Re: Regarding Planet X Debate...
In article <email@example.com>, Sarah Mc wrote:
> BD wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org
>> You've hit it right on the head. The responses on this board to zetatalk
>> show an extreme level of fear/arrogance and outright nastiness.
> No, they show an educated number of people who aren't taken in by bad
> science/astronomy and a cult mentality. Nastiness begets nastiness,
>> These people have no idea whether anything nancy says is true or not.
> I beg your pardon. Apparently you haven't followed the threads long
> enough, nor have you bothered to check up on some of her assertions,
> or check things out yourself.
>> They only know much of it goes against 'modern' thought which gives them
>> the excuse to ridicule and condemn.
> We're know much more than that. If you state a light bulb is off when
> it's really on, and a hundred people see that is on, you don't feel
> you're open to being criticized? No one is more open to new ideas and
> theories than the scientific community - if they pass the tests for
> predictions and accuracy.
>> Reading this board it would appear that the anti-nancy crowd is
>> the real cult protecting their own intellectual dogma and scared to death
>> that if even a little of what the 'zeta's' say is true - their world
>> will come tumbling down around them.
> Ah, the cult speaks now. I was wondering when you were going to try
> and turn the facts around to avoid the issue, and to point fingers
> rather than show proof. You've failed at both. Go back to TT-watch and
> bow down to Nancy, you're out of your league here.
> A good majority of this board is made up of amateur astronomers, who
> would like nothing more than to go down in the books as discovering
> such a planet. I would think that professionals as well would adhere
> to that notion. Your premise is flawed, and in fact was an attempt to
> divert the issue at hand.
>> Perhaps the real laugher here is that many of these people are christians
>> who firmly believe 'god' had sex with a 13yr. old virgin who turned around
>> and gave birth to the same guy she just had sex with. And if you don't
>> believe that, you will burn in a lake of fire forever. - But zetatalk is
> I think you have your statement backwards.
> There's a difference between faith and science, contrary to the
> new-age doctrine that they are the same. Or are all scientists,
> technicians and astronomers Christian? You make a poor attempt at
> logic, and a failed attempt to make a point.
> If anything, the ZetaCult is the one running on faith, while the
> skeptics here are the ones looking for the proof through all the
> garbage that Nancy posts. I say again, you have your statement
> If you want answers:
> Ask her why she edits her web pages of "ZetaTalk" history to reflect
> the current situation, similar to rewritting the bible on a weekly
> Ask her why the Zetas say the sun/moon is larger at the horizon when
> it's actually smaller, or ask her to explain auroras, or ask her why
> her a `mag 2, mag 10, mag 11' object is now a `mag20' fuzzball when
> it's getting closer.
> Ask her to explain a why an object so far away is diffuse and not a
> point source. Ask her how deep oceans appear on a "smoldering brown
> Ask her about the "lift" by the Zetas of believing humanoids from the
> planet seconds before the pole shift.
> Ask her why the members of TT-watch were told that they should "follow
> the example that Nancy sets for them".
> Ask her why she continues to claim Steve Havas saw Planet X, when
> Steve Havas claims he doesn't know what he saw. Ask her why she states
> IRAS located Planet X in no uncertain terms, when in fact they never
> Ask her to explain how an object can go past the sun, faster than the
> sun's escape velocity, then stop, turn around, and head back from
> whence it came.
> Ask her about the Earths twin on the other side of the sun, and Planet
> X's "twirling moons" that follow along behind it.
> Ask her why (if she's so concerned about getting the warning out) that
> she spent over $50,000 of cult members money on worms, shortwave
> radios and web servers, rather than rent time at an observatory to get
> the proof which would have warned everyone in the world a year ago.
> Ask her why her web page still say "non-profit" when their temporary
> status ran out a few months ago, and no update was posted. Ask her why
> there's no 2001 financial report on the non-profit's web page,or why
> there's no permanent grant of non-profit status, while their "Internal
> Auditor" comes here to sci.astro to argue and threaten people.
> Ask her why she's actively searching to aquire a movie deal, when the
> Earth will be in the midst of a mind boggling catastrophe in 15
> Ask her why Hale Bopp wasn't really a comet, but was planned by
> NASA/JPL to divert possible visual sightings of Planet X 7 years ago.
> (when no one can see even it now, much less)
> Ask her why the Zetas won't explain their mathematics (the new
> concepts would cause world wide disruption), but it's OK for them to
> tell us the world as we know will no longer exist in 15 months.
> Ask her why she took over the TT-watch group in a coup with Jan, began
> editing out messages and banning people, when her own people started
> asking questions she couldn't answer, or began questioning her
> sincerity. Ask her why long standing members of the group have been
> banned recently for questioning authority, dictatorship and
> Actually BD, "the real laughter" is towards people like you, who
> accept things at face value without looking into them first. I don't
> find Nancy to be funny one single bit. I find her to be a con artist,
> swindling money from ignorant people, and very possibly being a threat
> to their actual lives. Especially those that absolutely refuse to see
> the truth when it hits them in the face, like Milly. Nancy could tell
> Milly that the moon is a fake, and Milly would believe it without ever
> batting an eyelash.
> Some people just don't learn from the likes of Jonestown, Heaven's
> Gate, or Scientology.
> Thats not funny, that borders on criminal.
Sarah, take a hit and relax, I didn't mean to blow your circuits.
First off, as smart as you may be, you have little knowledge of what I'm about.
Secondly, it is only dull, cowardly people who cling to so-called science
and condemn that which they really have no knowledge of. I promise you,
every scientific 'certainty' you now cling to will be blown to bits within
the relatively near future. In 10 years, most of what you think you know
will be no different than what the lay science community thought was true
back a few hundred years when they 'knew' the earth was flat. You don't know diddle, but,
like many on this board, you speak as if every word from your mouth were
'god's' own 'scientific' truth. In other words sarah, I'm trying to help
you to see your folly. It doesn't matter what zetatalk is or isn't, you
don't know what's going on and perhaps you should stop pretending like you
But let's be more specific. Are you saying that Planet X doesn't exist?
Are you saying that NASA never claimed to believe there was a 10th planet
out there? Are you saying that in 1983 NASA didn't put out a PR saying it
was now certain that a 10th planet existed? Are you saying that from the
early 30's and maybe prior that the scientific community wasn't discussing the
possibility/probability that a 10th planet was real? Planet X has become a
bit of an icon in american culture from movies to books to comic books
(monsters from planet x) to discussion within the scientific community. Only after NASA
certified the existence of Planet X did the ridicule start. Was that
because they began to realize it's trajectory and they felt the need to
retract their previous claims? Sounds a little like Roswell - first we
claim it's true (the u.s. military), then when we realize what we've done,
we begin the ridicule campaign and threaten death to anyone who speaks up.
OH no, I've let the cat out of the bag, I must be just another kook;
everyone 'knows' Roswell was just a weather balloon.
Sarah, my advice to you is to sit back, relax, open your mind and try
to clear out all those conclusions you've formed which are now blocking
your ability to see ahead. If you don't believe Planet X will be here in
2003 that's o.k. (I'm not saying it will ), but to bring up stuff like
jonestown is really a dis-service to the questions at hand.