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

Groups > sci.physics > #519104 > unrolled thread

Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-05 11:50 -0500
    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-05 18:39 +0100
      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 11:38 -0400
        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:17 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 11:35 -0500
            Re: Rocky incoherent again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 17:07 +0000
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:09 -0500
                Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 18:21 +0000
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:45 -0500
                    Re: Rocky the stalking lunatic raves on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 19:26 +0000
                      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 16:21 -0500
                        Re: Rocky still delusional jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 21:38 +0000
                          Re: Strange Features Found in the Naudet Brothers First Strike Footage (jimp forgets about freeze frame again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 17:08 -0500
                            Re: Rocky continues to have delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 22:32 +0000
                        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:06 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K proves she lies about Dimitri) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 11:27 -0500
                            Re: Rocky raves on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 16:34 +0000
                              Re: Rocky raves on "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:45 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Roger has to lie, per his mental defect(s)) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:44 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:01 -0500
                  Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 15:38 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 19:33 -0500
                      Re: Rocky still crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-08 03:34 +0000
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - (Roger is caught lying again.) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:55 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! - (K  is caught bulshitting again.) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 15:26 -0500
                Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why does Roger keep using the same lies? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 16:21 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:22 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 02:19 +0000
                      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 01:23 -0500
                        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 01:02 +0000
                          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:39 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why is Roger DESPERATE to divert attention from his own claims? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:10 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 16:15 -0400
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 16:22 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K stop your bickering) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:55 -0500
                Re: Rocky's imaginary nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 00:29 +0000
                Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K stop your bickering) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:12 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K poves she is a complete asshole) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 11:42 -0500
                    Re: stalker rocky babbles on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 16:49 +0000
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K poves she is a complete asshole) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:45 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 10:29 -0400
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:44 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 19:11 -0400
    Re: Rocky has more delusions and is still jobless jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 18:55 +0000
      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 03:39 -0500
        Re: Yet more Rocky delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 17:01 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#519104 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

"Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message 
news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>
> The proof? - watch this video:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded

WTF?

The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think the 
Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.

The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground and the twin 
towers left lot in the air which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear 
controlled demolition.

And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.

And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few seconds 
before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the North Tower 
shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the jets were.

Rocky

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#519112

On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>
>> The proof? - watch this video:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>
> WTF?
>
> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think the
> Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.
>

Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?

> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground

Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.

> and the twin
> towers left lot in the air

So it's still there?

> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
> controlled demolition.

Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.

>
> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.
>
But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us about 
Geiger counters going off.
You really should remember what you yourself posted.


> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few seconds
> before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the North Tower
> shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the jets were.
>

What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell 
the whole world about these nukes.

Can you explain that?

> Rocky
>
>
>


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

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

#519266

Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
>> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
>> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>>
>>> The proof? - watch this video:
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>>
>> WTF?
>>
>> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think
>> the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.
>>
>
> Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?
>
>> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground
>
> Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
> You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.
>
>> and the twin
>> towers left lot in the air
>
> So it's still there?
>
>> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
>> controlled demolition.
>
> Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.
>
>>
>> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.
>>
> But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us about
> Geiger counters going off.
> You really should remember what you yourself posted.
>
>
>> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few
>> seconds before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the
>> North Tower shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the
>> jets were.
>
> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
> the whole world about these nukes.
>
> Can you explain that?
>




Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US dollar as 
their base currency.
Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the theft 
and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day business 
affairs.

You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.

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

#519273

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>Tony Dragon wrote:
>> On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
>>> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
>>> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>>>
>>>> The proof? - watch this video:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>>>
>>> WTF?
>>>
>>> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think
>>> the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.
>>
>> Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?
>>
>>> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground
>>
>> Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
>> You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.
>>
>>> and the twin towers left lot in the air
>>
>> So it's still there?
>>
>>> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
>>> controlled demolition.
>>
>> Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.
>>
>>> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.
>>>
>> But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us about
>> Geiger counters going off.
>> You really should remember what you yourself posted.
>>
>>
>>> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few
>>> seconds before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the
>>> North Tower shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the
>>> jets were.
>>
>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>
>> Can you explain that?
>>
>
>
>
>Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US dollar as 
>their base currency.

     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.

>Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the theft 
>and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day business 
>affairs.
>
>You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.

     Maybe so, maybe no.
     If you can attach their assets you have a chance at it.

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

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

#519277

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
>>>> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>>>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>>>>
>>>>> The proof? - watch this video:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>>>>
>>>> WTF?
>>>>
>>>> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think
>>>> the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.
>>>
>>> Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?
>>>
>>>> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground
>>>
>>> Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
>>> You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.
>>>
>>>> and the twin towers left lot in the air
>>>
>>> So it's still there?
>>>
>>>> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
>>>> controlled demolition.
>>>
>>> Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.
>>>
>>>> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.
>>>>
>>> But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us about
>>> Geiger counters going off.
>>> You really should remember what you yourself posted.
>>>
>>>
>>>> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few
>>>> seconds before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the
>>>> North Tower shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the
>>>> jets were.
>>>
>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>
>>> Can you explain that?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US dollar 
>>as
>>their base currency.
>
>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.

Too bad that happened after the great 9/11 hoax where they used CGIs instead 
of jets and nukes instead of jet fuel.  <G>

And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at 
the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and 
Nukes.

Rocky 

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

#519291 — Re: Rocky incoherent again

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...

>>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
>> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
> 
> Too bad that happened after the great 9/11 hoax where they used CGIs instead 
> of jets and nukes instead of jet fuel.  <G>

Yet more incoherent babble from the delusional stalker.

Prey tell us Rocky what the monetary systems of Russia and China have to
do with 9/11, you babble kook.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519298

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:hf8ubc-lh2.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

"And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at 
the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and 
Nukes."

and jimp didn't have a reply

Evidence that says CGIs:

Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

Evidence of nukes in Nuke York City:

Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition [Complete / Full Length]
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lec9giab90I

And given that the media was caught using inconsistent statements everything 
they relied on is also suspected of or was caught using inconstancies 
themselves.  <G>

Rocky 

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

#519305 — Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> "And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at 
> the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and 
> Nukes."

Here is your preponderance of the evidence, you raving kook.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

The raving kook forgets that there were thousands of eye witnesses
watching things happen as they happened; no CGI anything.

 
<snip remaining kook delusions>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519306

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:bqcubc-s63.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> "And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look 
>> at
>> the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and
>> Nukes."
>
> Here is your preponderance of the evidence

You had better look up the definition of "preponderance" you cartoon physics 
freak

The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.

The small amount of debris where the Twin Towers once stood is evidence of a 
nuke.

The EMP recorded by WCBS is evidence of a nuke.

The heat that burned boots of first responders months later is also evidence 
of a nuke.  Here see:

First Responder - "We Were Nuked on 9-11"First Responder -
 "We Were Nuked on 9-11"
 http://www.henrymakow.com/joey_peeps.html

And keep in mind Joey also states he saw airplane parts but he never saw the 
way those parts were delivered because parts from CGIs had to be trucked in.

Rocky 

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

#519331 — Re: Rocky the stalking lunatic raves on

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.

There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

<snip remaining insane babble>

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519374 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris)

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>
> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.

Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.

If the Twin Towers had really just collapsed down there would have been a 
pile of debris way too big for our current equipment.

Same with a controlled demolition.  If the Twin Towers had been through a 
"Controlled Demolition" the debris pile from the demolition would have been 
way too tall for our current equipment.

The only way to destroy the Twin Towers with a very small debris pile left 
behind was by using nukes and it is very obvious to me and others that they 
couldn't completely conceal the use of nukes so they had to use inconsistent 
seismic readings to help them out but too bad the shaking of the North Tower 
was caught on video.  <G>

And the first 11 seconds after the shaking started is how long it takes to 
build an underground cavity in rock so that explain why the North Tower was 
vaporized at least 11 seconds after the shaking ended.  See and read the 
screen at the same time:

This video is dedicated to Dimitri Khalezov
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY

Rocky 

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

#519384 — Re: Rocky still delusional

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
> news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>>
>> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.
> 
> Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.

There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic stalker.

This is just another of your delusions like your delusion about the
girl you stalked that got your ass hauled into court and your delusisons
of competence that get you fired from every job.

<snip remaining delusional drivel>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519400 — Re: Strange Features Found in the Naudet Brothers First Strike Footage (jimp forgets about freeze frame again)

<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
news:vaoubc-jb4.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>> news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>>>
>>> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.
>>
>> Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.
>
> There was no missing debris

You are beyond help so don't be surprised if you end up being treated just 
like I treat the Friendly Neighborhood Nut.

Rocky 

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

#519414 — Re: Rocky continues to have delusions

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> You are beyond help so don't be surprised if you end up being treated just 
> like I treat the Friendly Neighborhood Nut.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

How do you explain the fact that there are videos from New York but
if nuclear bombs had been present the EMP from EACH of the bombs
would have killed all the video cameras in the area?

Either everyone in New York was carrying EMP hardened cameras or
there were no nuclear bombs involved on 9/11.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519509 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris)

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:21:20 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>>
>> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.
>
>Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.
>

     Wow. You didn't even last 12 hours with your ignoring of Jim.
     This has to be a record. You managed a whole day with me, but
only a few hours with Jim.

>If the Twin Towers had really just collapsed down there would have been a 
>pile of debris way too big for our current equipment.

     Why?

>
>Same with a controlled demolition.  If the Twin Towers had been through a 
>"Controlled Demolition" the debris pile from the demolition would have been 
>way too tall for our current equipment.
>

     Since a great deal of the debris was in the sublevels and
bathtub, your lie continues to fail.

>The only way to destroy the Twin Towers with a very small debris pile left 
>behind was by using nukes and it is very obvious to me and others that they 
>couldn't completely conceal the use of nukes so they had to use inconsistent 
>seismic readings to help them out but too bad the shaking of the North Tower 
>was caught on video.  <G>

     Which serves to prove your claim of nukes wrong. But you lack the
intellect and mental stability to recognize this.

>
>And the first 11 seconds after the shaking started is how long it takes to 
>build an underground cavity in rock 

     Your cite for this is..?

>so that explain why the North Tower was 
>vaporized at least 11 seconds after the shaking ended.  See and read the 
>screen at the same time:

     It wasn't vaporized, as you KNOW, but are mentally incapable of
admitting.

>
>This video is dedicated to Dimitri Khalezov
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY

     That video has been proved wrong many times by many people.
     You need to try something new.

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

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

#519550 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K proves she lies about Dimitri)

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1trqua15uintmt3pu4jqdrb36g1v4npq25@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:21:20 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>>>
>>> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.
>>
>>Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.
>>
>
>     Wow. You didn't even last 12 hours with your ignoring of Jim.
>     This has to be a record. You managed a whole day with me, but
> only a few hours with Jim.

What are you talking about?  After I let jimp know she was beyond help I 
have not replied to any of her post.

And if you want to see how long I've ignored a total asshole just look at 
the last time I replied to Friendly Neighborhood Nut.  <G>

>>If the Twin Towers had really just collapsed down there would have been a
>>pile of debris way too big for our current equipment.
>
>     Why?

Are you incapable of finding out what % of a building is normally left on 
the ground after a collapse?

You really should check out the "Progressive Collapse Challenge" because in 
real life nobody can build a building that collapses from the top down.
 http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html

BTW NIST could easily win that Progressive Collapse Challenge because all 
they would have to do is submit another cartoon.  <G>

>>Same with a controlled demolition.  If the Twin Towers had been through a
>>"Controlled Demolition" the debris pile from the demolition would have 
>>been
>>way too tall for our current equipment.
>>
>
>     Since a great deal of the debris was in the sublevels and
> bathtub, your lie continues to fail.

BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT because there is no way any of the debris made it 
by the Survivors in WTC1 or they would have not been Survivors.  DUH.

>>The only way to destroy the Twin Towers with a very small debris pile left
>>behind was by using nukes and it is very obvious to me and others that 
>>they
>>couldn't completely conceal the use of nukes so they had to use 
>>inconsistent
>>seismic readings to help them out but too bad the shaking of the North 
>>Tower
>>was caught on video.  <G>
>
>     Which serves to prove your claim of nukes wrong. But you lack the
> intellect and mental stability to recognize this.

Look at you asshole.  I have all the evidence I used to win a jury trial 12 
to 0 on the Internet and what do  you choose to do?  You choose to listen to 
others instead of check out the exhibits for yourself.

That is you shithead to a T.  You did the exact same thing with me that you 
did with the facts about 9/11 you ignored them because you think you are 
smart but all  you did was prove you are really really really stupid.

>>And the first 11 seconds after the shaking started is how long it takes to
>>build an underground cavity in rock
>
>     Your cite for this is..?

ROTFLMAO  I can tell you where I found it but the issue is that evidence is 
not readily available because the media wants you to stay an idiot just like 
you are.

>>so that explain why the North Tower was
>>vaporized at least 11 seconds after the shaking ended.  See and read the
>>screen at the same time:
>
>     It wasn't vaporized, as you KNOW, but are mentally incapable of
> admitting.

Why don't you just look at the size of the debris that was left behind?  And 
vaporized does not mean disappeared from existence it means converted to 
ultra fine particles you idiot.

>>This video is dedicated to Dimitri Khalezov
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY

>     That video has been proved wrong many times by many people.
>     You need to try something new.

What are you talking about asshole?  That is not he video with Dimitri it is 
a video for Dimitri and oddly enough you will find a place in it that states 
now many seconds it takes for a 150kt nuke to make a cavity in rock.  <G>

And if you thought you were talking of the video with Dimitri then that 
video proves the seismic records were tainted and that the amount of 
radiation at GZ was covered up so the fact really is that video was never 
debunked.

And if you want to say absolute bullshit about Dimitri you had better try to 
prove it asshole.  Go ahead I'll be waiting and I'll constantly remind you 
too.

Rocky 

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

#519554 — Re: Rocky raves on

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> What are you talking about?  After I let jimp know she was beyond help I 
> have not replied to any of her post.

What Rocky means is he could no longer stand having the truth rubbed
into his delusional face and he was pissed off that I kept removing
the irrelevant astronomy group.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519646 — Re: Rocky raves on

On Mon, 7 Sep 2015 16:34:52 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
>> What are you talking about?  After I let jimp know she was beyond help I 
>> have not replied to any of her post.
>
>What Rocky means is he could no longer stand having the truth rubbed
>into his delusional face and he was pissed off that I kept removing
>the irrelevant astronomy group.

     When he is faced with a truth he can't lie around, he resorts to
ignoring the person who presents said truth. Of course, he lasted less
than 12 hours in regards to ignoring you. He managed over a day with
me.

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

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

#519645 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Roger has to lie, per his mental defect(s))

On Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:27:21 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:1trqua15uintmt3pu4jqdrb36g1v4npq25@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:21:20 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
>>>news:njgubc-fi3.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>>>>
>>>> There was no missing debris, you raving lunatic.
>>>
>>>Ok, let me say missing pile of debris you Crazy Cartoon Physics Freak.
>>
>>     Wow. You didn't even last 12 hours with your ignoring of Jim.
>>     This has to be a record. You managed a whole day with me, but
>> only a few hours with Jim.
>
>What are you talking about?  After I let jimp know she was beyond help I 
>have not replied to any of her post.
>

     You claimed in a reply to Bast that you had already started to
ignore Jim. Less than 24 hours and the post I replied to was sent. 
     I'm more than willing to post the MID wherein you made the claim.
Let me know if you'd like you LIE exposed in this fashion.

>And if you want to see how long I've ignored a total asshole just look at 
>the last time I replied to Friendly Neighborhood Nut.  <G>

     When you realized his every post proved you wrong, you ran away.
Just as you are doing with Jim. Just as you LIED and claimed you did
with me. 
     At least you lasted more than 12 hours when you announced you
were ignoring my posts.
     Hey, how is that whole ignoring my posts thing working out for
you? <G>

>
>>>If the Twin Towers had really just collapsed down there would have been a
>>>pile of debris way too big for our current equipment.
>>
>>     Why?
>
>Are you incapable of finding out what % of a building is normally left on 
>the ground after a collapse?

     I am quite capable. But you made the claim. It befalls you to
produce the evidence for the claim.

>
>You really should check out the "Progressive Collapse Challenge" because in 
>real life nobody can build a building that collapses from the top down.
> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html
>

     And yet it happens.
     Odd that.

>BTW NIST could easily win that Progressive Collapse Challenge because all 
>they would have to do is submit another cartoon.  <G>
>

     Since they can't really build another tower to prove the delusion
wrong, computer models will be the most logical choice.

>>>Same with a controlled demolition.  If the Twin Towers had been through a
>>>"Controlled Demolition" the debris pile from the demolition would have 
>>>been
>>>way too tall for our current equipment.
>>
>>     Since a great deal of the debris was in the sublevels and
>> bathtub, your lie continues to fail.
>
>BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT because there is no way any of the debris made it 
>by the Survivors in WTC1 or they would have not been Survivors.  DUH.

     You can lie as often as you need. The truth will not alter.
     The surviving corners PROVE no nukes were used. This has been
explained to you several times by several people.

>
>>>The only way to destroy the Twin Towers with a very small debris pile left
>>>behind was by using nukes and it is very obvious to me and others that 
>>>they
>>>couldn't completely conceal the use of nukes so they had to use 
>>>inconsistent
>>>seismic readings to help them out but too bad the shaking of the North 
>>>Tower
>>>was caught on video.  <G>
>>

     For the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, either use a real
news reader, or install quote fix. 


>>     Which serves to prove your claim of nukes wrong. But you lack the
>> intellect and mental stability to recognize this.
>
>Look at you asshole.  

     You consistently lash out when forced to face the truth.

>I have all the evidence I used to win a jury trial 12 
>to 0 on the Internet and what do  you choose to do?  You choose to listen to 
>others instead of check out the exhibits for yourself.

     Your trial had and has nothing to do with 9/11/2001. Please cease
presenting a connection.

>
>That is you shithead to a T.  You did the exact same thing with me that you 
>did with the facts about 9/11 you ignored them because you think you are 
>smart but all  you did was prove you are really really really stupid.
>

     And yet, you have proved, more times than I care to count, that I
am your intellectual superior. If I am really, really, really stupid,
how much more so are you?

>>>And the first 11 seconds after the shaking started is how long it takes to
>>>build an underground cavity in rock
>>
>>     Your cite for this is..?
>
>ROTFLMAO  I can tell you where I found it but the issue is that evidence is 
>not readily available because the media wants you to stay an idiot just like 
>you are.
>

     Your default admission that you lied is noted and accepted.

>>>so that explain why the North Tower was
>>>vaporized at least 11 seconds after the shaking ended.  See and read the
>>>screen at the same time:
>>
>>     It wasn't vaporized, as you KNOW, but are mentally incapable of
>> admitting.
>
>Why don't you just look at the size of the debris that was left behind?  And 
>vaporized does not mean disappeared from existence it means converted to 
>ultra fine particles you idiot.
>

     This is PROOF that no vaporization occurred. Sadly, you lack the
mental ability to accept this.
     I do wish that were an insult. Sadly, it's an accurate comment,
based on your posts.

>>>This video is dedicated to Dimitri Khalezov
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY
>
>>     That video has been proved wrong many times by many people.
>>     You need to try something new.
>
>What are you talking about asshole?  

     Once again the truth compels you to lash out in anger.
     I think you may benefit from speaking to a mental health care
professional about this matter.

>That is not he video with Dimitri it is 
>a video for Dimitri and oddly enough you will find a place in it that states 
>now many seconds it takes for a 150kt nuke to make a cavity in rock.  <G>

     Where do I claim it's a video with Demitri?
     Are you really as DESPERATE to divert attention from the truth as
your comment suggests?

>
>And if you thought you were talking of the video with Dimitri then that 
>video proves the seismic records were tainted and that the amount of 
>radiation at GZ was covered up so the fact really is that video was never 
>debunked.

     Since I didn't take the position your mental defect(s) demand you
claim, your lying fails you.

>
>And if you want to say absolute bullshit about Dimitri you had better try to 
>prove it asshole.  Go ahead I'll be waiting and I'll constantly remind you 
>too.
>

     It befalls the claimant to prove the claim. As such, it befalls
you to prove the claim you made is true. It does not befall me to
disprove it.
     That you've been reduced to LYING about what I've posted already
proves you know you're wrong and are DESPERATE to distract from this
truth.

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

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

#519353

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:45:38 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

><jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message 
>news:bqcubc-s63.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look 
>>> at
>>> the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and
>>> Nukes."
>>
>> Here is your preponderance of the evidence
>
>You had better look up the definition of "preponderance" you cartoon physics 
>freak
>
>The amount of debris in the air afterwards is evidence of a nuke.
>

     A nuke would not have left 99.999% of the buildings. This proves
your claim of a nuke false.

>The small amount of debris where the Twin Towers once stood is evidence of a 
>nuke.

     There was a large amount of debris. Most of it in the sublevels
and bathtub.

>
>The EMP recorded by WCBS is evidence of a nuke.
>

     There was no EMP. You helped to prove the lack of an EMP.

>The heat that burned boots of first responders months later is also evidence 
>of a nuke.  Here see:
>

     No, it's evidence of heat. Contrary to what your mental defect(s)
force you to claim, items other than nukes can cause such heat.
Honest.

>First Responder - "We Were Nuked on 9-11"First Responder -
> "We Were Nuked on 9-11"
> http://www.henrymakow.com/joey_peeps.html
>
>And keep in mind Joey also states he saw airplane parts but he never saw the 
>way those parts were delivered because parts from CGIs had to be trucked in.
>

     He made no mention of parts being trucked in. Why are you LYING?
You have to know anyone who checks the link will see you're lying
about his claim.
     Get the professional help you have once again PROVED you need.

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

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

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web