Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,392 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 384,417
Pageviews Today: 502,851Threads Today: 121Posts Today: 2,012
03:57 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer

 
The Lone Ranger

User ID: 345915
New Zealand
12/28/2007 09:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Four more years have been and gone
Still Ms LIEDer is wrong wrong wrong!!
Her doomsday rant that brought her some fame
is now considered so lame lame lame.
Season simulation or zetas fucking with the sky
it's all a big pile of horseshit and a big fat lie.
Earthquakes; bridge collapses; and so much more
it's big bad old Planet "eX" shout zeta max and Free Store.
2003 and 2004 came and they went
still Ms LIEDer must Planet "eX" vent vent vent.
"Be patient dear followers...it won't be long now
in the meantime I will dazzle you with bullshit that will make you go wow wow wow".
2005; 2006; and now 2007 turns out just the same
Ms LIEDer's 2003 hoax remains so hilariously lame lame lame!!!!

H A P P Y_N E W_Y E A R!!......you big old Planet "eX".

looking forward to seeing you in 2008......please just remember.....try not to be so damn late .. lol4me
Life Is But A Dream!!
Therefore, "'Tis better to have dreamed and lost than never to have dreamed at all."
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

DON'T​ BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS THREAD!....USE DISCERNMENT!!
The Lone Ranger

User ID: 345915
New Zealand
12/28/2007 09:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Debunkers are thinkers while bunkers wear blinkers.
 Quoting: Boomerang


:horse laug:.....and those bozzos know it too!!

100percent
Life Is But A Dream!!
Therefore, "'Tis better to have dreamed and lost than never to have dreamed at all."
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

DON'T​ BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS THREAD!....USE DISCERNMENT!!
Prof-Rabbit
User ID: 148352
Australia
12/28/2007 09:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Christmas ham? Yeah, I had a Christmas ham!


So did I. It was pretty good.

As for earthquake analysis, I'm trying to do a count with the ANSS data. Unfortunately, Excel can't handle more than 64k rows.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 345644


Open Office will handle the rows and is free.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 345644
United States
12/28/2007 10:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Christmas ham? Yeah, I had a Christmas ham!


So did I. It was pretty good.

As for earthquake analysis, I'm trying to do a count with the ANSS data. Unfortunately, Excel can't handle more than 64k rows.


Open Office will handle the rows and is free.
 Quoting: Prof-Rabbit 148352


I've used Open Office before but dread the 130 mb (around 14 minute) download even at DSL speeds.

Using the full ANSS data set results in single year datasets with over 100,000 records.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 345644
United States
12/28/2007 10:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Debunkers are thinkers while bunkers wear blinkers.
 Quoting: Boomerang


The big difference between the debunkers and the bunkers is the debunkers will actually do the research while the bunkers accept Nancy's rantings without question. Have any of the bunkers done any independent research?
Earth420

User ID: 346924
United States
12/29/2007 12:33 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Fuck you

[link to www.youtube.com]

PEACE
Om Tare Tuttare Ture Svaha
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 345644
United States
12/29/2007 01:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Fuck you

[link to www.youtube.com]

PEACE
 Quoting: Earth420


What a nice guy. Same to you (first sentence, not the last).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 345644
United States
12/29/2007 01:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
OpenOffice Calc won't handle over 64k records so I used MS Access (no limitation).

2000 75145
2001 74617
2002 98414
2003 97043 (wasn't planet X supposed to be here?)
2004 115187
2005 105472 (oops, the number is dropping)
2006 98266 (yep, definitely going down)
2007 80978 (to 12/29/2007)

Numbers derived from ANSS datasets.
The Lone Ranger

User ID: 345915
New Zealand
12/29/2007 02:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Fuck you

[link to www.youtube.com]

PEACE
 Quoting: Earth420


Hammer hammer!!!

Big_smile
Life Is But A Dream!!
Therefore, "'Tis better to have dreamed and lost than never to have dreamed at all."
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

DON'T​ BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS THREAD!....USE DISCERNMENT!!
The Lone Ranger

User ID: 345915
New Zealand
12/29/2007 03:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
:100%:
Life Is But A Dream!!
Therefore, "'Tis better to have dreamed and lost than never to have dreamed at all."
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

DON'T​ BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS THREAD!....USE DISCERNMENT!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
United States
12/29/2007 09:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Fuck you

[link to www.youtube.com]

PEACE
 Quoting: Earth420


Typical of hard hitting, in-depth bunker "research". You idiots are pitiful.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
United States
12/29/2007 09:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
OpenOffice Calc won't handle over 64k records so I used MS Access (no limitation).

2000 75145
2001 74617
2002 98414
2003 97043 (wasn't planet X supposed to be here?)
2004 115187
2005 105472 (oops, the number is dropping)
2006 98266 (yep, definitely going down)
2007 80978 (to 12/29/2007)

Numbers derived from ANSS datasets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 345644


Good data. But it won't be long before Nancy will again be telling her sheep about the "increasing" earthquakes, and they of course, will follow along like the good little sheep they are. Keep this data handy.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 345644
United States
12/29/2007 10:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
OpenOffice Calc won't handle over 64k records so I used MS Access (no limitation).

2000 75145
2001 74617
2002 98414
2003 97043 (wasn't planet X supposed to be here?)
2004 115187
2005 105472 (oops, the number is dropping)
2006 98266 (yep, definitely going down)
2007 80978 (to 12/29/2007)

Numbers derived from ANSS datasets.


Good data. But it won't be long before Nancy will again be telling her sheep about the "increasing" earthquakes, and they of course, will follow along like the good little sheep they are. Keep this data handy.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145


I've got it as both MS Access database and the original .txt files.
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 10:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
The "stats" you show now PROVE absolutely how much the debunkers at GLP have lied all these years.

The debunkers have been claiming since DAY 1 that earthquakes have never increased. BUT, your stats show they very much did increase in the same time frame they claimed they never did. These lying government paid debunkers cannot have it both ways ... but still they try ... and fail every time!

How fitting is that?!!!
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 11:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
I guess I shall kick that lowly debunker ass some more as I have a few more minutes to do so.

A BIG YES to you agent # 88145 and MeNow. Earthquakes have increased and the data says so!



"I did a little data mining on the above USGS site, and to my own surprise what Nancy claims about the increase in EQ'S is actually...accurate!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not saying she is right about PX or not, as no one truly knows...yet.
HERE ARE THE FACTS FROM THE USGS ON RECENT EARTHQUAKES:
I RAN THE SEARCH FOR ALL EQ'S OF A 5+ mag or bigger, going back and running it for each year to 1975;
I will summarize each year's total:
2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135
2004-1799
2003-1414
2002-1361
2001-1385
2000-1518
1999-1252
1998-1108
1997-1263
1996-1405
1995-1537
1990-1763,
1980-1418,
1975-1509.
YOU CAN VERIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY SHOW A HUGE INCREASE!
HERE IS ONE DATA-VERIFIED STATEMENT FROM THE VIDEO FROM NANCY, SO NOT ALL OF HER CLAIMS CAN BE SO EASILY DISMISSED FOLKS...JUST MY 2 CENTS.




Look at the 70's .... now look at the 80's ... now look at all of the 90's data. And what do we see? OH BOY!

More deflunker lies, pasted in all of their glory.

2004, 2005, then 2006 and now 2007 have more earthquakes then previously reported for all of the decades listed before , year-to-year.

You lying twerps need your heads examined!
Your own data destroys you!

MeNow's shill status right out there and as obvious as leopard spots. Climb back under that rock agent-boys! Consider yourselves exposed, yet again!
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 11:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
I guess I shall kick that lowly debunker ass some more as I have a few more minutes to do so.

A BIG YES to you agent # 88145 and MeNow. Earthquakes have increased and the data says so!



"I did a little data mining on the above USGS site, and to my own surprise what Nancy claims about the increase in EQ'S is actually...accurate!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not saying she is right about PX or not, as no one truly knows...yet.
HERE ARE THE FACTS FROM THE USGS ON RECENT EARTHQUAKES:
I RAN THE SEARCH FOR ALL EQ'S OF A 5+ mag or bigger, going back and running it for each year to 1975;
I will summarize each year's total:
2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135
2004-1799
2003-1414
2002-1361
2001-1385
2000-1518
1999-1252
1998-1108
1997-1263
1996-1405
1995-1537
1990-1763,
1980-1418,
1975-1509.
YOU CAN VERIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY SHOW A HUGE INCREASE!
HERE IS ONE DATA-VERIFIED STATEMENT FROM THE VIDEO FROM NANCY, SO NOT ALL OF HER CLAIMS CAN BE SO EASILY DISMISSED FOLKS...JUST MY 2 CENTS.




Look at the 70's .... now look at the 80's ... now look at all of the 90's data. And what do we see? OH BOY!

More deflunker lies, pasted in all of their glory.

2004, 2005, then 2006 and now 2007 have more earthquakes then previously reported for all of the decades listed before , year-to-year.

You lying twerps need your heads examined!
Your own data destroys you!

MeNow's shill status right out there and as obvious as leopard spots. Climb back under that rock agent-boys! Consider yourselves exposed, yet again!
 Quoting: User # 78/68



"Look at the 70's .... now look at the 80's ... now look at all of the 90's data. And what do we see? OH BOY!"

What do we see? We see the skewed stats that the very same site explains as an increased number of sensors picking up smaller quakes.

Why don't you stop pretending to be honestly assessing the data?

Idiot.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
United States
12/29/2007 11:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
I guess I shall kick that lowly debunker ass some more as I have a few more minutes to do so.

A BIG YES to you agent # 88145 and MeNow. Earthquakes have increased and the data says so!
 Quoting: User # 78/68


So, you say that :

2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135

Shows an INCREASING number of quakes? Do I have to repeat my little math lesson here for you AGAIN?

Let's see...in 2005, we show 2135 quakes. In 2006, we see 2033 quakes...do you think 2033 is more than 2135? Apparently you do. Again, in 2007, we've had 1939 quakes. Is 1939 more than 2033? Apparently you think so.

Go back to first grade, idiot!
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 12:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
I guess I shall kick that lowly debunker ass some more as I have a few more minutes to do so.

A BIG YES to you agent # 88145 and MeNow. Earthquakes have increased and the data says so!



"I did a little data mining on the above USGS site, and to my own surprise what Nancy claims about the increase in EQ'S is actually...accurate!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not saying she is right about PX or not, as no one truly knows...yet.
HERE ARE THE FACTS FROM THE USGS ON RECENT EARTHQUAKES:
I RAN THE SEARCH FOR ALL EQ'S OF A 5+ mag or bigger, going back and running it for each year to 1975;
I will summarize each year's total:
2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135
2004-1799
2003-1414
2002-1361
2001-1385
2000-1518
1999-1252
1998-1108
1997-1263
1996-1405
1995-1537
1990-1763,
1980-1418,
1975-1509.
YOU CAN VERIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY SHOW A HUGE INCREASE!
HERE IS ONE DATA-VERIFIED STATEMENT FROM THE VIDEO FROM NANCY, SO NOT ALL OF HER CLAIMS CAN BE SO EASILY DISMISSED FOLKS...JUST MY 2 CENTS.




Look at the 70's .... now look at the 80's ... now look at all of the 90's data. And what do we see? OH BOY!
 Quoting: User # 78/68


Look at the 70's? The "70's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1975. Look at the 80's? The "80's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1980. You don't even know what is there. You are only spewing, as usual.

More deflunker lies, pasted in all of their glory.
 Quoting: User # 78/68


No. It's easy for all to see that it is YOU who is the chronic liar.

2004, 2005, then 2006 and now 2007 have more earthquakes then previously reported for all of the decades listed before , year-to-year.
 Quoting: User # 78/68


"All the decades" are not even listed there, as you claim, "year-to-year".

You lying twerps need your heads examined!
Your own data destroys you!

MeNow's shill status right out there and as obvious as leopard spots. Climb back under that rock agent-boys! Consider yourselves exposed, yet again!
 Quoting: User # 78/68


Nothing but your usual nonsense-spewing. Why couldn't YOU come up with any stats when we asked you to? Why do you ignore the statement on the same site that explains the effect of the increased number of sensors on those numbers?

Why? Because you are only a spoiled child, throwing a tantrum.
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 01:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
"Look at the 70's? The "70's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1975. Look at the 80's? The "80's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1980. You don't even know what is there. You are only spewing, as usual."



Menow, Menow, Menow must you lie so blatently, so often?

1975 is in the 70's ... and 1980 is in the 80's.

Ohhhh, the lies from you!


The debunkers have been claiming all along earthquakes never showed an increase. What LIES!

Sensors or no sensors the data did and does show an increase from previous decades or years in previous decades. Claiming otherwise is pure debunker drivel!

Claiming the increase is solely based on more "sensors" is speculation. Can you liars get your collective heads around that?

The debunker spin machine seems stuck in the mud again. Oh Dear!
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 01:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
You said this, right Menow?

"What do we see? We see the skewed stats that the very same site explains as an increased number of sensors picking up smaller quakes."



Let's see him answer this. (hint: he'll evade it ... now, watch)
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 01:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
"Look at the 70's? The "70's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1975. Look at the 80's? The "80's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1980. You don't even know what is there. You are only spewing, as usual."



Menow, Menow, Menow must you lie so blatently, so often?

1975 is in the 70's ... and 1980 is in the 80's.

Ohhhh, the lies from you!

 Quoting: User # 78/68


That's what I SAID, spewer. 1975 does not equal "the 70's", and 1980 does not equal "the 80's".

Idiot.
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 01:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
You said this, right Menow?

"What do we see? We see the skewed stats that the very same site explains as an increased number of sensors picking up smaller quakes."



Let's see him answer this. (hint: he'll evade it ... now, watch)
 Quoting: User # 78/68


Of course I said that. The only evasion is yours in ignoring what it means.
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 01:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Hmmmmm. Menow gets caught again!

That/this data set is earthquakes 5.0 and greater. We aren't talking about smaller earthquakes here, now are we?

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!




""I did a little data mining on the above USGS site, and to my own surprise what Nancy claims about the increase in EQ'S is actually...accurate!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not saying she is right about PX or not, as no one truly knows...yet.
HERE ARE THE FACTS FROM THE USGS ON RECENT EARTHQUAKES:
I RAN THE SEARCH FOR ALL EQ'S OF A 5+ mag or bigger, going back and running it for each year to 1975;
I will summarize each year's total:
2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135
2004-1799
2003-1414
2002-1361
2001-1385
2000-1518
1999-1252
1998-1108
1997-1263
1996-1405
1995-1537
1990-1763,
1980-1418,
1975-1509.
YOU CAN VERIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY SHOW A HUGE INCREASE!
HERE IS ONE DATA-VERIFIED STATEMENT FROM THE VIDEO FROM NANCY, SO NOT ALL OF HER CLAIMS CAN BE SO EASILY DISMISSED FOLKS...JUST MY 2 CENTS."



OUCH!
User # 78/68

User ID: 341591
Canada
12/29/2007 01:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Menow ... you make for good floor-wipe!
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 02:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Hmmmmm. Menow gets caught again!

That/this data set is earthquakes 5.0 and greater. We aren't talking about smaller earthquakes here, now are we?

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!




""I did a little data mining on the above USGS site, and to my own surprise what Nancy claims about the increase in EQ'S is actually...accurate!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not saying she is right about PX or not, as no one truly knows...yet.
HERE ARE THE FACTS FROM THE USGS ON RECENT EARTHQUAKES:
I RAN THE SEARCH FOR ALL EQ'S OF A 5+ mag or bigger, going back and running it for each year to 1975;
I will summarize each year's total:
2007-1939 YTD
2006-2033
2005-2135
2004-1799
2003-1414
2002-1361
2001-1385
2000-1518
1999-1252
1998-1108
1997-1263
1996-1405
1995-1537
1990-1763,
1980-1418,
1975-1509.
YOU CAN VERIFY THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY SHOW A HUGE INCREASE!
HERE IS ONE DATA-VERIFIED STATEMENT FROM THE VIDEO FROM NANCY, SO NOT ALL OF HER CLAIMS CAN BE SO EASILY DISMISSED FOLKS...JUST MY 2 CENTS."



OUCH!
 Quoting: User # 78/68


For the terminally stupid and willfully ignorant, like Luser, here.

From the same site, for the umpteenth time:

[link to earthquake.usgs.gov]

FAQ - Common Myths about Earthquakes

Q: Why are we having so many earthquakes? Has earthquake activity been increasing? Does this mean a big one is going to hit? OR We haven't had any earthquakes in a long time; does this mean that the pressure is building up?

A: Although it may seem that we are having more earthquakes, earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or greater have remained fairly constant throughout this century and, according to our records, have actually seemed to decrease in recent years. There are several reasons for the perception that the number of earthquakes, in general, and particularly destructive earthquakes is increasing. 1) A partial explanation may lie in the fact that in the last twenty years, we have definitely had an increase in the number of earthquakes we have been able to locate each year. This is because of the tremendous increase in the number of seismograph stations in the world and the many improvements in global communications. In 1931, there were about 350 stations operating in the world; today, there are more that 4,000 stations and the data now comes in rapidly from these stations by telex, computer and satellite. This increase in the number of stations and the more timely receipt of data has allowed us and other seismological centers to locate many small earthquakes which were undetected in earlier years, and we are able to locate earthquakes more rapidly.
Menow
User ID: 152169
United States
12/29/2007 02:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
Menow ... you make for good floor-wipe!
 Quoting: User # 78/68


You make a good idiot/troll. I should remember not to waste my time on your inane blathering.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308776
Canada
12/29/2007 02:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
"Look at the 70's? The "70's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1975. Look at the 80's? The "80's" arent even SHOWN there. Only 1980. You don't even know what is there. You are only spewing, as usual."



Menow, Menow, Menow must you lie so blatently, so often?

1975 is in the 70's ... and 1980 is in the 80's.

Ohhhh, the lies from you!


The debunkers have been claiming all along earthquakes never showed an increase. What LIES!

Sensors or no sensors the data did and does show an increase from previous decades or years in previous decades. Claiming otherwise is pure debunker drivel!

Claiming the increase is solely based on more "sensors" is speculation. Can you liars get your collective heads around that?

The debunker spin machine seems stuck in the mud again. Oh Dear!
 Quoting: User # 78/68

I suspect that the other years in the 70's and 80's blew the increased quakes claim out of the water and they were omitted. I do know that there were a couple of years in the 70's that had an abnormal amount of quakes, it was fodder back in the day for the Jehova Witnesses that believed the second coming was nigh. I remember it well.
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 297320
United States
12/29/2007 02:47 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
2004, 2005, then 2006 and now 2007 have more earthquakes then previously reported for all of the decades listed before , year-to-year.
 Quoting: User # 78/68

Yes, but the numbers are also going DOWN. If you look at all the data you provided, you can see that the number of earthquakes over the time period remained fairly constant, with a dip in the numbers in the 90's and an increase in 2004...with a peak in 2005...two years AFTER Nancy's make believe "planet" was supposed to be here. And then the numbers started going down again. Funny how you can't wrap your head around that. If "Planet X" were really responsible for any increase, then those numbers would be continuing to increase. They aren't. And how do you know that numbers that high haven't happened before? The data provided only goes back to 1975. For someone who claims to be so educated, you should know that this hardly shows a trend. So, go ahead and keep spinning it anyway you want. No matter what you say or do, you're still wrong about "Planet X." End of story.

You lying twerps need your heads examined!

You certainly aren't doing a good job of earning the meager salary Nancy pays you.
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.
Menow
User ID: 145776
United States
12/29/2007 02:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
(snip)

Sensors or no sensors...(snip)

 Quoting: User # 78/68



Ahh... yes... just ignore anything that would adversely affect the conclusion you are spinning for.
The Lone Ranger

User ID: 345915
New Zealand
12/29/2007 03:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: ZetaTalk: Christmas Hammer
:Moron_user:......He reinforces his INABILITIY to debate truthfully with the debunkers..... lol4me and the little dufos keeps on pretending that he possesses HIGH intelligence.

Ms LIEDer is probably embarrassed by such idiotic follower's such as this nerd.

PS: "User" is the ONLY repetitive LIAR supporting Ms LIEDer on her threads. Then again he is determined to excel in such activity as purporting LIES and then blaming others.
Life Is But A Dream!!
Therefore, "'Tis better to have dreamed and lost than never to have dreamed at all."
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

DON'T​ BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS THREAD!....USE DISCERNMENT!!

News