|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#401
June 7th 04, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On 6 Jun 2004 20:44:45 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss) wrote: **THIS ought to get everyone going. Ready?** ...And, with this statement, she admits exactly why s/he's been posting this bull**** from Day One: She's just masturbating her ego by ****ing all of us off. OM Nope, just finding the humor in the childishness in here. Some of the posters are intelligent; others are like watching six-year-olds on the playground. As for masturbating, I'll leave that to you. LaDonna 
|
|
#402
June 7th 04, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 18:39:35 -0500, Pat Flannery wrote: OM wrote: "...The lurkers support me in e-mail!" does not count, you dink. Be careful OM...you're using soft language. ...The word I *want* to use in order to be totally accurate is the one that I promised Mary I wouldn't use again in her presence out of respect for her. I made a promise, and I intend to keep it. However, since it's obvious she's "scott's" mistress, my question is that is she doing him for free, or does she charge for it? OM OK, I'm just going to ask. I can't help myself. You spend so much time babbling on about what you believe is Scott's sex life, here's my question: Are you wanting him for yourself?
|
|
#404
June 7th 04, 02:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:58:07 -0400, Kevin Willoughby
wrote: Yep. Her harshest critic, in terms of classical scientific discourse, is Daniel Maxson, who is continuously trying to interject facts into this discussion. LsDonna could do worse than to ignore everyone (including Derek and me) except Daniel. ....Who, being the ******* son of one of the worst trolls to ever plague the sci.space hierarchy, is about as trustable as an FDA approved for casual drinking lable on a bottle of Zyklon-B. I find it rather too odd a coincedence that the minute this skank starts her crap, Denial pops up after months of silence to suddenly play Defender of the Truth. Wolves may wear sheep's clothing, but lepers don't change their scabs. OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr
|
|
#405
June 7th 04, 02:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 07 Jun 2004 04:56:18 GMT, rk
wrote: It is your choice whether or not to answer questions or to spend your time on other things. See Derek's comments. ....Rich, would you compile all seven questions so far, and post them by themselves, without any quoted text, and with a subject header that she'll be able to distinguish from the rest? That way, if she misses them this time, it's obvious she's evading in order to prevent from having to admit she's a lying trailer troll. OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr
|
|
#406
June 7th 04, 02:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Charleston" wrote in message news:Z9Mwc.31391$lL1.25983@fed1read03...
"LaDonna Wyss" wrote: Doug... wrote: In article , says... "LaDonna Wyss" wrote: Unfortunately, as I've said before many times, Scott does not explain things well. He deals in sound bites, and I'm afraid it has left a VERY wrong impression. If he dealt in verifiable evidence, he'd accomplish more. Perhaps you can assist him by providing verifiable evidence which you've uncovered. Scott, we've been through this with scott and his supporters in the past. The fact is that scott has never been able to support his positions with factual statements that stand scrutiny (witness how the Hill Report burst his bubble so thoroughly), and when he's pressed to back up his statements with verifications, he descends into 6-year-old name-calling and emotional appeals. It's just not worth the effort. And note that, if we had all just ignored scott's latest "got-religion" convert, we wouldn't be seeing this newsgroup hijacked yet again to pump up scott grissom's ****ing ego and fuel his fantasies. Doug Apparently it is far easier for some in here to believe people get brainwashed by Scott than to think someone actually took at the fire for him/her self and decided something was up. For people to berate Scott the way they do, and then proceed to give him that much power is rather incongruous, don't you think? There are people here on this group today who went out on a limb to try and give Scott a fair chance to present his argument in a scientific forum with peer review. They even went so far as to put together a moderated newsgroup where he could air his theories without being attacked. People here voted for that new newsgroup to be formed (sci.space.moderated) so he and others could talk in that safer atmosphere. Since you come here not knowing the history here, as I did too once upon a time, you need to appreciate that people are sort of spent on this issue unless something dramatically new is shown to them. So that is why some have offered to put up your citations on a website. So everyone can see them. When you are ready to do that, I think you will get a fair hearing. Until then, there are scant few of us with enough of the documents available to us to discuss Apollo 1 in much detail other than what is available on the web and in a few books. My interest in the Apollo 1 accident is primarily its historical aspect with regards to how NASA has addressed the issue of escape systems. Nevertheless, I spent a lot of time, last year at a University Library, making copies of key portions of that aged Congressional report, so that I could get to the bottom of whether the Apollo crew could have survived and if so with what quality of life. It is a bit disturbing to delve into the details of their deaths, but I have done so to try and help you understand just how significantly that crew was exposed to CO, and other toxic gases, some of which are pulmonary irritants. I think I have failed. I have worked a couple of CO accidents from an Environmental Health aspect (non fire related) and they can be very deadly, happen very quickly, and yes, very sadly. ...He's either convincing, or he's not, and if he's not, then you need to deal with the fact that there are some of us out in the public who do not bow at NASA's altar. There are a lot of people here who do not bow at NASA's altar. Daniel If your scenario is true regarding the CO, why did NASA choose NOT to have the lithium hydroxide canisters analyzed? It would have strengthened their case to have all that toxicity documented...unless their story isn't true. :-)
|
|
#407
June 7th 04, 02:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:53:33 -0400, Kevin Willoughby
wrote: So.... what is is your definition of "serious"? ....Someone who'll lick her festering rectal orafice while swearing before all the Netherrealm Deities that scott grissom is 100% right,and that NASA and NAA murdered the A1 crew, and after receiving the bogus data will protect her "honor" by claiming "well, after reading what she sent me, I can understand why she'd want to keep it a secret. This is 'grassy knoll' level stuff, and she could get killed unless it's presented right", or some other steaming pile of crap. OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr
|
|
#408
June 7th 04, 02:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#409
June 7th 04, 02:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 04:37:03 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote: What I wish we wouldn't play is the trollish tactic of starting new threads for no real purpose. Stuffie does that. ....Hmmm. Separated at afterbirth, perhaps? OM -- "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society - General George S. Patton, Jr
|
|
#410
June 7th 04, 02:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On 6 Jun 2004 13:59:53 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss) wrote: Apparently it is far easier for some in here to believe people get brainwashed by Scott than to think someone actually took at the fire for him/her self and decided something was up. ...BZZZZZT! Wrong, tampon-breath. We all went over the data "scott" presented, and found it to be so utterly incoherent and inconclusive that it had to be the work of a major mental defective. Even if the switch had a "hard short", it wasn't even in the circuit that the evidence pretty much shows was the most likely heat/spark source that started the fire. Had the switch in fact caused the arc that caused the fire, the fire would have started above Ed's seat, and nowhere near Gus' feet as the ARB found. ****, next thing we know, you'll be claiming that the fire was started because some NAA pad rat tossed a cigarette butt through one of the RCS thrusters... OM How did you know? j/k On a serious note, what circuit is it you believe sparked? And, the fire didn't start in the switch itself. It started in the +yaw thruster (designated A-13, although I'm sure that tells you nothing.)
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
