|
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 16, 10:04*am, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 15, 12:06 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 14, 12:59 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 13, 9:42 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:28:50 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 12, 3:19 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:44:53 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova : On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 10, 9:09 pm, John Smith wrote: On 6/10/2011 9:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote: ... You are way off topic. When do you plan on fixing that? Off topic? Man, that vile creature is off planet and outta' its' gourd! Don't even distract it from things of real concern! ROFLOL! Then tell us why the history as told by William Mook is wrong. Who's William Mook? And why should anyone care? [Crickets...] So, FUD-masters and ZNR/GOP rednecks are not allowed to speak of anything investigative by William Mook. Message received loud and clear. The message you received is a product of your imagination. Asking for information isn't a refusal to allow posting of the information requested; in fact, it's the opposite. Language isn't your first language, is it? And your refusal to provide the requested information, along with definitions of your personal fabrications "FUD" and "ZNR", is indeed noted. Again. Silly boy. You must have flunked out of FUD-master 101. Obviously you are still very afraid of what William Mook and a few others have uncovered. Obviously you imagine I know who that is and care what he thinks. Too bad I don't. I see that you still quote dead people McCoy is dead? Cite? [Crickets...] Well? Is McCoy dead? If not (or if, as is more likely, you don't know) what, if anything other than stupidity, was your comment intended to convey? , perhaps because they can't refuse to support your perverted closed mindset. At least Hitler appreciated redneck folks like yourself. I see that you still refuse to provide any requested information, and prefer to post nonsense, made-up acronyms and personal attacks using non-standard definitions. Your choice if you want to look like an idiot; HANL. If I posted a link... ...it would improve your position regarding the honesty of your claims (but not, of course, regarding their validity; only the content of the cited link can do that). snip irrelevancies You've never demonstrated any such capability of accepting anything that isn't mainstream brown-nose peer approved by your good buddies. In other words, everything has to be status-quo NASA or otherwise government approved, or else it doesn't matter. *So, what's your real point or objective? My "real point or objective" is exactly what I stated - a request for information from you, information which you refuse to provide. Have you ever published or officially supported anything original that wasn't already proven and/or accepted by others? Yep. In fact, before I retired I developed several things that weren't "already proven and/or accepted by others"; that's what engineering is all about. And I'm still waiting for that info from you. -- Bob C. "Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." * * * * * * * * * * * * * - McNameless In other words, you cant admit to anything that was truly yours. |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 17, 2:29*pm, GovShill wrote:
Has Herc been posting lately? Yeah. New ID though. Yup. Over in sci.skeptic will his usual BS claim... |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:23:41 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 16, 10:04*am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 15, 12:06 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 14, 12:59 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 13, 9:42 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:28:50 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 12, 3:19 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:44:53 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova : On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 10, 9:09 pm, John Smith wrote: On 6/10/2011 9:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote: ... You are way off topic. When do you plan on fixing that? Off topic? Man, that vile creature is off planet and outta' its' gourd! Don't even distract it from things of real concern! ROFLOL! Then tell us why the history as told by William Mook is wrong. Who's William Mook? And why should anyone care? [Crickets...] So, FUD-masters and ZNR/GOP rednecks are not allowed to speak of anything investigative by William Mook. Message received loud and clear. The message you received is a product of your imagination. Asking for information isn't a refusal to allow posting of the information requested; in fact, it's the opposite. Language isn't your first language, is it? And your refusal to provide the requested information, along with definitions of your personal fabrications "FUD" and "ZNR", is indeed noted. Again. Silly boy. You must have flunked out of FUD-master 101. Obviously you are still very afraid of what William Mook and a few others have uncovered. Obviously you imagine I know who that is and care what he thinks. Too bad I don't. I see that you still quote dead people McCoy is dead? Cite? [Crickets...] Well? Is McCoy dead? If not (or if, as is more likely, you don't know) what, if anything other than stupidity, was your comment intended to convey? , perhaps because they can't refuse to support your perverted closed mindset. At least Hitler appreciated redneck folks like yourself. I see that you still refuse to provide any requested information, and prefer to post nonsense, made-up acronyms and personal attacks using non-standard definitions. Your choice if you want to look like an idiot; HANL. If I posted a link... ...it would improve your position regarding the honesty of your claims (but not, of course, regarding their validity; only the content of the cited link can do that). snip irrelevancies You've never demonstrated any such capability of accepting anything that isn't mainstream brown-nose peer approved by your good buddies. In other words, everything has to be status-quo NASA or otherwise government approved, or else it doesn't matter. *So, what's your real point or objective? My "real point or objective" is exactly what I stated - a request for information from you, information which you refuse to provide. Have you ever published or officially supported anything original that wasn't already proven and/or accepted by others? Yep. In fact, before I retired I developed several things that weren't "already proven and/or accepted by others"; that's what engineering is all about. And I'm still waiting for that info from you. In other words, you cant admit to anything that was truly yours. Missed the part about "before I retired I developed several things that weren't 'already proven and/or accepted by others'; that's what engineering is all about.", did you? No surprise; you seem to ignore anything which doesn't support your personal agenda; you're identical to many other loons in this way. And I'm still waiting for those definitions you refuse to provide: "FUD" or "FUD-master" "ZNR" "redneck" (your personal definition, that is; I know the actual meaning). Have fun tapdancing around them again. -- Bob C. "Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." - McNameless |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 17, 9:21*am, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:23:41 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 16, 10:04 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 15, 12:06 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 14, 12:59 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 13, 9:42 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:28:50 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 12, 3:19 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:44:53 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova : On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 10, 9:09 pm, John Smith wrote: On 6/10/2011 9:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote: ... You are way off topic. When do you plan on fixing that? Off topic? Man, that vile creature is off planet and outta' its' gourd! Don't even distract it from things of real concern! ROFLOL! Then tell us why the history as told by William Mook is wrong. Who's William Mook? And why should anyone care? [Crickets...] So, FUD-masters and ZNR/GOP rednecks are not allowed to speak of anything investigative by William Mook. Message received loud and clear. The message you received is a product of your imagination. Asking for information isn't a refusal to allow posting of the information requested; in fact, it's the opposite. Language isn't your first language, is it? And your refusal to provide the requested information, along with definitions of your personal fabrications "FUD" and "ZNR", is indeed noted. Again. Silly boy. You must have flunked out of FUD-master 101. Obviously you are still very afraid of what William Mook and a few others have uncovered. Obviously you imagine I know who that is and care what he thinks. Too bad I don't. I see that you still quote dead people McCoy is dead? Cite? [Crickets...] Well? Is McCoy dead? If not (or if, as is more likely, you don't know) what, if anything other than stupidity, was your comment intended to convey? , perhaps because they can't refuse to support your perverted closed mindset. At least Hitler appreciated redneck folks like yourself. I see that you still refuse to provide any requested information, and prefer to post nonsense, made-up acronyms and personal attacks using non-standard definitions. Your choice if you want to look like an idiot; HANL. If I posted a link... ...it would improve your position regarding the honesty of your claims (but not, of course, regarding their validity; only the content of the cited link can do that). snip irrelevancies You've never demonstrated any such capability of accepting anything that isn't mainstream brown-nose peer approved by your good buddies. In other words, everything has to be status-quo NASA or otherwise government approved, or else it doesn't matter. So, what's your real point or objective? My "real point or objective" is exactly what I stated - a request for information from you, information which you refuse to provide. Have you ever published or officially supported anything original that wasn't already proven and/or accepted by others? Yep. In fact, before I retired I developed several things that weren't "already proven and/or accepted by others"; that's what engineering is all about. And I'm still waiting for that info from you. In other words, you cant admit to anything that was truly yours. Missed the part about "before I retired I developed several things that weren't 'already proven and/or accepted by others'; that's what engineering is all about.", did you? No surprise; you seem to ignore anything which doesn't support your personal agenda; you're identical to many other loons in this way. And I'm still waiting for those definitions you refuse to provide: "FUD" or "FUD-master" "ZNR" "redneck" (your personal definition, that is; I know the actual meaning). Have fun tapdancing around them again. -- Bob C. "Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." * * * * * * * * * * * * * - McNameless So you still can't admit to anything that was all you, or even tell us the date and place of whatever you were specifically any part of. Working for the government or even privet industry that essentially provides everything and otherwise pays for everything and thereby owns all the rights to everything you've ever accomplished is not hardly the same thing as accomplishing anything on your own, now is it. http://www.wanttoknow.info/ http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 18, 5:24*am, Brad Guth wrote:
So you still can't admit to anything that was all you, or even tell us the date and place of whatever you were specifically any part of. Working for the government or even privet industry that essentially provides everything and otherwise pays for everything and thereby owns all the rights to everything you've ever accomplished is not hardly the same thing as accomplishing anything on your own, now is it. Decoder ring time. I noticed the word privet in there. Is he 'hedging' ??? |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 17, 1:16*pm, george wrote:
On Jun 18, 5:24*am, Brad Guth wrote: So you still can't admit to anything that was all you, or even tell us the date and place of whatever you were specifically any part of. Working for the government or even privet industry that essentially provides everything and otherwise pays for everything and thereby owns all the rights to everything you've ever accomplished is not hardly the same thing as accomplishing anything on your own, now is it. Decoder ring time. I noticed the word privet in there. Is he 'hedging' ??? You silly FUD-masters are always having such problems decoding our dyslexic and other skillfully encrypted stuff. That must be why MI6 and Qinetiq have to tell you brown-nosed clowns exactly how to act/ react, what to believe, how to think and of course what to say. "privet" is a secret code word to have you FUD-masters executed on site. Sorry about that, it just slipped out. http://www.wanttoknow.info/ http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:24:01 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 17, 9:21*am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:23:41 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 16, 10:04 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 15, 12:06 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 14, 12:59 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 13, 9:42 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:28:50 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 12, 3:19 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:44:53 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova : On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 10, 9:09 pm, John Smith wrote: On 6/10/2011 9:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote: ... You are way off topic. When do you plan on fixing that? Off topic? Man, that vile creature is off planet and outta' its' gourd! Don't even distract it from things of real concern! ROFLOL! Then tell us why the history as told by William Mook is wrong. Who's William Mook? And why should anyone care? [Crickets...] So, FUD-masters and ZNR/GOP rednecks are not allowed to speak of anything investigative by William Mook. Message received loud and clear. The message you received is a product of your imagination. Asking for information isn't a refusal to allow posting of the information requested; in fact, it's the opposite. Language isn't your first language, is it? And your refusal to provide the requested information, along with definitions of your personal fabrications "FUD" and "ZNR", is indeed noted. Again. Silly boy. You must have flunked out of FUD-master 101. Obviously you are still very afraid of what William Mook and a few others have uncovered. Obviously you imagine I know who that is and care what he thinks. Too bad I don't. I see that you still quote dead people McCoy is dead? Cite? [Crickets...] Well? Is McCoy dead? If not (or if, as is more likely, you don't know) what, if anything other than stupidity, was your comment intended to convey? , perhaps because they can't refuse to support your perverted closed mindset. At least Hitler appreciated redneck folks like yourself. I see that you still refuse to provide any requested information, and prefer to post nonsense, made-up acronyms and personal attacks using non-standard definitions. Your choice if you want to look like an idiot; HANL. If I posted a link... ...it would improve your position regarding the honesty of your claims (but not, of course, regarding their validity; only the content of the cited link can do that). snip irrelevancies You've never demonstrated any such capability of accepting anything that isn't mainstream brown-nose peer approved by your good buddies. In other words, everything has to be status-quo NASA or otherwise government approved, or else it doesn't matter. So, what's your real point or objective? My "real point or objective" is exactly what I stated - a request for information from you, information which you refuse to provide. Have you ever published or officially supported anything original that wasn't already proven and/or accepted by others? Yep. In fact, before I retired I developed several things that weren't "already proven and/or accepted by others"; that's what engineering is all about. And I'm still waiting for that info from you. In other words, you cant admit to anything that was truly yours. Missed the part about "before I retired I developed several things that weren't 'already proven and/or accepted by others'; that's what engineering is all about.", did you? No surprise; you seem to ignore anything which doesn't support your personal agenda; you're identical to many other loons in this way. And I'm still waiting for those definitions you refuse to provide: "FUD" or "FUD-master" "ZNR" "redneck" (your personal definition, that is; I know the actual meaning). Have fun tapdancing around them again. So you still can't admit to anything that was all you, or even tell us the date and place of whatever you were specifically any part of. Since it was involved with technical information about testing of electronic systems, you wouldn't be able to follow the details anyway, so I won't waste my time. Working for the government or even privet industry Hedge funds? that essentially provides everything and otherwise pays for everything and thereby owns all the rights to everything you've ever accomplished is not hardly the same thing as accomplishing anything on your own, now is it. Ah, additional tapdancing and goalpost sprints. HANL. -- Bob C. "Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." - McNameless |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 18, 10:38*am, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:24:01 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 17, 9:21 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:23:41 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 16, 10:04 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:46:10 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 15, 12:06 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 14, 12:59 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 13, 9:42 am, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:28:50 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 12, 3:19 pm, Bob Casanova wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:44:53 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova : On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : On Jun 10, 9:09 pm, John Smith wrote: On 6/10/2011 9:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote: ... You are way off topic. When do you plan on fixing that? Off topic? Man, that vile creature is off planet and outta' its' gourd! Don't even distract it from things of real concern! ROFLOL! Then tell us why the history as told by William Mook is wrong. Who's William Mook? And why should anyone care? [Crickets...] So, FUD-masters and ZNR/GOP rednecks are not allowed to speak of anything investigative by William Mook. Message received loud and clear. The message you received is a product of your imagination. Asking for information isn't a refusal to allow posting of the information requested; in fact, it's the opposite. Language isn't your first language, is it? And your refusal to provide the requested information, along with definitions of your personal fabrications "FUD" and "ZNR", is indeed noted. Again. Silly boy. You must have flunked out of FUD-master 101. Obviously you are still very afraid of what William Mook and a few others have uncovered. Obviously you imagine I know who that is and care what he thinks. Too bad I don't. I see that you still quote dead people McCoy is dead? Cite? [Crickets...] Well? Is McCoy dead? If not (or if, as is more likely, you don't know) what, if anything other than stupidity, was your comment intended to convey? , perhaps because they can't refuse to support your perverted closed mindset. At least Hitler appreciated redneck folks like yourself. I see that you still refuse to provide any requested information, and prefer to post nonsense, made-up acronyms and personal attacks using non-standard definitions. Your choice if you want to look like an idiot; HANL. If I posted a link... ...it would improve your position regarding the honesty of your claims (but not, of course, regarding their validity; only the content of the cited link can do that). snip irrelevancies You've never demonstrated any such capability of accepting anything that isn't mainstream brown-nose peer approved by your good buddies. In other words, everything has to be status-quo NASA or otherwise government approved, or else it doesn't matter. So, what's your real point or objective? My "real point or objective" is exactly what I stated - a request for information from you, information which you refuse to provide. Have you ever published or officially supported anything original that wasn't already proven and/or accepted by others? Yep. In fact, before I retired I developed several things that weren't "already proven and/or accepted by others"; that's what engineering is all about. And I'm still waiting for that info from you. In other words, you cant admit to anything that was truly yours. Missed the part about "before I retired I developed several things that weren't 'already proven and/or accepted by others'; that's what engineering is all about.", did you? No surprise; you seem to ignore anything which doesn't support your personal agenda; you're identical to many other loons in this way. And I'm still waiting for those definitions you refuse to provide: "FUD" or "FUD-master" "ZNR" "redneck" (your personal definition, that is; I know the actual meaning). Have fun tapdancing around them again. So you still can't admit to anything that was all you, or even tell us the date and place of whatever you were specifically any part of. Since it was involved with technical information about testing of electronic systems, you wouldn't be able to follow the details anyway, so I won't waste my time. Working for the government or even privet industry Hedge funds? that essentially provides everything and otherwise pays for everything and thereby owns all the rights to everything you've ever accomplished is not hardly the same thing as accomplishing anything on your own, now is it. Ah, additional tapdancing and goalpost sprints. HANL. -- Bob C. "Evidence confirming an observation is evidence that the observation is wrong." * * * * * * * * * * * * * - McNameless Yes, as per usual corrupt hedge funds fits your closed mindset that's clearly pro-Jewish regardless of the mostly negative consequences. You are in FUD-master heaven, which by the way Jews do not believe in because there's no such thing as any Jewish or Zionist hell, so everyone gets to move on up the ladder regardless of their actions, but only as long as they are Jewish and/or an essential minion that works on their behalf. Obviously you believe that each and every government agency and their many thousand contractors always tell us the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and otherwise at the very least Hitler would have to agree with you. http://www.wanttoknow.info/ http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 10:38:10 -0700, Bob Casanova
wrote: On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:24:01 -0700 (PDT), the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Brad Guth : Working for the government or even privet industry Hedge funds? Gotten by selling grass? -- "Integrity has no need for rules" - Albert Camus |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com