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

Groups > alt.astronomy > #274483

Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE?

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Tony Dragon, in <news:mrvvaf$uc0$2@dont-email.me> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On 30/08/2015 17:19, Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking
> failed truck driver and deadly menace behind the wheel) wrote:

>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:mrv6qa$lok$3@dont-email.me...

>>> On 30/08/2015 13:37, Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking
>>> failed truck driver and deadly menace behind the wheel)  wrote:

>>>> PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE keep a list of your exhibits because T-annoy claimed
>>>> he gave me evidence once that he would not repost and he is a big liar too.

>>> I would be interested in your explanation of the above.

>>>> One of the sites I used to prove that there were 3 exit holes at the
>>>> Pentagon was changed after they realized it was inconsistent with the
>>>> story they were trying to tell.  In other words some evidence that we were told
>>>> lie after lie after lie about Ground Zero is drying up.

>>> So yet again your evidence 'disappears' how convenient.

>> Not all of it disappears but the photo that showed 3 exit holes in the
>> Pentagon did.

> The amount of time that your evidence 'disappears' is strange, if any 
> other person had that trouble they would make back ups.

There were three exit holes, but then, only the outer wall of the
Pentagon was fortified... the area the plane struck was open office
area with no walls to stop the debris until it punched those holes
through the inner wall, which is easily explained by plane parts and
chunks of building careening off the vertical support beams, changing
the angle at which they were flying.

For all the evidence one needs to completely squash this kook's
utterly impossible conspiracy theory, see:
<http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.com/2012/09/american-airlines-77-hit-pentagon.html>
"Further down take note of the construction of the Pentagon. Only the
outer wall was constructed with reinforcing. The C-Ring "punch out"
wall was plain brick and nothing more. Also note that the area AAL77
impacted; the bottom and second floors, is open space the entire
distance between the outer E-Ring and the inner C-Ring with no
dividing walls lower than the third floor. It can therefore clearly be
seen that AAL77 did not penetrate 6 reinforced walls, but only 1; the
outer most wall."

But Roger Wittekind will run from that proof that he's a
paranoid-delusional schizophrenic off his meds, likely by k'laming
that the site is done by a paid disinformation agent of the
conspirators.

That's part and parcel of his mental illness, after all.

<snicker>

-- 

Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East
Moline, IL.

Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in
trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain
becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate
(which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes
larger and larger leaps of illogic.

For instance:
=============================
A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video
*you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they
must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you
believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed
over the concrete and walked away for 33 years.

B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the
satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and
the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but
kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil
composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never
mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today,
let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your
kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at
some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the
nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was
"dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years".

C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic
replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally
radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon,
which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken
brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the
triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to
change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped
the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an
entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service
personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back
into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words).

D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your
original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite
uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you
k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an
EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs,
so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in
rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke
detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out
electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no
nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the
vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC.

E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried
deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up
your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but
somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that
the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that
miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding,
in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that
your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of
*solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL

F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your
broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to
underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first
because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but
for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to
your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite
uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time
the buildings fell, which is pretty much where we started. So I've
proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of
sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL

G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your
broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a
desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility...
saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath
the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode,
where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive
metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the
vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why
did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not
just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the
WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP")
and the shaking and collapse of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole
seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL

H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID:
<e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of
widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're
off your meds, Mike.

IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from
reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And
the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little
tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very
best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot
with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even
worked up a sweat yet.
=============================

Kook. LOL

Back to alt.astronomy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 07:37 -0500
  Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-08-30 09:12 -0400
  Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-30 16:19 +0100
    Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 11:19 -0500
      Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-30 23:17 +0100
        Re: Ping: Kent Wills: WHERE THE FCUK IS YOUR EVIDENCE? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 03:37 +0200

csiph-web