Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #523890 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-29 22:45 -0400 |
| Last post | 2015-10-02 18:19 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 90 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-29 22:45 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 05:13 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-09-30 08:40 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 09:14 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:37 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 14:59 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 19:17 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:46 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 06:59 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-01 00:44 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 05:32 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 04:46 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 09:04 -0700
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:34 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 15:03 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-30 14:40 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 20:44 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 19:32 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-30 16:11 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 19:08 -0700
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 08:59 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 17:39 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-30 15:06 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-30 19:33 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 17:33 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-01 22:59 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-01 22:10 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-02 04:08 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 04:05 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-02 08:44 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-02 18:18 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 11:36 -0700
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 15:21 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-02 19:38 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-02 21:40 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 03:53 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-03 00:27 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 06:11 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-03 11:38 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 17:17 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 15:43 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-03 15:24 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 20:22 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-03 17:17 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:48 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-04 21:02 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 01:04 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 04:07 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-05 10:38 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 09:54 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 12:23 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 12:06 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 16:27 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 12:11 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 15:10 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 15:57 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 15:48 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 17:17 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 18:35 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-05 19:46 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-05 23:53 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 20:12 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-06 01:21 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-06 02:30 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-06 16:30 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-07 16:56 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-08 04:25 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 15:28 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-08 18:01 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 18:05 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-08 23:22 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-09 13:28 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-09 09:25 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:42 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-03 01:11 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-10-03 10:44 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 17:27 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-04 11:40 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-10-04 12:22 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-04 17:18 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-04 19:00 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-04 23:20 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-04 18:50 -0500
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 06:19 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 17:29 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 15:56 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-03 20:33 +0000
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-03 18:37 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-10-02 09:10 -0400
Re: Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-02 18:19 +0000
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-03 15:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mupb0n$hcd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524391 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 06:11:29 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 03:53:04 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 18:18:38 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 04:05:02 -0500, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 17:33:19 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Out! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He's pissed the virgins weren't and they were all ugly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> And so, Jimp proves again that he even refuses to LOOK at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kook youtube videos are not proof of anything, raving >>>>>>>>>>>>> lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sure they are,....they prove that you are afraid of your own >>>>>>>>>>>> shadow. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Babbling nonsense of a raving lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <snip lunatic babble> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So while you are flapping your gums. >>>>>>>>>> How about an actual comment on the video >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! >>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please see Message-ID: <k4tudc-1v2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> for >>>>>>>>> Jim's comment on the video. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Which does not address the issues of flying fast so close to the >>>>>>>> ground or why there weren't Wile E Coyote outlines of both >>>>>>>> engines in the wall of the Pentagon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is nothing special about flying fast close to the ground >>>>>>> other than, if one wants to stay alive, you must be vigilante for >>>>>>> things sticking up in the air. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To even suggest that an airplane moving at hundreds of miles per >>>>>>> hour is going to create some sort of outline in a sturdy building >>>>>>> wall is the height of ignorance. >>>>>> >>>>>> I didn't say the airplane, I said its two engines. Why do you think >>>>>> they would both go through one hole that was smaller than the >>>>>> distance between them? >>>>>> >>>>>> Supposedly the aircraft made a nice round hole after passing >>>>>> through a couple rings of the Pentagon. >>>>> >>>>> Why do you think the engines were not turned into flying debris >>>>> within milliseconds of impact lke the rest of the airplane? >>>> >>>> To touch on the topic of this group where I am seeing this: >>>> conservation of momentum. >>> >>> Momentum may be conserved, but physical integrity is not, and when >>> turbine engines come apart, the pieces tend to fly 90 degrees from >>> the axis of rotation. >> >> Those pieces would travel at subsonic velocities relative to the axis. >> The craft was moving relative to the wall at a speed that was not an >> insignificant fraction of the radial velocity of debris. The debris >> from an engine would have spread over a limited radial extent as the >> craft impacted the wall. > > Yeah, so? > > The engine would not be going through the wall like a bullet; more > like buckshot. > I love it. So now your story is that the alleged plane at the pentagon, turned to fragments before it hit anything. HOOO- BOY You should have stuck to mutant alligators eating it. That fairytale was more credible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-03 15:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l7ydndH5P7BRpI3LnZ2dnUU7-cmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524406 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mupb0n$hcd$1@dont-email.me... > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 06:11:29 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 03:53:04 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 18:18:38 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 04:05:02 -0500, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 17:33:19 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Out! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He's pissed the virgins weren't and they were all ugly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And so, Jimp proves again that he even refuses to LOOK at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kook youtube videos are not proof of anything, raving >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure they are,....they prove that you are afraid of your own >>>>>>>>>>>>> shadow. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Babbling nonsense of a raving lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <snip lunatic babble> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> So while you are flapping your gums. >>>>>>>>>>> How about an actual comment on the video >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please see Message-ID: <k4tudc-1v2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> for >>>>>>>>>> Jim's comment on the video. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which does not address the issues of flying fast so close to the >>>>>>>>> ground or why there weren't Wile E Coyote outlines of both >>>>>>>>> engines in the wall of the Pentagon. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is nothing special about flying fast close to the ground >>>>>>>> other than, if one wants to stay alive, you must be vigilante for >>>>>>>> things sticking up in the air. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To even suggest that an airplane moving at hundreds of miles per >>>>>>>> hour is going to create some sort of outline in a sturdy building >>>>>>>> wall is the height of ignorance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I didn't say the airplane, I said its two engines. Why do you think >>>>>>> they would both go through one hole that was smaller than the >>>>>>> distance between them? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Supposedly the aircraft made a nice round hole after passing >>>>>>> through a couple rings of the Pentagon. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why do you think the engines were not turned into flying debris >>>>>> within milliseconds of impact lke the rest of the airplane? >>>>> >>>>> To touch on the topic of this group where I am seeing this: >>>>> conservation of momentum. >>>> >>>> Momentum may be conserved, but physical integrity is not, and when >>>> turbine engines come apart, the pieces tend to fly 90 degrees from >>>> the axis of rotation. >>> >>> Those pieces would travel at subsonic velocities relative to the axis. >>> The craft was moving relative to the wall at a speed that was not an >>> insignificant fraction of the radial velocity of debris. The debris >>> from an engine would have spread over a limited radial extent as the >>> craft impacted the wall. >> >> Yeah, so? >> >> The engine would not be going through the wall like a bullet; more >> like buckshot. >> > > > > > > > I love it. > So now your story is that the alleged plane at the pentagon, turned to > fragments before it hit anything. > > HOOO- BOY You should have stuck to mutant alligators eating it. That > fairytale was more credible. LOL and they still can't figure out the clearly bogus stories mean there never was a 757 at the Pentagon. Oh, I can't forget to mention that the real attack of the Pentagon started when the clocks stopped about 6 minutes before the 9/11 Commission claims it started and that can not be blamed on elementary school clocks either. <G> Rocky "The Pentagon clock problem" http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x13460
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-03 20:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <61q5ec-s1q.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #524406 |
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > I love it. > So now your story is that the alleged plane at the pentagon, turned to > fragments before it hit anything. No, moron, it turned to fragments WHEN it hit something, raving, delusional lunatic. <snip remaining lunatic babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-03 17:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <yNednU22GIy5yY3LnZ2dnUU7-V2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524406 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mupb0n$hcd$1@dont-email.me... > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 06:11:29 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 03:53:04 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 18:18:38 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In sci.physics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 04:05:02 -0500, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 17:33:19 -0400, "Bast" >>>>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Out! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He's pissed the virgins weren't and they were all ugly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And so, Jimp proves again that he even refuses to LOOK at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kook youtube videos are not proof of anything, raving >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure they are,....they prove that you are afraid of your own >>>>>>>>>>>>> shadow. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Babbling nonsense of a raving lunatic. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <snip lunatic babble> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> So while you are flapping your gums. >>>>>>>>>>> How about an actual comment on the video >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please see Message-ID: <k4tudc-1v2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> for >>>>>>>>>> Jim's comment on the video. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which does not address the issues of flying fast so close to the >>>>>>>>> ground or why there weren't Wile E Coyote outlines of both >>>>>>>>> engines in the wall of the Pentagon. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is nothing special about flying fast close to the ground >>>>>>>> other than, if one wants to stay alive, you must be vigilante for >>>>>>>> things sticking up in the air. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To even suggest that an airplane moving at hundreds of miles per >>>>>>>> hour is going to create some sort of outline in a sturdy building >>>>>>>> wall is the height of ignorance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I didn't say the airplane, I said its two engines. Why do you think >>>>>>> they would both go through one hole that was smaller than the >>>>>>> distance between them? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Supposedly the aircraft made a nice round hole after passing >>>>>>> through a couple rings of the Pentagon. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why do you think the engines were not turned into flying debris >>>>>> within milliseconds of impact lke the rest of the airplane? >>>>> >>>>> To touch on the topic of this group where I am seeing this: >>>>> conservation of momentum. >>>> >>>> Momentum may be conserved, but physical integrity is not, and when >>>> turbine engines come apart, the pieces tend to fly 90 degrees from >>>> the axis of rotation. >>> >>> Those pieces would travel at subsonic velocities relative to the axis. >>> The craft was moving relative to the wall at a speed that was not an >>> insignificant fraction of the radial velocity of debris. The debris >>> from an engine would have spread over a limited radial extent as the >>> craft impacted the wall. >> >> Yeah, so? >> >> The engine would not be going through the wall like a bullet; more >> like buckshot. >> > > > > > > > I love it. > So now your story is that the alleged plane at the pentagon, turned to > fragments before it hit anything. > > HOOO- BOY You should have stuck to mutant alligators eating it. That > fairytale was more credible. LOL and you made a very good point. We will have to quit using the term "Official Fairytale" because with all the different stories we have seen on how now a very wide jet made it into a 16 foot hole where one engine disappeared and the other engine just shrunk we will now have to use the term Official Fairytales with an "s" because the fairytale about the Pentagon change from person to person. Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. Behind the Smoke Curtain - 2nd Edition (2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXBk8JqwFlw Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 11:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <abi21blougpmb229bdel7acfdv1q4t8kcs@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524441 |
On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was no 757 >that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started and clocks and >watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 Commission claims the >Pentagon attack started. Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which clock said 9:34?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 21:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <musi3h$si4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524511 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was >> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started and >> clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. > > Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after > the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of > commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of > them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which > clock said 9:34? Trick question. Since NO flights hit the pentagon. I can tell you when the missile hit though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 01:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <v3141b9ldj45ph2gf1orvdintprk6guc6g@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524588 |
On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was >>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started and >>> clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >> >> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which >> clock said 9:34? > > > > >Trick question. >Since NO flights hit the pentagon. Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >I can tell you when the missile hit though. What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 04:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524605 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was >>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>> >>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which >>> clock said 9:34? >> >> >> >> >> Trick question. >> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. > > Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. > > >> I can tell you when the missile hit though. > > What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. Another trick question. As an imaginary missile couldn't come from anywhere,.....except your 9/11 report, as they claim lots of imaginary stuff there Including your imaginary flights that all vanished without a trace, buildings that implode into and through themselves.....or were eaten by your mutant aligators.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 10:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.307c5558de7a70aa98c30d@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524614 |
In article <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... > > Sarah Ehrett wrote: > > On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: > >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was > >>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started > >>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 > >>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. > >>> > >>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after > >>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of > >>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of > >>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which > >>> clock said 9:34? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Trick question. > >> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. > > > > Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. > > > > > >> I can tell you when the missile hit though. > > > > What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. > > > > > > > > Another trick question. > As an imaginary missile couldn't come from anywhere,.....except your 9/11 > report, as they claim lots of imaginary stuff there > Including your imaginary flights that all vanished without a trace, > buildings that implode into and through themselves.....or were eaten by your > mutant aligators. Wow, I wonder what your social worker thinks of your ravings... -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 09:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <suadnSXOE67IEo_LnZ2dnUU7-LednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524645 |
"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message news:MPG.307c5558de7a70aa98c30d@news.giganews.com... > In article <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> > On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >> >>>> was >> >>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >> >>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >> >>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >> >>> >> >>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >> >>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >> >>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >> >>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me >> >>> which >> >>> clock said 9:34? Whatever clock you are talking about it would have to be 3 minutes before the alleged Flight 77 showed up because even the Internet says the alleged Flgiht 77 showed up at 9:37 which is 6 minutes after clocks and watches stopped working after the first Pentagon Attack. >> >> Trick question. >> >> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >> > >> > Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >> > >> > >> >> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >> > >> > What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Another trick question. >> As an imaginary missile couldn't come from anywhere,.....except your 9/11 >> report, as they claim lots of imaginary stuff there >> Including your imaginary flights that all vanished without a trace, >> buildings that implode into and through themselves.....or were eaten by >> your >> mutant aligators. > > Wow, I wonder what your social worker thinks of your ravings... Her comments are only over your head and you would know you have been lied to by the media if you ever tried to say which one of the many 9/11 fairytales that you really believe. <G> Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he posted a photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that the 9/11 Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. Considering that the Twin Towers fell at the same speed they would fall at if they were nuked, the Twin Towers left very little debris on the ground like they were nuked, what was left on the ground was consistent with a nuke that was placed under one side of the building and the fact that the original meaning of Ground Zero was where nukes were detonated I have to say that Nukes at Ground Zero passes the Duck Test with flying colors. And the fact that NIST was not allowed to address why the Twin Towers fell so fast or why they left so little on the ground only goes to prove that the only country to nuke another country also nukes themselves. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 12:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <muu82c$d5i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524648 |
Rocky wrote: > "BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message > news:MPG.307c5558de7a70aa98c30d@news.giganews.com... >> In article <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid >> says... >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >>>>>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>>>>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work >>>>>> after the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and >>>>>> out of commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if >>>>>> one of them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you >>>>>> tell me which >>>>>> clock said 9:34? > > > Whatever clock you are talking about it would have to be 3 minutes > before the alleged Flight 77 showed up because even the Internet says > the alleged Flgiht 77 showed up at 9:37 which is 6 minutes after clocks > and watches stopped working after the first Pentagon Attack. > > >>>>> Trick question. >>>>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >>>> >>>> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >>>> >>>> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be >>>> specific. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Another trick question. >>> As an imaginary missile couldn't come from anywhere,.....except your >>> 9/11 report, as they claim lots of imaginary stuff there >>> Including your imaginary flights that all vanished without a trace, >>> buildings that implode into and through themselves.....or were eaten >>> by your >>> mutant aligators. >> >> Wow, I wonder what your social worker thinks of your ravings... > > Her comments are only over your head and you would know you have been > lied to by the media if you ever tried to say which one of the many 9/11 > fairytales that you really believe. <G> > > Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he posted a > photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that the 9/11 > Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. > > Considering that the Twin Towers fell at the same speed they would fall > at if they were nuked, the Twin Towers left very little debris on the > ground like they were nuked, what was left on the ground was consistent > with a nuke that was placed under one side of the building and the fact > that the original meaning of Ground Zero was where nukes were detonated > I have to say that Nukes at Ground Zero passes the Duck Test with > flying colors. > And the fact that NIST was not allowed to address why the Twin Towers > fell so fast or why they left so little on the ground only goes to > prove that the only country to nuke another country also nukes > themselves. <G> > Rocky Do you really think I care what bdk hvac jimp sara etc., think of me ? I would be panicking if they actually ever were on my side, about anything. But that a random 9/11 post can make them all dance, is still somewhat amusing. ....Especially when they missed the ones I deliberately threw in that support the "official 9/11 fairytale". You can't ask for better proof that they have no idea what they are raving about, when they make themselves look like idiots to anyone else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 12:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <HMWdnYA99-GlM4_LnZ2dnUU7-LmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524668 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:muu82c$d5i$1@dont-email.me... > > > Rocky wrote: >> "BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message >> news:MPG.307c5558de7a70aa98c30d@news.giganews.com... >>> In article <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid >>> says... >>>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >>>>>>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>>>>>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work >>>>>>> after the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and >>>>>>> out of commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if >>>>>>> one of them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you >>>>>>> tell me which >>>>>>> clock said 9:34? >> >> >> Whatever clock you are talking about it would have to be 3 minutes >> before the alleged Flight 77 showed up because even the Internet says >> the alleged Flgiht 77 showed up at 9:37 which is 6 minutes after clocks >> and watches stopped working after the first Pentagon Attack. >> >> >>>>>> Trick question. >>>>>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >>>>> >>>>> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >>>>> >>>>> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be >>>>> specific. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Another trick question. >>>> As an imaginary missile couldn't come from anywhere,.....except your >>>> 9/11 report, as they claim lots of imaginary stuff there >>>> Including your imaginary flights that all vanished without a trace, >>>> buildings that implode into and through themselves.....or were eaten >>>> by your >>>> mutant aligators. >>> >>> Wow, I wonder what your social worker thinks of your ravings... >> >> Her comments are only over your head and you would know you have been >> lied to by the media if you ever tried to say which one of the many 9/11 >> fairytales that you really believe. <G> >> >> Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he posted a >> photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that the 9/11 >> Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. >> >> Considering that the Twin Towers fell at the same speed they would fall >> at if they were nuked, the Twin Towers left very little debris on the >> ground like they were nuked, what was left on the ground was consistent >> with a nuke that was placed under one side of the building and the fact >> that the original meaning of Ground Zero was where nukes were detonated >> I have to say that Nukes at Ground Zero passes the Duck Test with >> flying colors. >> And the fact that NIST was not allowed to address why the Twin Towers >> fell so fast or why they left so little on the ground only goes to >> prove that the only country to nuke another country also nukes >> themselves. <G> >> Rocky > > > > > > > Do you really think I care what bdk hvac jimp sara etc., think of me ? > > I would be panicking if they actually ever were on my side, about > anything. > But that a random 9/11 post can make them all dance, is still somewhat > amusing. > > ....Especially when they missed the ones I deliberately threw in that > support the "official 9/11 fairytale". > You can't ask for better proof that they have no idea what they are raving > about, when they make themselves look like idiots to anyone else. LOL Dig this: Michael posted this: "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " But that is not consistent with the government's story about the Pentagon because that alleged jet made a 16 foot hole instead and Michael is not consistent with Popular Mechanics either where PM stated it "flowed into the structure." ><http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911-myths-pentagon><Also see: ><http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/hufschmid/PentagonPlaneCrash.html><Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 16:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <muu8dh$2f2$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #524648 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he posted a >photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that the 9/11 >Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. Say what? Bast made the stupid claim that all the jets started out as shiny silver but turned black when hijacked, and I responded with a photo of the actual plane that struck the South Tower, which was always dark in color, just like in all the videos of it doing so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 12:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <xMydnYZJ5KLyMo_LnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524669 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:muu8dh$2f2$3@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he posted a >>photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that the 9/11 >>Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. > > Say what? Bast made the stupid claim that all the jets started out as > shiny silver but turned black when hijacked, and I responded with a photo > of the actual plane that struck the South Tower, which was always dark in > color, just like in all the videos of it doing so. But you never did a side by side comparison that would prove that the insignias on the CGIs also changed location after they were converted to CGIs. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 15:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <muuhp5$ojh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524685 |
Rocky wrote: > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:muu8dh$2f2$3@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>> Look what Bast did to Michael. She managed to fry him after he >>> posted a photo of a 767 but a real one and not one of the CGIs that >>> the 9/11 Hoaxsters used to ram the Twin Towers. >> >> Say what? Bast made the stupid claim that all the jets started out as >> shiny silver but turned black when hijacked, and I responded with a >> photo of the actual plane that struck the South Tower, which was >> always dark in color, just like in all the videos of it doing so. > > But you never did a side by side comparison that would prove that the > insignias on the CGIs also changed location after they were converted to > CGIs. <G> > > Rocky What a silly question. Of course all the insignias/logo's turned black in the 9/11 videos as well. Do you know how hard it is to superimpose fine detail like that on a moving CGI object, and not have it look jerky or just vanish completely between field scans if you don't get the layer sync timed right. It could look as silly as if a wing disappeared. Or if one wing/engine seemed a step in time ahead of the other, and throw off the symmetry of the "plane" http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ScreenHunter_1769-Jun.-05-11.22.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 15:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <01l51b56bhmr0em1eqcht6gbupokf50l4a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524648 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:54:19 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message >news:MPG.307c5558de7a70aa98c30d@news.giganews.com... >> In article <mutb0u$pd9$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> > On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was >>> >>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >>> >>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>> >>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>> >>> >>> >>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >>> >>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >>> >>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >>> >>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which >>> >>> clock said 9:34? > > >Whatever clock you are talking about it would have to be 3 minutes before >the alleged Flight 77 showed up because even the Internet says the alleged >Flgiht 77 showed up at 9:37 which is 6 minutes after clocks and watches >stopped working after the first Pentagon Attack. You're admitting the clocks in the Pentagon had different times on 9/11. Not all synchronized nice and neat. The time stamp on the video from the guard shack - what time is on that time stamp?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 15:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ipk51b9pp9vkgevlll917ktfhbs7pm4jv7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524614 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 04:07:49 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there was >>>>> no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack started >>>>> and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when the 9/11 >>>>> Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>> >>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >>>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >>>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >>>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me which >>>> clock said 9:34? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Trick question. >>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >> >> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >> >> >>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >> >> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. > >Another trick question. No. If you claim the use of a missile, which you still haven't identified, then What platform? How was it fired? Where was it fired from? Do you know the answers to these questions? Yes or no? [ snip Bast nonsense attempting to redirect away from her inability to answer questions.]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 17:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <muup6p$ot6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524735 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 04:07:49 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >>>>>> was no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack >>>>>> started and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when >>>>>> the 9/11 Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>>> >>>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >>>>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >>>>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >>>>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me >>>>> which clock said 9:34? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Trick question. >>>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >>> >>> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >>> >>> >>>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >>> >>> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. >> >> Another trick question. > > No. If you claim the use of a missile, which you still haven't > identified, then > > What platform? A green one > How was it fired? With a button > Where was it fired from? From behind the slurpee machine at the 7/11 > > Do you know the answers to these questions? Yes or no? Answers above
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 18:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <tlu51blmpvdngjjt4tf8s30f8ecs0nhufd@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524757 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:17:09 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 04:07:49 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >>>>>>> was no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack >>>>>>> started and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when >>>>>>> the 9/11 Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work after >>>>>> the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and out of >>>>>> commission. What time did all those clocks say? What if one of >>>>>> them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can you tell me >>>>>> which clock said 9:34? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Trick question. >>>>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >>>> >>>> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >>>> >>>> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be specific. >>> >>> Another trick question. >> >> No. If you claim the use of a missile, which you still haven't >> identified, then >> >> What platform? > >A green one > >> How was it fired? > >With a button > >> Where was it fired from? > > >From behind the slurpee machine at the 7/11 > > >> >> Do you know the answers to these questions? Yes or no? > > > >Answers above All this does is point out and reinforce the fact that you're lying about the events of 9/11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 19:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <muv1to$pcn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524773 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:17:09 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 04:07:49 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:17:12 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Where all the non-television set worshippers have to say is there >>>>>>>> was no 757 that struck the Pentagon at 9:31 am when the attack >>>>>>>> started and clocks and watches stopped working or at 9:37am when >>>>>>>> the 9/11 Commission claims the Pentagon attack started. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ya know, Roger Rocky, clocks in the Pentagon continued to work >>>>>>> after the attack. IOW's the entire building wasn't off line and >>>>>>> out of commission. What time did all those clocks say? What >>>>>>> if one of them said 9:34 when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Can >>>>>>> you tell me which clock said 9:34? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Trick question. >>>>>> Since NO flights hit the pentagon. >>>>> >>>>> Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I can tell you when the missile hit though. >>>>> >>>>> What platform did your imaginary missile come from? And be >>>>> specific. >>>> >>>> Another trick question. >>> >>> No. If you claim the use of a missile, which you still haven't >>> identified, then >>> >>> What platform? >> >> A green one >> >>> How was it fired? >> >> With a button >> >>> Where was it fired from? >> >> >> From behind the slurpee machine at the 7/11 >> >> >>> >>> Do you know the answers to these questions? Yes or no? >> >> >> >> Answers above > > All this does is point out and reinforce the fact that you're lying > about the events of 9/11. So ? You've seen this already ? How To Destroy a 9/11 Truther https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4yGICFsi8
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web