckwit has been claiming multiple nuclear devices in the 100 kiloton range, the seismic signatures would be roughly 6 for EACH explosion. I won't even go into the ridiculous idea that somehow several hunderd kilotons of TNT were hidden under the towers. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 04:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <spltta9j4g35cg7a46h5mkppqg90dhvr4a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #517050 |
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:25:08 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows
>>>>>> that
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes.
>>>>>
>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the
>>>>> planet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong.
>>>
>>>> No seismic info will show a nuke as opposed to any other explosion.
>>>
>>> You clearly know nothing of seismographs.
>>
>>
>> So please enlighten us with your wisdom, and actual citations form a
>> credible source.
>> .....I'm waiting.
>
>OK, here's one in language a 5th grader can understand:
>
>http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea
>
You beat me to it.
I wonder how Bast will deal with this bit of truth. I anticipate
a lack of acknowledgment of your cite.
[...]
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-26 09:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <QJ-dnSbIC-kEW0DInZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #516931 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com... > On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>> that >>> >>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>> >>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. >> >> >>Nope you are wrong. > > Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the planet?" Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" because the speed at which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized is consistent with an underground nuke and not a jet fuel fire. Plus the USGS never recorded that or deleted it from the record. <G> 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds before collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA And since NIST can not explain why the Twin Towers collapsed that means anybody can say they were nuked and they would certainly be closer to the truth than NIST. <G> Nuclear destruction of the WTC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-26 17:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mi91bc-7ci.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #516997 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from > anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the > planet?" http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea The seismic signatures in the links below are not from USGS and not from just one source, kook. 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 as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events. A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a fact that is widely known and trivial to verify. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. 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]
| From | gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-26 22:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mrm0gd$rko$3@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #516997 |
On 8/26/2015 9:00 AM, Rocky wrote: > First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from > anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the > planet?" > > Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" because the speed at > which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized is > consistent with an underground nuke and not a jet fuel fire. Plus the USGS > never recorded that or deleted it from the record. <G> NO RADIATION DUDE. > Rocky the lying Squarrllie >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 04:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dultta9qp074ngm2rbc9eqjdgrnisnt7ck@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #516997 |
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:00:21 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows
>>>>> that
>>>>
>>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes.
>>>>
>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
>>>
>>>
>>>Nope you are wrong.
>>
>> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong.
>
>First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from
>anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the
>planet?"
>
This doesn't make him wrong. Not to the educated mind.
A nuclear device will create a unique seismic signature. This
isn't rocket science. In fact, it's 9th grade level physics. Sadly,
that's too advanced for your brain.
I don't mean that as an insult. Your very real learning
disability means even basic physics is beyond your ability to
understand.
>Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" because the speed at
>which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized is
>consistent with an underground nuke and not a jet fuel fire. Plus the USGS
>never recorded that or deleted it from the record. <G>
Whereas the building was not vaporized, a TRUTH you've helped to
prove, there would be nothing to record.
>
>9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds
>before collapse
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA
>
>And since NIST can not explain why the Twin Towers collapsed that means
>anybody can say they were nuked and they would certainly be closer to the
>truth than NIST. <G>
>
And yet, they were not nuked. Odd that.
>Nuclear destruction of the WTC
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y
>
A video made by a k00k is not credible. Please try again.
How is that whole ignoring my posts thing working out for you?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 20:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mrno0v$d5a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #516997 |
On 26/08/2015 15:00, Rocky wrote: > "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>>> that >>>> >>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>>> >>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. >>> >>> >>> Nope you are wrong. >> >> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. > > First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from > anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the > planet?" > > Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" Because if you didn't find it, there could be no nukes. > because the speed at > which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized As there was debris on the ground, it could not have been vaporized. > is > consistent with an underground nuke For something to be 'consist ant' with means there is something to compare it to. What event are you comparing it to? > and not a jet fuel fire. Plus the USGS > never recorded that or deleted it from the record. <G> > > 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds > before collapse > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA > > And since NIST can not explain why the Twin Towers collapsed I seem to recall they did just that. > that means > anybody can say they were nuked and they would certainly be closer to the > truth than NIST. So you are now saying that they could be nuked, not that they were nuked? <G> > > Nuclear destruction of the WTC > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y > > Rocky sheeple > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 15:29 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) |
| Message-ID | <Hb-dnd0cxNaj7kLInZ2dnUU7-L2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517258 |
"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:mrno0v$d5a$1@dont-email.me... > On 26/08/2015 15:00, Rocky wrote: >> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>>>> that >>>>> >>>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>>>> >>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the >>>>> planet. >>>> >>>> >>>> Nope you are wrong. >>> >>> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. >> >> First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from >> anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the >> planet?" >> >> Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" > > Because if you didn't find it, there could be no nukes. > >> because the speed at >> which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized > > As there was debris on the ground, it could not have been vaporized. And what % of the original height of the Twin Towers was the debris? <G> And there obviously wasn't much debris because the Survivors were not crushed by debris and the "Surviving Walls" stood way above the debris. DUH T-Annoy, you are just lie after lie after lie just like NIST, the FAA, NORAD, the EPA, NNSA and the USGS. <G> BTW is there a reason you have to screw with what other people have posted like gilber34? Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 21:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying now) |
| Message-ID | <mrnt3l$330$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #517277 |
On 27/08/2015 21:29, Rocky wrote: > "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:mrno0v$d5a$1@dont-email.me... >> On 26/08/2015 15:00, Rocky wrote: >>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com... >>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody knows >>>>>>> that >>>>>> >>>>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>>>>> >>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the >>>>>> planet. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nope you are wrong. >>>> >>>> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. >>> >>> First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from >>> anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the >>> planet?" >>> >>> Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" >> >> Because if you didn't find it, there could be no nukes. >> No comment from you then? >>> because the speed at >>> which the North Tower started shaking 12 seconds before it was vaporized >> >> As there was debris on the ground, it could not have been vaporized. > > And what % of the original height of the Twin Towers was the debris? <G> > So you are not saying the TT's 'vaporized' the? > And there obviously wasn't much debris because the Survivors were not > crushed by debris and the "Surviving Walls" stood way above the debris. DUH > And these people survived although they were above a nuke, and they did not have any radiation problems as well. > T-Annoy, you are just lie after lie after lie just like NIST, the FAA, > NORAD, the EPA, NNSA and the USGS. <G> > > BTW is there a reason you have to screw with what other people have posted > like gilber34? > > Rocky Sheeple > > The only thing I did was alter your name, the same as you have altered mine. Now back to the questions I have asked before. What type was the radiation? What was the level of radiation? How was it detected? Why was there no seismic nuclear signature? Who detected it? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 16:02 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) |
| Message-ID | <tImdnaFaa6ua5kLInZ2dnUU7-IOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517283 |
"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:mrnt3l$330$1@dont-email.me... > On 27/08/2015 21:29, Rocky wrote: >> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >> news:mrno0v$d5a$1@dont-email.me... >>> On 26/08/2015 15:00, Rocky wrote: >>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:dh8qta10g4gl898o46olq7qjs8hreqlncu@4ax.com... >>>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:11 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The EPA lied about the air quality at Ground Zero and everybody >>>>>>>> knows >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Even if they did, it is irrelevant to the issue of nukes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>>>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the >>>>>>> planet. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nope you are wrong. >>>>> >>>>> Jim is 100% correct. But do point out just where he is wrong. >>>> >>>> First all Jim has ever showed us is crap from the USGS and nothing from >>>> anywhere else so why does he give us that crap about "anywhere on the >>>> planet?" >>>> >>>> Second, there is no need to look a the "Seismic Data" >>> >>> Because if you didn't find it, there could be no nukes. >>> > > No comment from you then? The North Tower shook like a tuning fork 12 seconds before it was vaporized and that was not recorded by the USGS? And at the same time the speed the North Tower started shaking could only be caused by a nuke you clown. So why didn't the USGS record the North Tower shaking like a tuning fork? They obviously had recorded that activity since it was so visible but if they had given that information to the public even people as stupid as you would have known the Twin Towers were nuked. DUH Nuclear destruction of the WTC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y AND what is our government saying about all the radiation from Hanford and Fukishima now? They are in a one big cover-up because even ground water is showing up as radioactive now. http://www.groundzeromedia.org/hydros-fear/ Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-27 21:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) |
| Message-ID | <1sb4bc-0ss.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #517285 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > The North Tower shook like a tuning fork 12 seconds before it was vaporized > and that was not recorded by the USGS? And at the same time the speed the > North Tower started shaking could only be caused by a nuke you clown. Just a tower shaking would not generate a seismic signature for more than a mile or so because there is so little energy there, kook. All of the many seismographs that recorded the buildings collapsing were many miles away and were NOT all run by USGS, you raving, insane, kook. 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 as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events. A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a fact that is widely known and trivial to verify. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html Be sure to follow all the links in the above links. <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-28 11:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) |
| Message-ID | <mrphaa$q07$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #517298 |
jimp wrote: > When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic > signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. I just sit and wonder how you can be that stupid in so many domains.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-28 12:06 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) |
| Message-ID | <QF%Dx.73167$oa5.69514@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #517392 |
On 08/28/2015 07:39 AM, Margarita Cibulkova wrote:
> jimp wrote:
>
>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.
>
> I just sit and wonder how you can be that stupid in so many domains.
Well, jimp, in the face of such overwhelming scientific proof it looks
like your arguments all can be ignored!
The two usual scientific arguments used here that are positively
irrefutable are: "You are insane ("kook")" and "You are stupid".
Jimp you simply can't refute science like that! You lose.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-28 18:05 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (T-annoy is lying again) |
| Message-ID | <ogk6bc-427.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #517392 |
In sci.physics Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> wrote: > jimp wrote: > >> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. > > I just sit and wonder how you can be that stupid in so many domains. It is well know and eaisly verified that a 1 kiloton nuclear device produces a roughly 4 Richter scale signature and the the P, S, and Love wave characteristics are unique. Not that you would have the slightest clue what P, S, and Love waves are. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 16:49 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (iimp is a complete idiot) |
| Message-ID | <X_adnVKkRqzqXXXInZ2dnUU7-IOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517469 |
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message news:ogk6bc-427.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > In sci.physics Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> wrote: >> jimp wrote: >> >>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. >> >> I just sit and wonder how you can be that stupid in so many domains. > > It is well know and eaisly verified that a 1 kiloton nuclear device > produces a roughly 4 Richter scale signature and the the P, S, and > Love wave characteristics are unique. But the issue is the North Tower shook like a tuning fork 12 seconds before it was vaporized. People described that shaking in a way that is comparable to a 5.5 quake. See: 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds before collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA The fact there was no seismic reading for that visible shaking proves the seismic readings that you swear by have been tainted. Plus, look at how much crap we were fed about jets in Nuke York City when the facts prove all that was in Nuke York City were CGIs that didn't even have shadows consistent with 9am jet. <G> Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U And the media never addressed why just certain parts of both the Twin Towers were not crushed by falling debris but in fact stood strong. But deep underground nukes explain why about a dozen people survived from the lower floors of the North Tower. See: Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition [Complete / Full Length] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lec9giab90I And considering how long it has been, now there is no issue with dangerous radiation. More about that is given right after 1:21:25 in the above video. BTW jimp you can keep the physics lessons you learned from watching Disney cartoons since you are so quick to use them to believe a jet could really make a roadrunner shaped hole in the Twin Towers. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 22:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Rocky is still batshit crazy and jobless |
| Message-ID | <opumbc-008.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #518772 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message > news:ogk6bc-427.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> In sci.physics Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> wrote: >>> jimp wrote: >>> >>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic >>>> signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet. >>> >>> I just sit and wonder how you can be that stupid in so many domains. >> >> It is well know and eaisly verified that a 1 kiloton nuclear device >> produces a roughly 4 Richter scale signature and the the P, S, and >> Love wave characteristics are unique. > > But the issue is the North Tower shook like a tuning fork 12 seconds before > it was vaporized. People described that shaking in a way that is comparable > to a 5.5 quake. See: Perhaps right next to the building, but all the seismographs recorded the total energy of the building collapse, which was about 2, you delusional, ignorant, lunatic. So it is an issue only in your ignorant, delusional, mind, kook. How is that job search going, you stalking, delusional, kook? 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 as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events. A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a fact that is widely known and trivial to verify. Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data. Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources. Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any governmental agency. This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11. http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/military/how-to-find-a-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html Be sure to follow all the links in the above links. <snip remaining kook babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 16:31 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a complete idiot) |
| Message-ID | <oI6dnc-1LuxdkHfInZ2dnUU7-SudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #518772 |
"dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:4b815c08-0aa1-4b22-a487-fe375dab7e6d@googlegroups.com... On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 4:49:45 PM UTC-5, Rocky wrote: ... > 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 > seconds > before collapse > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA ... > Rocky > For those watching from the sidelines, I took a look at the video. It is > laughably obvious that the *camera* shakes, not the building. (Or does an > "earthquake" also shake smoke?!) If Khalezov really claims this is the > building shaking, he is clearly a BS merchant. (As if the nuclear > demolition nonsense did not make that clear enough.) A camera shake that shook and shook and shook at a consistent speed for a lot longer than just a shake? riiight. And then why did so many people start running at your alleged camera shake? Oh, your lies are so obvious but your Cartoon Physics Clowns will love you bullshit. And don't forget that an AM receiver just happened to record an EMP at the exact same time the ground under WTC3 shook and shook and shook so much that people started running at that time and did now wait for the North Tower to appear to come down after it had been vaporized. The reason why I stated "appear" is there are so many inconsistencies in the videos none of them can really be trusted. > Dan (Woj...) Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-06 22:45 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a joke) |
| Message-ID | <cqydnQvMHrtHmnDInZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #518772 |
"dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:4b815c08-0aa1-4b22-a487-fe375dab7e6d@googlegroups.com... On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 4:49:45 PM UTC-5, Rocky wrote: ... > 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 > seconds > before collapse > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA ... > Rocky For those watching from the sidelines, I took a look at the video. It is laughably obvious that the *camera* shakes, not the building. (Or does an "earthquake" also shake smoke?!) If Khalezov really claims this is the building shaking, he is clearly a BS merchant. (As if the nuclear demolition nonsense did not make that clear enough.) ================== An earthquake shakes everything you clown and a quake keeps shaking things too just like in the above video. Plus the small deep underground nuke that was detonated to cause that shake made a small EMP that was received by an AM receiver. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-07 08:29 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The US has been caught lying about radiation before too (dmaster is a joke) |
| Message-ID | <941ee247bcb1564c304384c8f2ffe318@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #519478 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional woman-stalking truck crashing kook), in <news:cqydnQvMHrtHmnDInZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > "dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message > news:4b815c08-0aa1-4b22-a487-fe375dab7e6d@googlegroups.com... >> On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 4:49:45 PM UTC-5, Rocky >> (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional >> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) wrote: >>> 9<SMACKAKOOK!> >> For those watching from the sidelines, I took a look at the video. It is >> laughably obvious that the *camera* shakes, not the building. (Or does an >> "earthquake" also shake smoke?!) If Khalezov really claims this is the >> building shaking, he is clearly a BS merchant. (As if the nuclear demolition >> nonsense did not make that clear enough.) > A<SMACKAKOOK!> Now you're back to k'laming the nuke was deep underground, Roger? If so, you'll have to contend with your unresolvable logic hole yet again... if that nuke was at sufficient depth to make the timing between the video disruption on the WCBS video due to satellite uplink interference (what you k'lame is "EMP") and the building shaking due to the central column buckling (what you k'lame is the compressive blast of the nuclear weapon) correct, it'd have to be 37 to 96 *miles* deep... a depth we don't even have the technology to drill to today... and given that the neutron-source triggers for nuclear weapons require periodic replacement, that'd mean there must have been, as you have k'lamed in the past, an entire *facility* impossibly deep below the WTC towers... remember? You said that "facility" dozens of miles deeper than we have the technology to drill even today, let alone in 1968, had "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). And you've got a second unresolvable logic hole in your kooky conspiracy theory: Given that the Sedan nuclear explosion of 104 kT caused the displacement of 11 million tons of soil, and given that the resulting crater was 330 feet deep and 1280 feet diameter, and given that the dust cloud from the 104 kT nuclear explosion (smaller than Roger's k'lamed 150 kT nukes) expanded to a diameter of 5 miles, and given that the explosion lifted a dome of soil 300 feet above the desert floor before it vented, and given that the mushroom cloud reached to 12,000 feet, and given that the radiation at the lip of the crater was 500 Rads per hour... why hasn't Rocky explained: 1) why there weren't dozens (since he's k'lamed dozens of nuclear weapons were detonated at the WTC site) of *larger* (given that his k'lamed 150 kT nukes were larger than the Sedan shot and he k'lamed they were buried shallower) gigantic holes that should have been at least 400 feet deep and 1500 feet in diameter; 2) why there were not dozens of mushroom clouds extending to approximately 15,000 feet; 3) why there was no nuclear weapon-related radiation at the WTC site after his k'lamed dozens of nukes detonated; 4) why, given that even *ONE* such nuclear weapon would have lifted the WTC's relatively light 1.5 million tons several hundred feet in the air, didn't the WTC towers rise in height even one inch; 5) and why all of NYC wasn't covered in radioactive dirt from the estimated 400,000,000 *tons* of soil that would have been displaced had all his k'lamed nukes been detonated? And that's not even mentioning that the EMP pulses from your k'lamed dozens of nuclear detonations would have burned out electronics, so there wouldn't have been any video of the collapse or immediate aftermath. Automobiles would have fried their ECUs, helicopters would have all fallen out of the sky at the same time, all cameras in a miles-wide radius would have burned out, the electrical grid for most of that area would have burned out their substations... none of that happened. And that's not even mentioning that *no* radiation above background was found anywhere in NYC, let alone at the WTC site, except for slightly elevated beta radiation from nano-curie concentrations of tritium traced back to the aircraft exit signs and LEO weapons sights, as measured by both Geiger counter and liquid scintillation device. Moron. LOL > Rocky ====================================================== 1) Your estimation of the time between detonation and the time of collapse puts the nukes between from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep below the towers, a depth we don't even have the technology to drill to today, let alone back in 1968. Not to mention the fact that at that depth, the temperature is so high things like metal *melt*. That's *why* we can't drill much deeper than the 7.636 miles of the Al Shaheen oil well in Qatar (the deepest hole *ever* dug in human history)... the equipment fails. That's why the Kola Superdeep Borehole was abandoned at 7.619 miles deep. 2) The claimed "EMP pulse" in the WCBS video *you* provided wasn't an EMP pulse at all, it was satellite uplink interference. If it'd been a nuke EMP (especially one sized 150 kt), the nanosecond time frame of the explosion (and thus the sharp peak of the EMP) would have caused the camera's electronics to burn out. No amount of shielding would have been sufficient to prevent that. That there is video of the immediate aftermath proves there was no nuke, especially one sized your claimed 150 kt, which would have destroyed all electronics for dozens of miles radius. 3) The radiation experienced was of such short duration that there's no way it was neutron or gamma bombardment from a nuke. If it had been from a nuke the metal in the buildings would have shown high levels of radioactivity for decades. It was found to be beta radiation from the tritium in the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement weapon sights that was the source. That you're gullible enough not to know that a nuke would spread radiation far and wide is testament to how delusional you are. 4) No nuclear detonation byproducts were found at the WTC complex or anywhere in NYC (MID: <e62c14c89ab831a63f27243e265c711a@dizum.com>). They found tritium from the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement weapons sites, radium from industrial sources unrelated to nuclear weapons and background levels for all other sources of radiation. 5) The seismic waves caused by a small 150 kt nuke wouldn't be sufficient to drop the buildings, it'd barely even be felt by people in the vicinity, especially with the bombs buried, as you k'lamed, from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep. It would take on the order of 2 MEGAtons to do so, especially at the depths you k'lame the bombs were buried. 6) The trigger that sets off the nuclear explosion is a neutron source. It naturally radioactively decays over time, and its decay byproducts, the elements the neutron source transmutes into as it decays, include xenon, which is a neutron absorber. It's called xenon poisoning. Any bomb that has sat for 33 years without its trigger being replenished will not have a trigger that is viable to start any sort of nuclear chain reaction. 7) I've provided a video from *inside* one of the towers *as* *it* *was* *collapsing*, showing the vibration from the buckling vertical support column and *NO* EMP: ====================== <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xYjoSvzWeo> You'll note the massive shaking from the central support column buckling, but *NO* EMP. And that was INSIDE the WTC tower. No amount of shielding would have saved that camera from a nuke EMP. ====================== 8) Why aren't you explaining how those supposed nukes were going to survive at a depth of 37.28 miles (where the temperature would be approximately 960 degrees F) to 96.93 miles (where the temperature would be approximately 1840 degrees F), Ko0K? 9) Explain how a nuclear weapon can direct its explosion through a hole without any of the compressive blast going out into surrounding rock. 10) Explain how 19 nukes (according to you, another leap of logic taken by your broken brain to explain away the 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the video *you* provided) were detonated at the WTC complex in rapid succession, yet no ill effects were experienced by electronics, the electrical grid or aircraft. 11) Why aren't you explaining how the personnel you claim were sent down to service those nukes (because now that you know the neutron-source triggers for nuclear weapons require replacement on a periodic basis, your broken brain *had* to construct an entire facility at 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep (far deeper than we have the technology to dig even today, let alone back in 1968), complete with "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained", or your brain would have been forced to admit it was wrong when it told you those nukes sat untouched for 33 years and maintained their viability) are supposed to survive in 960 to 1840 degree heat? 12) You admitted (MID:<ed75e9d6f7ccf7296c075fd695673a37@dizum.com>) that all the materials used in construction of the twin towers (all 1.5 million tons of it) had been accounted for and trucked off to the Fresh Kills landfill. How will you reconcile your admission with your kook blather that significant percentages of the buildings "vaporized" (your word) and "floated toward Europe" (your words)? 13) Why can't you provide proof of the nuclear explosion seismic signatures for these 19 nukes you k'lame were detonated at the WTC site on 11 Sep 2001? 14) Where were the vertically-directed plumes of dust and debris kicked up from your claimed nuclear weapons being detonated deep underground, Ko0K? 15) Explain how the 19 nukes you claimed to have existed could have tunneled holes from the underground installation 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep that you claimed to have existed, to directly under the WTC complex... in 12 seconds... through solid bedrock... prior to detonating directly below the WTC towers (which, of course, fucks up your timing between the detonations you claim took place (for which you used the WCBS video, claiming the satellite uplink interference was "EMP") and the collapses, leading you back to where your delusion started. Congratulations, Dimwit, you've made the full circuit on The Island of Insanity. Now go 'round again.). 16) Explain why you're now saying there were 34 nukes (MID:<345fee8b286a91037bc806ed589d182d@dizum.com>), as opposed to your previously k'lamed 19 nukes (and your previously, previously k'lamed 3 nukes)... would it be because your broken little brain is squirming under the scorching twin beams of truth and reality, screaming in agony at its being forced to see just how delusional it truly is? While you're at it, get to explaining how the regular rad sweeps (radiological surveys) at the twin towers (because the space was primarily rented by government agencies) showed no nukes or any contamination whatsoever, and how 34 nukes were obtained and put in place without drawing any attention whatsoever. Of course, this *still* fucks up your timing between the detonations (ie: your claimed "EMP" on the WCBS video) and the collapses, leading you back to where your delusion started... that unresolvable logic hole rears its ugly head again. LOL 17) Your broken brain is yet again expanding your delusion with your "34 or more nukes" blather (you're now saying there were 65 nukes (MID: <984122ddbf1e4e5d6f5a7b3f56eeeb6f@dizum.com>))... eventually, your broken brain will be telling you that NYC today is a CGI and the real city was blown up by 1,592,629,490,173,371,449,138,916,004,581,949 intelligent nano-nukes which autonomously dug their way up from their secret underground MoleMan base 15,682,941 miles below the surface of our hollow planet and attached themselves to every steel part of every building in NYC and vaporized them and they all floated down to MoleVille, and the fact that the EMP from all those nukes detonating at once didn't burn out every electrical generating station, electrical substation, every piece of electronic equipment, every vehicle, every aircraft... that's *proof* that NYC is a CGI today! LOL 18) Explain how a nuclear weapon wouldn't have nuclear detonation byproducts with the right nuclear trigger, according to your words "with the right detonator you could have a 'clean' nuke" (MID: <43acc7488b179f3bfea83ef7076f92b9@dizum.com>). 19) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. 20) Now you're saying the Ogallala Aquifer is radioactive (what's that got to do with the WTC?)... with absolutely no proof... all you have is the paranoid delusional rantings of other schizophrenics like you. 21) Now you're k'laming that the reason no one is hearing these devastatingly loud blasts from your "nuclear terrorism era" is because they're using magical "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence the nukes. Do you see how utterly ridiculous you're beginning to sound? Get back on your meds, you delusional loon. ====================================================== -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web