Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,813 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 949,193
Pageviews Today: 1,191,910Threads Today: 193Posts Today: 4,170
09:39 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

 
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/24/2010 07:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So it may have been real, like the Norway spiral, whatever that was.

You do realize that the hoaxer admitted it all ? Just like Kid A with his nibiru pics back in the days !

BTW, I'm still waiting for your prove that the Vatican images are really made by the Vatican.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 980051


Just like the crop circle hoaxers linked to British military funding claimed they did all the circles, when all their circles didn't replicate ANY of the special crop circles?

Or maybe in the Norway case, it was really hoaxed?

Again, we need more than a claim of hoaxing to take the person's word as true.

Off to the movie ... hope it's good.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
05/24/2010 07:45 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
And those Bad Astronomy claims about the SOHO images ... could they be right? So far, no comparable "flares" have been presented, except from comparable photos since PX was supposedly already possibly here.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219

A planet would appear in consecutive images and move with some kind of logic. Cosmic ray hits don't.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980604
United Kingdom
05/24/2010 07:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I have read Kepler, and took 7 years of Latin training, for example. If you don't know how this trains your minds in orders of magnitude distinctions, try it!

Sheesh.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


With you, it quite obviously didn't do any good. You are one of the dumbest posters to GLP.
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/24/2010 07:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Regarding the Vatican images i first suggest you link them again, as I have no time to wade through 40 pages back until I find them.
Then your next task would be to prove beyond doubt that the source of the images are really the Vatican Telescope, so far you failed to prove this, you only link to other more than dubious websites like yowusa.com.
After you have proven to us that these images are originated from the Vatican Telescope then it's time for us to debunk them.
Until you have proven that these images are truly by the Vatican Telescope (and not photoshop) discussing them will be a waste of time.


I linked to them -- and others wouldn't re-link for me on other things. So why should I? :)

I'll do so later, though. Off to the movie about Tony Blair's treason with Bush, cloaked in a fiction form: "Ghostwriter".

Re. MY proving it: they make claims. You test it. I wanted your opinions.

I want to know: CAN they be from the Vatican -- their own telescope, or a satellite they share with NASA?

And the magnetosphere ... what's up with that? Repulsion while the Sun attracted it. Hm.

And those Bad Astronomy claims about the SOHO images ... could they be right? So far, no comparable "flares" have been presented, except from comparable photos since PX was supposedly already possibly here.


It doesnt work that way in science ... YOU make claims out of the ordinary, so YOU have to prove them ... that's the way the scientific community works, period.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 980051


THEY make the claims, and have what they think is proof. You test it -- this is the way science testability works: replicability. Do you find the same results they did and if so, on what points?

I submitted it as a claim from THEM; I make no claim about it. I just recognize that they purport these may be accurate images. Do you think they are? I don't know, myself, and thought maybe you (all) would have some thoughts relevant to the claims.
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/24/2010 07:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I have read Kepler, and took 7 years of Latin training, for example. If you don't know how this trains your minds in orders of magnitude distinctions, try it!

Sheesh.


With you, it quite obviously didn't do any good. You are one of the dumbest posters to GLP.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 980604


Gobledygook. To quote others' word.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980604
United Kingdom
05/24/2010 07:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Just like the crop circle hoaxers linked to British military funding claimed they did all the circles, when all their circles didn't replicate ANY of the special crop circles?

Or maybe in the Norway case, it was really hoaxed?

Again, we need more than a claim of hoaxing to take the person's word as true.

Off to the movie ... hope it's good.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


Everything you post is either lies, misrepresentations, twisting of words or just plain old bullshit.

Typical Zetard behaviour.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980604
United Kingdom
05/24/2010 07:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I have read Kepler, and took 7 years of Latin training, for example. If you don't know how this trains your minds in orders of magnitude distinctions, try it!

Sheesh.


With you, it quite obviously didn't do any good. You are one of the dumbest posters to GLP.


Gobledygook. To quote others' word.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


You can't even spell gobbledegook!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980604
United Kingdom
05/24/2010 07:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I submitted it as a claim from THEM; I make no claim about it. I just recognize that they purport these may be accurate images. Do you think they are? I don't know, myself, and thought maybe you (all) would have some thoughts relevant to the claims.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


No, you're just trolling bullshit again.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980051
Germany
05/24/2010 07:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Or maybe in the Norway case, it was really hoaxed?
 Quoting: mclarek 980219

The norway Spiral has been proven to be a failed russian rocket test months ago ... there are about 5 other videos on youtube that show similar spirals (though not that spectecular) and all of them are proven to be failed rockets ... a rocket which messes up its guiding system has the habit of swirling around.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980604
United Kingdom
05/24/2010 07:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Or maybe in the Norway case, it was really hoaxed?

The norway Spiral has been proven to be a failed russian rocket test months ago ... there are about 5 other videos on youtube that show similar spirals (though not that spectecular) and all of them are proven to be failed rockets ... a rocket which messes up its guiding system has the habit of swirling around.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 980051


Zetards are not interested in reality. They only like ridiculously stupid 'explanations'.
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/24/2010 08:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It doesnt work that way in science ... YOU make claims out of the ordinary, so YOU have to prove them ... that's the way the scientific community works, period.


THEY make the claims, and have what they think is proof. You test it -- this is the way science testability works: replicability. Do you find the same results they did and if so, on what points?

I submitted it as a claim from THEM; I make no claim about it. I just recognize that they purport these may be accurate images. Do you think they are? I don't know, myself, and thought maybe you (all) would have some thoughts relevant to the claims.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


You come around here, call people idiots, petulantly insist that YOU know more about astronomy terms than they do, and then you demand that the same people get busy and work on YOUR pet projects?

I say again.... you are one piece of work, Clare!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980051
Germany
05/24/2010 08:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
And those Bad Astronomy claims about the SOHO images ... could they be right? So far, no comparable "flares" have been presented, except from comparable photos since PX was supposedly already possibly here.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219

Why pic especially these ? Nancy claims the "winged globe" as legit whenever it shows up (as it is a CCD glitch it shows up often) ... If I remember right she claimed like 3 or 4 SOHO images to be legit in the past 2 weeks ... why do you insist on those old pics (from 1999 if Im not mistaken, or do you mean the 2003 ones, that were debunked by Phil Plait) ? If the BA pics were really showing Planet X , like you claim ... then the poleshift would long have happened, don't you think ?
Returner
User ID: 980634
United States
05/24/2010 08:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Watch out, boys!

Clare once picked up a book by Kepler AND she claims SEVEN YEARS of Latin!

Either rates a full doctorate in Astrophysics from the prestigious College of Forced-Air Systems and Vending Technology of legendary Duluth.

What fools we were to challenge Clare's intimate knowledge of rotary go-motions and spinable round-abouts!

If only we could abandon our preconceived notions of spin and still, of left and right, of up and down! Unfettered by the chains of convention, perhaps then we could see the universe as Clare sees it -- through the eyes of a none-too-bright child.

But I think I'll stick with boring old astronomy.
Setheory
User ID: 978353
United States
05/24/2010 08:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I, too, thought the vids, at least one of them, looked fake. But usually the military doesn't issue statements on things such as this -- and they did, because so many people called in. So it may have been real, like the Norway spiral, whatever that was.

 Quoting: mclarek 980219


Clare:

Agreed, the photos and video looked fake. Additionally, the person has admitted it was a hoax. Am I understanding you correctly that you think this STILL may be real?
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/24/2010 08:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As to the issue of my "not thinking", this is ridiculous! ROTFL!

I have read Kepler, and took 7 years of Latin training, for example. If you don't know how this trains your minds in orders of magnitude distinctions, try it!

Sheesh.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


And yet you still think the Moon doesn't rotate on its axis.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 980051
Germany
05/24/2010 09:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Agreed, the photos and video looked fake. Additionally, the person has admitted it was a hoax. Am I understanding you correctly that you think this STILL may be real?
 Quoting: Setheory 978353

I'm sure the guy was forced at gunpoint to claim he hoaxed the video.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/24/2010 09:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
But the Moon would not fly off if the Earth disappeared. It would continue around the Sun.


Yes, but we were not (as far as I know) talking of the orbital factor of the SYSTEM of the E-M. I thought he was just asking relative to the E-M system, but yes, add in the Sun again, and that movement would yes, pull the Moon. It would take some time to stabilize, but anyway, the Moon would in fact fly into whatever direction it was turned when the Earth disappeared -- making an ellipse around the Sun.

Anyway that's why I said "off in circles", but without the Sun, no, it would be straight in whatever direction it was faced at that point/

No spin, though in that: it faces its next turn around the Earth at each point it gets there. It does not spin as well more than it has to for the path.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


So, Clare, let me make sure I understand you. You are saying that the moon would NOT be spinning on its axis in relation to the rest of the universe as it flew off if the earth suddenly disappeared? Is that what you are claiming?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/24/2010 09:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Thank you. Just popping in. I said many times the semantics were screwing things up, the the egos here refused to work with me as I worked with them in their lack of understanding of which items we were talking of. (The "We" by the way, referred to the conversation in total, back-and forth between us all, that is.)

And as Wikipedia said, the "laymen" include astronomers, who use "rotation, spin, orientation, orbit and revolution" interchangeably for different real motions, which require specifications in addition to these words, just like me.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219



No, Clare, that is NOT what it said. If you think so, please point us to those references.

Nancy was saying too, that there is no motion of spin on the Moon other than the forward motion, which is locked onto the Earth by gravity pulling it in.

 Quoting: mclarek 980219


Wrong again. Nothing is "locked" by gravity. Both bodies are free to rotate on their own. It's just that over eons the tidal forces raised in the moon have slowed its rotation to match the period of its orbit. The term "tidal locking" is a description of that synchronization, but does not, in fact, mean that either body is "locked" to the other. Libration is a clear demonstration of that.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/24/2010 09:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Clare, you have been asked this multiple times but have evaded answering. Once again...

If the moon rotated in a period of 20 days, so all sides were visible from earth over time, would you then say that the moon was rotating?

If the moon rotated in a period of 40 days, so all sides were visible from earth over time, would you then say that the moon was rotating?

What is it about its 29 day rotation period that makes you think it is NOT rotating?

What if it were rotating at the same speed, but in the opposite direction so that over 29 days, we saw all sides of it TWICE. Would it then be rotating?


These are very simple yes or no answers. Please don't run away from them this time.
Returner
User ID: 980634
United States
05/24/2010 09:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Other Clare Beliefs:

* The Sun is a huge flat disk. She can prove this in a lengthy series of expositions involving fluid hydrodynamics, the alignments of the pyramids, the layout of the original Disneyland, and a complex analysis of her cat Fluffy's bowel movements. Not for the faint of heart.

* Integers are People. Clare can prove that Seven is an individual, with feelings, hopes, dreams, and goals, most of which involve being divided by Three, that slut. Expect a forty page diatribe with quotes from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the infamous 'Jump the Shark' episode of 'Happy Days.' Grown men have been observed screaming after reading nothing but the introduction. Illegal in seven (see, there he is again!) states and the District of Columbia.

* Otters control the Michigan State Lottery. With videos which inexplicably contain no references to otters, Michigan, or a lottery. Clare exhorts viewers to 'expand their minds' and 'think outside the Sphinx.' The opening 30 seconds of the first video alone are known to induce feelings of nausea and apprehension in test subjects. The accompanying sound track, which is a looped version of 'Muskrat Love,' is often used to quell prison riots.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/24/2010 09:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Also, Clare, since you seem to have ignored it...

The earth will eventually become tidally locked to the sun as Mercury is now. Several mllion years before that, its rotation will be 'almost" synchronous with its orbit in that its rotation period on its axis will have slowed to one every 100 days. Will it still be rotating on its own axis?

When it finally settles down with it rotating on its axis once every 365 days, will it in your opinion still be rotating? If not, then when did it stop rotating?
***ZetaMaX***

User ID: 980751
United States
05/24/2010 10:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Watch out, boys!

Clare once picked up a book by Kepler AND she claims SEVEN YEARS of Latin!

Either rates a full doctorate in Astrophysics from the prestigious College of Forced-Air Systems and Vending Technology of legendary Duluth.

What fools we were to challenge Clare's intimate knowledge of rotary go-motions and spinable round-abouts!

If only we could abandon our preconceived notions of spin and still, of left and right, of up and down! Unfettered by the chains of convention, perhaps then we could see the universe as Clare sees it -- through the eyes of a none-too-bright child.

But I think I'll stick with boring old astronomy.
 Quoting: Returner 980634


PROOF - that Returner is a PAID SHILL!!!

[link to www.infowars.com]
The best advice we can give on this matter is to read with your heart as well as your mind. Follow the flow, let the nuances lie unanswered and unchallenged in your mind. Treat this as a garden you are walking through for the first time, and experience it fully without trying to categorize it! Much of what you will learn will be processed in your subconscious, and influence your conscious mind later. If you must dissect each phrase, and correlate it with each piece of information taken from another source, you will trash much of what you could otherwise gain. Live in the gray, not always insisting on black and white and strict compartmentalizations.

ZetaTalk: Oahspe Note: written Apr 15, 1997.
 [link to www.zetatalk.com] 

ZetaMax
Reality420
User ID: 970551
United States
05/24/2010 11:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Also, Clare, since you seem to have ignored it...

The earth will eventually become tidally locked to the sun as Mercury is now. Several mllion years before that, its rotation will be 'almost" synchronous with its orbit in that its rotation period on its axis will have slowed to one every 100 days. Will it still be rotating on its own axis?

When it finally settles down with it rotating on its axis once every 365 days, will it in your opinion still be rotating? If not, then when did it stop rotating?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 795135


An illuminating question for anyone confused. (which probably isn't many except an handful of Zetadrones)

Don't expect an answer. I believe this "person" is someone playing a joke with a gibberish generator and feeding it debunker questions complete with astronomy jargon which it then transmogrifies into astro-gibberish.

Either that or this really is a N*ncy sock since her astro vocabulary is equally illucid.

In either case all you'll get is incomprehensible gibberish.

Have fun.


R.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 896329
United States
05/24/2010 11:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
And those Bad Astronomy claims about the SOHO images ... could they be right? So far, no comparable "flares" have been presented, except from comparable photos since PX was supposedly already possibly here.

A planet would appear in consecutive images and move with some kind of logic. Cosmic ray hits don't.
 Quoting: Astronut


They still believe cosmic ray hits are a "string of pearls" (i.e., planet x moons) and planet x.

I pointed them to the unprocessed fits images to prove my point...unfortunately, not one of them has the curiosity or intelligence to look at them.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
05/25/2010 12:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
But the Moon would not fly off if the Earth disappeared. It would continue around the Sun.


Yes, but we were not (as far as I know) talking of the orbital factor of the SYSTEM of the E-M. I thought he was just asking relative to the E-M system, but yes, add in the Sun again, and that movement would yes, pull the Moon. It would take some time to stabilize, but anyway, the Moon would in fact fly into whatever direction it was turned when the Earth disappeared -- making an ellipse around the Sun.

Anyway that's why I said "off in circles", but without the Sun, no, it would be straight in whatever direction it was faced at that point/

No spin, though in that: it faces its next turn around the Earth at each point it gets there. It does not spin as well more than it has to for the path.
 Quoting: mclarek 980219


Hello,

Been trying to play catch up on this thread -- still maintaining popularity after Nancy's 'departure.' Interesting.

Clare,

I think you do make a point regarding the motions of the Moon -- but I think that point is invalidated because of the Moon's unique orbital characteristics: it falls primarily toward the Sun. You are largely incorrect in your guess regarding what would happen: if the Earth did vanish, the Moon's orbit would vary only slightly, and the Moon would continue to orbit the Sun much as it does now, and rotate on its axis roughly 12 times each Solar Year, as it does now. If the Sun lasted long enough, the Earthless Moon would eventually slow and tidally lock to the Sun. But its rotation would not cease even then, if you were, say floating 50 million miles above the Solar System, observing the Earthless Moon in orbit below you.

Of course, the Moon does not spin in a frame where it doesn't spin, and the Earth does hang nearly motionless in the lunar sky. But this, I would say, is the illusion. Both are engaging in all sorts of motions.

I don't think you can honestly claim that the Moon is 'not spinning' up until the hypothetical moment that the Earth vanishes, and then is 'suddenly spinning.' (although some haggling over relative motions could be argued, I suppose) Although such hair-splitting of movements over other planet/moon/moons systems might have some validity, since they fall toward their primaries. But not ours.

Therefore, I believe the more traditional models explain and predict this behavior with greater accuracy -- an accuracy that demonstrates many of Nancy's claims to be hopelessly incorrect. The Moon does turn on its axis, as evidenced by the fact that the Sun and stars rise and set on the Moon. That motion would not stop whether Earth was here or not. Those motions have little dependence on the Earth, as Menow has been trying to point out with his 'angular momentum' questions.

I apologize for my tardiness to the thread -- real life calls, and all that, and thank you for your kind words earlier in the thread. I hope you understand and can accept my explanations and positions on this matter, or perhaps propose an experiment/predictive model which can demonstrate your explanations as being superior. But, for now, I think that the traditional model stands.

In the meantime, PX certainly continues to be almost as dangerous as the Invisible Dragon in my Garage.

Be well.
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
05/25/2010 12:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Anyway,
on a positive note, I wish you well in spite of it all.
I really do hope you can debunk PX one day fully. It would be nice.

Clare -- hf



How can we start missing you if you don't leave, clunk?


I never asked you to miss me, Comic-book mutant.

You just want me gone. I don't need to be. Maybe I change my mind, or check back.


 Quoting: mclarek 980219



I don't give a flying load of rancid wombat bladders if you are here or not, so long as you are here and insist on behaving the way you have behaved you make a wonderful chew toy.

Of course if you grew up and mastered high school physics it would be a LOT harder, and a LOT less fun to use you as a chew toy.

Your call.....
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/25/2010 01:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
To the person asking about the Vatican stuff:
Info on the Vatican and the radio telescope and the images follows:


All videos of the Vatican images now removed! -- except inside the Project Camelot interview/ so you'll have to look at the details of the circumstantial evidence around this. In other words, could it be real disclosure -- but covered up?

The footage type of another similar footage in a video was released as "NSD42" -- and it was actually classified by the NSA in the USA as a "threat to national security", as stated by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), where it states:

"...the NSC staff has determined that the release of the format of NSD 42 could cause damage to the national security."

[link to fas.org]

Now, that doesn't mean these images were for real (they were like but not the same as Barbato's) but if it was that format, then this is interesting as possibly real. Now Youtube typical censorship is likely (is known in other instances where there was no voluntary removal of footage: we now get here, either "account suspended" messages or "video removed by user".

Original pages on the Barbato disclosure supposedly from Jesuit:
[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]

[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]

The pics are still available sort of through the Project Camelot interview of Scantamburlo about Barbato:

[link to projectcamelot.org]

The part where "SVS" on the header is explained by an unrelated source (rather significant, since no-one knew what it was, so why hoax that?):
[link to projectcamelot.org]

The SITUATION (circumstantial evidence) in many details not just about the footage but the persons involved and types of header and types of footage seem credible in general lines, to me.

What do you think? Not all the claims need to be true, but I get the impression it was in good faith that Barbato got the footage.
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/25/2010 01:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I submitted it as a claim from THEM; I make no claim about it. I just recognize that they purport these may be accurate images. Do you think they are? I don't know, myself, and thought maybe you (all) would have some thoughts relevant to the claims.

Wrong. Just like the creationists you don't understand how
real science works:
:scicreat:
 Quoting: DrPostman


No, you misunderstand. Hypothesis is a TEMPORARY conclusion, for which you think all possible roads, so you leave no stone unturned.

Then you compare the pieces and test them.

You also test various hypotheses against EACH OTHER.

Creationists do not do these things: they argue ONLY one hypothesis.
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/25/2010 02:07 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
But the Moon would not fly off if the Earth disappeared. It would continue around the Sun.


Yes, but we were not (as far as I know) talking of the orbital factor of the SYSTEM of the E-M. I thought he was just asking relative to the E-M system, but yes, add in the Sun again, and that movement would yes, pull the Moon. It would take some time to stabilize, but anyway, the Moon would in fact fly into whatever direction it was turned when the Earth disappeared -- making an ellipse around the Sun.

Anyway that's why I said "off in circles", but without the Sun, no, it would be straight in whatever direction it was faced at that point/

No spin, though in that: it faces its next turn around the Earth at each point it gets there. It does not spin as well more than it has to for the path.


Hello,

Been trying to play catch up on this thread -- still maintaining popularity after Nancy's 'departure.' Interesting.

Clare,

I think you do make a point regarding the motions of the Moon -- but I think that point is invalidated because of the Moon's unique orbital characteristics: it falls primarily toward the Sun. You are largely incorrect in your guess regarding what would happen: if the Earth did vanish, the Moon's orbit would vary only slightly, and the Moon would continue to orbit the Sun much as it does now, and rotate on its axis roughly 12 times each Solar Year, as it does now. If the Sun lasted long enough, the Earthless Moon would eventually slow and tidally lock to the Sun. But its rotation would not cease even then, if you were, say floating 50 million miles above the Solar System, observing the Earthless Moon in orbit below you.

Of course, the Moon does not spin in a frame where it doesn't spin, and the Earth does hang nearly motionless in the lunar sky. But this, I would say, is the illusion. Both are engaging in all sorts of motions.

I don't think you can honestly claim that the Moon is 'not spinning' up until the hypothetical moment that the Earth vanishes, and then is 'suddenly spinning.' (although some haggling over relative motions could be argued, I suppose) Although such hair-splitting of movements over other planet/moon/moons systems might have some validity, since they fall toward their primaries. But not ours.

Therefore, I believe the more traditional models explain and predict this behavior with greater accuracy -- an accuracy that demonstrates many of Nancy's claims to be hopelessly incorrect. The Moon does turn on its axis, as evidenced by the fact that the Sun and stars rise and set on the Moon. That motion would not stop whether Earth was here or not. Those motions have little dependence on the Earth, as Menow has been trying to point out with his 'angular momentum' questions.

I apologize for my tardiness to the thread -- real life calls, and all that, and thank you for your kind words earlier in the thread. I hope you understand and can accept my explanations and positions on this matter, or perhaps propose an experiment/predictive model which can demonstrate your explanations as being superior. But, for now, I think that the traditional model stands.

In the meantime, PX certainly continues to be almost as dangerous as the Invisible Dragon in my Garage.

Be well.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444


Hi, 74444 (wish I had a name for you: so much better, but anyway ...)

Yes, you are right re. WITH the Sun in the picture, it would continue to orbit around the missing point of the Earth, in a sine wave for a while, and yes, turn on its axis to go around it, in "orbital revolution", which really means it moves forward, with a turn on its axis to achieve that forward flow. And would eventually lock with the Sun.

But it would not have the additional spin on its axis as imageable in our mind experiment (my point, anyway). That is, it would not have the additional directional spin (diurnal rotation), relative to the missing Earth point, just as now it also does not have day and night relative to the Earth.

Venus has this relative to the Sun; the Earth has this relative to the Sun; the E-M system as a whole has it relative to the Sun (hence Moon phases), and the Sun has it relative to the galaxy.

But the Moon doesn't have it relative to the Earth.

Anyway, these are the bigger and smaller frames of reference, which here people have been confusing when talking of them; and claiming I don't get them. They still don't get that I was always talking of diurnal-type rotation around its axis -- originally (as Nancy was originally, before orbit was added, and she showed she didn't know that).

Oh well.

As to the invisible dragon: why don't you go out and have a few "puffs" with it, then? At least it'll be good for something -- AND be less likely to get into trouble!

LOL!

Cheers, to you.
Clare

5a
mclarek
User ID: 980219
Canada
05/25/2010 02:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh, re. Vatican purported leaks:

when they came out the footage was still on line;

But here is the press release. It was supposedly from a probe named "Siloe".

The discussion and some brief images on the Project Camelot interview are all that's left of the images, I am afraid, that I can find, anyway.

However, it is tantalizing that we may have a trail from a real disclosure: like memos from now-lost meeting notes.

However, here is the article I could find about it from ufodigest, vetting the Barbato story of the Vatican Jesuitical leak -- article by Scantamburlo (the first page is also in one of the other links I posted, but the second I think is unique to the ufodigest site):

[link to www.ufodigest.com]
[link to www.ufodigest.com]

P.S. I am not claiming UFOs exist, or anything -- though these writers are linked to that belief system. I am not saying PX exists either.

I simply know that sometimes where there's national security breaches, Jesuits, and so on , there are real leaks. And if PX is real, such a breach would have the kind of discussion trail with missing video, but a possible disclosure, information about which built up over several vetters of the story.

It seems that, whatever the value of the leaks -- even if a hoaxed set of images by the Vatican Jesuits themselves!!!!! -- this has enough details to be a real leak of SOME kind, from the details of the circumstantial evidence.

News