EPA, AVIRIS system results from WTC flyover

Originally posted by gavron

Thanks for proving my point yet again that you are too immature to admit that the EPA requested the flyover as proven by the USGS site.



[edit on 6-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


No request was made for the AVIRIS to search for radiation:

trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

Robert Green and Roger Clark from USGS report, on request to use AVIRIS and results:

popo.jpl.nasa.gov...

The truth will always prevail, ULTIMA1. You cannot hide from

Originally posted by gavron

Thats it, just keep proving my point that you are too immature to admit that the EPA requested the flyover.

Keep showing everyone how immature you really are.

reply to post by ULTIMA1



You really are a one trick pony arent you?


I will continue to post FACTS that show the following:

The USGS request to NASA to use the AVIRIS did not include a request to check for radiation. The reports also made by NASA and the USGS do not show request or check for radioactivity.

Originally posted by gavron
I will continue to post FACTS that show the following:

Too bad you are not adult enough to post the whole truth that the EPA requested the flyover.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Too bad you will not admit that there was no request to NASA to check for radiation. A fact that can be proven by documentation from NASA.

Originally posted by gavron
Too bad you will not admit that there was no request to NASA to check for radiation. A fact that can be proven by documentation from NASA.

Too bad everyone can see that you are too immature to admit to all the facts.

So the OP has been proven and you refuse to admit to the truth.

[edit on 6-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1



That silly fact that NASA was not requested to use the AVIRIS to check for radiation at the WTC location? Oh, that fact we all know is true, since it can be so easily proven, which I have done time and time again here.

Originally posted by gavron

Sorry end of story if all you do is show how immature you are and not admit to all the facts as shown.

The OP stands as fact.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
The OP stands as fact.

The OP is just another example of a conspiracy theorist ignoring the facts, because it conflicts with their fantasy world.

No request was made for the AVIRIS to search for radiation:

trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

Robert Green and Roger Clark from USGS report, on request to use AVIRIS and results:

popo.jpl.nasa.gov...

And to think you claim to be lloking for the truth. Shame on you, ULTIMA1.

I really believe we are dealing with "ThrotYogart" with a new name .

Both of these people typ the same way!

Speak the same and I noties they use the same sites for debunking.

Now "ThrotYogart" hasnt posted in a few days, and he was in here every day. Now this new poster is posting like crazy. I think they are one in the same.

reply to post by cashlink


Actually that would be a compliment to me. ThroatYogurt has provided me with a lot of nice links and stuff. But, if you need to check, just have a mod check IP addresses or whatever. I dont mind at all.

Oh, and NASA seems to be a pretty good site for information, especially when talking about the AVIRIS.

[edit on 6-8-2008 by gavron]

Originally posted by gavron
Oh, and NASA seems to be a pretty good site for information, especially when talking about the AVIRIS.

I am going to close the site since you cannot be mature enough to admit the facts and evidence shown.

I hate dealing with immature people who live in a fantasy world.

The OP stands as correct.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
The OP stands as correct.

and I will close with this fact:

No request was made for the AVIRIS to search for radiation:

trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

Robert Green and Roger Clark from USGS report, on request to use AVIRIS and results:

popo.jpl.nasa.gov...

The OP is not correct.

reply to post by gavron


Ya! you can log in any computer to set up as many acounts you want .

I think you are one in the same.

Originally posted by gavron
and I will close with this fact:

No you are closing with the fact that you are too immature and closed minded to admit to the facts.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


I'm not sure why you feel you need to lie about the AVIRIS checking for radiation at the WTC locations. There was no request for it, there was no evidence of that in the reports generated.

Here is the request from Roger Clark from the USGS:
trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

Here are the reports fromRobert Green and Roger Clark from USGS, on the results of the AVIRIS flyovers:
popo.jpl.nasa.gov...

No requests for the AVIRIS to check for radiation.

Originally posted by gavron
I'm not sure why you feel you need to lie about the AVIRIS checking for radiation at the WTC locations.

I am not sure why you have to lie about the EPA requesting the flyover.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I am not sure why you have to lie about the EPA requesting the flyover.

I've never lied. Unless you feel that NASA is lying.

Here is the request from Roger Clark from the USGS:
trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

Here are the reports fromRobert Green and Roger Clark from USGS, on the results of the AVIRIS flyovers:
popo.jpl.nasa.gov...

No requests for the AVIRIS to check for radiation.

I still don't see what the flyover has to do with radiation apart from the infrared / visible kind. The AVIRIS instrument has impressive capabilities at detecting geological, vegetation and thermal variations not visible to the naked eye.