911 and the Demo Truth
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Intermediate Accounting 12th and 13th edition Kieso Weygandt
Next: JSH: Back to conic section parameterization result
From: knews4u2chew on 3 Oct 2009 13:55 On Oct 3, 7:11 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > Innews:216eb011-4375-45a9-a6e3-8b8c16716135(a)y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com, > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > > > > On Oct 2, 4:39 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >> Innews:6a329f66-529c-4225-b022-39c9f5eb0426(a)v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com, > >> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >>> On Oct 1, 2:35 pm, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >>>> Innews:852aa34a-add3-464d-abed-3068ff9b03db(a)g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com, > >>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 12:22 pm, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: > >>>>>> In article > >>>>>> <dd6e9f5e-86fd-4222-a0ae-dde189490...(a)d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, > > >>>>>> <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Oct 1, 8:13=A0am, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 7:58=A0am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> Daniel wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> =A0 And even there had been, it couldn't have melted > >>>>>>>>>>> the steel, > >>>>>>>>>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. > > >>>>>>>>> =A0 We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only > >>>>>>>>> thermite explains it. > > >>>>>>>> No steel melted, and it is physically impossible for > >>>>>>>> thermite to produce what happened on 9/11. Other than > >>>>>>>> that, Hankie, you're still batting 0.000. > > >>>>>>> How does one become such a liar? > > >>>>>> There is no eyewitness reports of molten steel on the pile > >>>>>> at WTC. > >>>>>> All the reports are second-hand. > > >>>>>> -- > >>>>> So who took the "first hand" evidence away? > >>>>> There are EYEWITNESS accounts of "red hot flowing molten" > >>>>> SOMETHING. > > >>>> Even if that fantasy were true, it's not proof that it was > >>>> steel. Moreover, you've never shown how any controlled > >>>> demolition has ever resulted in pools of molten steel. > > >>>>> The eyewitness couldn't cart the "evidence" away because it > >>>>> was CONTROLLED. > >>>>> ANY "true scientific" analysis is "IMPOSSIBLE" since the > >>>>> evidence "we" > >>>>> have is "in dispute." > > >>>> So you have no proof for your claims because it's your claim > >>>> that all the proof was stolen. Do you have any proof of THAT > >>>> claim? > > >>> Where is the building? > > >> In the middle of the largest city in the world. > > > Liar. > > It was hauled away under heavy guard. > > In the middle of one of the largest cities in the world, and then > over to various sites to which almost anyone had access. > > > > >>> Who has it? > > >> Did you expect it to be saved forever? > > > No answer noted. > > Yes, your non answer is noted. > > > > >>> Did it disappear? > > >> Not before it was thouroughly examined by anyone who wanted to > >> see it. > > > Liar. > > Prove it. > > > And the evidence of what was examined has been ignored. > > All the real evidence of what happened was thoroughly included in > the determination of the real conclusion. > > > So you and the report writers lie about it. > > Prove it. > > > > >>> If there is none does that mean the buildings never existed? > > >> It means that your imaginary thermite didn't exist. > > > Liar. > >http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf > > Nothing there is proof of anything at all. It's all just fantasies > and arm waving. > > > > >>> How convenient. > > >> So all of your proof is that THE truth is convenient? > > > The truth is the truth. > > Of which you seem to be incapable of recognizing. > > > You are in denial. > > Of fantasies. Your Mossad tactics. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS345&q=disinfo+tactics&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
From: Al Dykes on 3 Oct 2009 15:30 In article <e32b8bbc-63db-4a1e-aacb-8a37dcbcbabc(a)i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Oct 3, 7:11=A0am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >> Innews:216eb011-4375-45a9-a6e3-8b8c16716135(a)y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com, >> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >> >> >> > On Oct 2, 4:39 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >> >> Innews:6a329f66-529c-4225-b022-39c9f5eb0426(a)v37g2000prg.googlegroups.c= >om, >> >> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >> >>> On Oct 1, 2:35 pm, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >> >>>> Innews:852aa34a-add3-464d-abed-3068ff9b03db(a)g1g2000pra.googlegroups.= >com, >> >>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >> >>>>> On Oct 1, 12:22 pm, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >> >>>>>> In article >> >>>>>> <dd6e9f5e-86fd-4222-a0ae-dde189490...(a)d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>= >, >> >> >>>>>> <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Oct 1, 8:13=3DA0am, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 7:58=3DA0am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: >> >> >>>>>>>>> Daniel wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0 And even there had been, it couldn't have melted >> >>>>>>>>>>> the steel, >> >>>>>>>>>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. >> >> >>>>>>>>> =3DA0 We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only >> >>>>>>>>> thermite explains it. >> >> >>>>>>>> No steel melted, and it is physically impossible for >> >>>>>>>> thermite to produce what happened on 9/11. Other than >> >>>>>>>> that, Hankie, you're still batting 0.000. >> >> >>>>>>> How does one become such a liar? >> >> >>>>>> There is no eyewitness reports of molten steel on the pile >> >>>>>> at WTC. >> >>>>>> All the reports are second-hand. >> >> >>>>>> -- >> >>>>> So who took the "first hand" evidence away? >> >>>>> There are EYEWITNESS accounts of "red hot flowing molten" >> >>>>> SOMETHING. >> >> >>>> Even if that fantasy were true, it's not proof that it was >> >>>> steel. Moreover, you've never shown how any controlled >> >>>> demolition has ever resulted in pools of molten steel. >> >> >>>>> The eyewitness couldn't cart the "evidence" away because it >> >>>>> was CONTROLLED. >> >>>>> ANY "true scientific" analysis is "IMPOSSIBLE" since the >> >>>>> evidence "we" >> >>>>> have is "in dispute." >> >> >>>> So you have no proof for your claims because it's your claim >> >>>> that all the proof was stolen. Do you have any proof of THAT >> >>>> claim? >> >> >>> Where is the building? >> >> >> In the middle of the largest city in the world. >> >> > Liar. >> > It was hauled away under heavy guard. >> >> In the middle of one of the largest cities in the world, and then >> over to various sites to which almost anyone had access. >> >> >> >> >>> Who has it? >> >> >> Did you expect it to be saved forever? >> >> > No answer noted. >> >> Yes, your non answer is noted. >> >> >> >> >>> Did it disappear? >> >> >> Not before it was thouroughly examined by anyone who wanted to >> >> see it. >> >> > Liar. >> >> Prove it. >> >> > And the evidence of what was examined has been ignored. >> >> All the real evidence of what happened was thoroughly included in >> the determination of the real conclusion. >> >> > So you and the report writers lie about it. >> >> Prove it. >> >> >> >> >>> If there is none does that mean the buildings never existed? >> >> >> It means that your imaginary thermite didn't exist. >> >> > Liar. >> >http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf >> >> Nothing there =A0is proof of anything at all. =A0It's all just fantasies >> and arm waving. >> >> >> >> >>> How convenient. >> >> >> So all of your proof is that THE truth is convenient? >> >> > The truth is the truth. >> >> Of which you seem to be incapable of recognizing. >> >> > You are in denial. >> >> Of fantasies. > >Your Mossad tactics. >http://www.google.com/search?hl=3Den&rlz=3D1G1GGLQ_ENUS345&q=3Ddisinfo+tact= >ics&btnG=3DSearch&aq=3Df&oq=3D&aqi=3D BEEP BEEP BEEP k00k changes topics instead of addressing point BEEP BEEP BEEP -- Al Dykes News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
From: AllYou! on 3 Oct 2009 15:46 In news:e32b8bbc-63db-4a1e-aacb-8a37dcbcbabc(a)i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com, knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> mused: > On Oct 3, 7:11 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >> Innews:216eb011-4375-45a9-a6e3-8b8c16716135(a)y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com, >> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >> >> >>> On Oct 2, 4:39 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >>>> Innews:6a329f66-529c-4225-b022-39c9f5eb0426(a)v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com, >>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >>>>> On Oct 1, 2:35 pm, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >>>>>> Innews:852aa34a-add3-464d-abed-3068ff9b03db(a)g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com, >>>>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >>>>>>> On Oct 1, 12:22 pm, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>> <dd6e9f5e-86fd-4222-a0ae-dde189490...(a)d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, >> >>>>>>>> <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 8:13=A0am, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 7:58=A0am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> Daniel wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> =A0 And even there had been, it couldn't have melted >>>>>>>>>>>>> the steel, >>>>>>>>>>>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. >> >>>>>>>>>>> =A0 We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only >>>>>>>>>>> thermite explains it. >> >>>>>>>>>> No steel melted, and it is physically impossible for >>>>>>>>>> thermite to produce what happened on 9/11. Other than >>>>>>>>>> that, Hankie, you're still batting 0.000. >> >>>>>>>>> How does one become such a liar? >> >>>>>>>> There is no eyewitness reports of molten steel on the pile >>>>>>>> at WTC. >>>>>>>> All the reports are second-hand. >> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> So who took the "first hand" evidence away? >>>>>>> There are EYEWITNESS accounts of "red hot flowing molten" >>>>>>> SOMETHING. >> >>>>>> Even if that fantasy were true, it's not proof that it was >>>>>> steel. Moreover, you've never shown how any controlled >>>>>> demolition has ever resulted in pools of molten steel. >> >>>>>>> The eyewitness couldn't cart the "evidence" away because it >>>>>>> was CONTROLLED. >>>>>>> ANY "true scientific" analysis is "IMPOSSIBLE" since the >>>>>>> evidence "we" >>>>>>> have is "in dispute." >> >>>>>> So you have no proof for your claims because it's your claim >>>>>> that all the proof was stolen. Do you have any proof of THAT >>>>>> claim? >> >>>>> Where is the building? >> >>>> In the middle of the largest city in the world. >> >>> Liar. >>> It was hauled away under heavy guard. >> >> In the middle of one of the largest cities in the world, and >> then over to various sites to which almost anyone had access. >> >> >> >>>>> Who has it? >> >>>> Did you expect it to be saved forever? >> >>> No answer noted. >> >> Yes, your non answer is noted. >> >> >> >>>>> Did it disappear? >> >>>> Not before it was thouroughly examined by anyone who wanted to >>>> see it. >> >>> Liar. >> >> Prove it. >> >>> And the evidence of what was examined has been ignored. >> >> All the real evidence of what happened was thoroughly included >> in the determination of the real conclusion. >> >>> So you and the report writers lie about it. >> >> Prove it. >> >> >> >>>>> If there is none does that mean the buildings never existed? >> >>>> It means that your imaginary thermite didn't exist. >> >>> Liar. >>> http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf >> >> Nothing there is proof of anything at all. It's all just >> fantasies and arm waving. >> >> >> >>>>> How convenient. >> >>>> So all of your proof is that THE truth is convenient? >> >>> The truth is the truth. >> >> Of which you seem to be incapable of recognizing. >> >>> You are in denial. >> >> Of fantasies. > > Your Mossad tactics. > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS345&q=disinfo+tactics&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi= So THAT's where you learned your tactics. got it.
From: Iarnrod on 3 Oct 2009 17:04 On Oct 3, 1:46 pm, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > Innews:e32b8bbc-63db-4a1e-aacb-8a37dcbcbabc(a)i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com, > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > > > > On Oct 3, 7:11 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >> Innews:216eb011-4375-45a9-a6e3-8b8c16716135(a)y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com, > >> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >>> On Oct 2, 4:39 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >>>> Innews:6a329f66-529c-4225-b022-39c9f5eb0426(a)v37g2000prg.googlegroups..com, > >>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2:35 pm, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > >>>>>> Innews:852aa34a-add3-464d-abed-3068ff9b03db(a)g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com, > >>>>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >>>>>>> On Oct 1, 12:22 pm, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: > >>>>>>>> In article > >>>>>>>> <dd6e9f5e-86fd-4222-a0ae-dde189490...(a)d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, > > >>>>>>>> <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 8:13=A0am, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 7:58=A0am, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> Daniel wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 23, 3:49 pm, Henry <9-11tr...(a)experts.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> =A0 And even there had been, it couldn't have melted > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the steel, > >>>>>>>>>>>> It didn't melt the steel, and it didn't have to. > > >>>>>>>>>>> =A0 We know the fires didn't melt the steel. Only > >>>>>>>>>>> thermite explains it. > > >>>>>>>>>> No steel melted, and it is physically impossible for > >>>>>>>>>> thermite to produce what happened on 9/11. Other than > >>>>>>>>>> that, Hankie, you're still batting 0.000. > > >>>>>>>>> How does one become such a liar? > > >>>>>>>> There is no eyewitness reports of molten steel on the pile > >>>>>>>> at WTC. > >>>>>>>> All the reports are second-hand. > > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> So who took the "first hand" evidence away? > >>>>>>> There are EYEWITNESS accounts of "red hot flowing molten" > >>>>>>> SOMETHING. > > >>>>>> Even if that fantasy were true, it's not proof that it was > >>>>>> steel. Moreover, you've never shown how any controlled > >>>>>> demolition has ever resulted in pools of molten steel. > > >>>>>>> The eyewitness couldn't cart the "evidence" away because it > >>>>>>> was CONTROLLED. > >>>>>>> ANY "true scientific" analysis is "IMPOSSIBLE" since the > >>>>>>> evidence "we" > >>>>>>> have is "in dispute." > > >>>>>> So you have no proof for your claims because it's your claim > >>>>>> that all the proof was stolen. Do you have any proof of THAT > >>>>>> claim? > > >>>>> Where is the building? > > >>>> In the middle of the largest city in the world. > > >>> Liar. > >>> It was hauled away under heavy guard. > > >> In the middle of one of the largest cities in the world, and > >> then over to various sites to which almost anyone had access. > > >>>>> Who has it? > > >>>> Did you expect it to be saved forever? > > >>> No answer noted. > > >> Yes, your non answer is noted. > > >>>>> Did it disappear? > > >>>> Not before it was thouroughly examined by anyone who wanted to > >>>> see it. > > >>> Liar. > > >> Prove it. > > >>> And the evidence of what was examined has been ignored. > > >> All the real evidence of what happened was thoroughly included > >> in the determination of the real conclusion. > > >>> So you and the report writers lie about it. > > >> Prove it. > > >>>>> If there is none does that mean the buildings never existed? > > >>>> It means that your imaginary thermite didn't exist. > > >>> Liar. > >>>http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf > > >> Nothing there is proof of anything at all. It's all just > >> fantasies and arm waving. > > >>>>> How convenient. > > >>>> So all of your proof is that THE truth is convenient? > > >>> The truth is the truth. > > >> Of which you seem to be incapable of recognizing. > > >>> You are in denial. > > >> Of fantasies. > > > Your Mossad tactics. > >http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS345&q=disinfo+tact... > > So THAT's where you learned your tactics. got it. He's finally exposing himself for the anti-semitic kooker he is. It all comes down to the evil joooooooooos for these asswipes.
From: PV on 3 Oct 2009 18:06
knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com writes: >Where is the building? It was destroyed, fucknugget. >Where is the rubble? Cleaned up. Why wouldn't it have been? >Who has it? You're soaking in it. Or perhaps shaving with it. >Did it disappear? Yes, space aliens beamed it up. >If there is none does that mean the buildings never existed? >How convenient. If there is not what? What is convenient? * -- * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. |