Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,836 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 819,640
Pageviews Today: 1,051,133Threads Today: 228Posts Today: 3,833
10:07 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

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

 
andrew

User ID: 1147954
Ukraine
10/31/2010 02:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
zetas DID foresaw - increase in natural disasters, erratic weather and severe weather conditions, globally. its not a question is it happening or not - its the question of measuring its scale and impact.

Certainly it's a question of if what she claims is actually happening. Show me any evidence you have of the "increases" she has claimed over the last decade and how things are any different than they have been at times in the past.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 991880


Natural Disasters on Increase – Insurers confirm
"There has been a dramatic increase in frequency and severity of natural disasters, now killing and injuring many millions of people every year and causing mounting economic losses".
- UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director,
former German environment minister
Klaus Topfer, 1999.

Insurance companies, globally, are already feeling the effects of this.

The Rising Cost of Natural Hazards
As recently as the 1950s, the average cost of catastrophic events was a mere $3.9 billion per year. Since 1950, the cost of natural disasters worldwide has increased, dramatically.
Violent weather cost the world a record $89 billion during 1998, more than in all of the 1980s, per the Worldwatch Institute and Munich Re.
Total disaster-related economic losses hit record 232 billion US dollars in 2008, continuing a long-term trend.

On the Rise
"Have climate-related disasters increased? The answer is yes".
- Debarati Guha-Sapir, director of the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED).

In a report issued December 1999, Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer (insurer of insurance companies), noted that the number of natural disasters has increased more than fourfold since the 1950s.

Disasters Quadruple over Last 20 Years: Oxfam
Nov 25, 2007
From 120 disasters a year on average in the early 1980s, to 2007, which alone had 950 – the highest number since Munich Re records began, in 1974.

During the 2000-2009 period, there were 385 disasters on average, an increase of 233% to 1980-1989, and 67% to 1990-1999, according to CRED data.

Weather-related events, such as droughts, storms and floods, have made up the majority of disasters overall, increasing by as much as 350 percent since data was first collected in 1950. Increase of deluges by 57% and droughts by 47% comprises for most of these numbers.
Since the 1980s, Earthquakes, which are not weather-related, have risen by around 50 percent.
- Munich Re in a study with the UNEP

The group acknowledges that we should not be misled by the absence of "mega-disasters", and warns that much more such extremes are to be expected in the future.

Increasing Storms
A rise in the world's ocean temperatures is putting more water vapor into the atmosphere. This provides additional fuel for storms as they travel overland.

Since the 1970s the average number of intense Category 4 and 5 hurricanes that draw their force from the ocean, occurring globally, has nearly doubled, averaging about 18 per year.
In 2005 the hurricane and typhoon season not only broke records, it doubled in ferocity and count.

[compiled by me from various news sources for ZetaMovie-2]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1143118
United States
10/31/2010 02:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Zetas Wrong Again!

[link to www.zetasquawk.com]

To be followed by a posting on how the LISS heliplots do not show the supposed earth wobble
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1143118


...after I finish part of an IPC I'm doing for a Boeing 767.
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 02:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
why are you so convinced that ancient megaliths were indeed astronomical devices?
 Quoting: andrew


That doesn't even matter, if you will think about it. Those monuments HAVE lined up with the position of Solar events since WAAAAAY before PX allegedly arrived to screw things up. They confirm that NOTHING has recently changed with the position of the Sun. You didn't think that dodge through before you contrived it, and put your foot right in your mouth.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
10/31/2010 02:08 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
re Sun and Moon - ask Inuit, IS it normal [not should or shouldnt].
 Quoting: andrew

It IS normal:
Thread: Come see live video of the moon, stars, and a telescopic sunrise! (Page 2)
The sun and moon are exactly where they should be in the sky.
astrobanner2
andrew

User ID: 1147954
Ukraine
10/31/2010 02:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Andrew, look up Nancy's 'science' of "Moon facts" that she touts in saying that the Moon shouldn't appear to rotate as we watch it move across the sky. What she says there is nothing but a pack of lies, Andrew. She misdefines terms and twists them so that people who read and believe her will think that the have been able to see confirmation for themsleves that the Moon is doing something 'wrong'.

The truth is, the Moon HAS to appear to rotate as it crossed the sky. It is utterly NORMAL for it to do that, but it has become Nancy's pet 'proof' that PX is affecting things. It's all a DAMNABLE LIE, Andrew! I'll take you through it sentence by sentence if you want, but you don't WANT that, do you? No... you don't WANT to see the lies in Zetatalk no matter how obvious they are!


Menow, if you think about it, and not just accept everything that science preaches, you see that what Nancy/Zetas say about the rotation of the Moon is very much possible, probable.


If *I* think about it?? How about if *YOU* think about it, hmm? Try real hard, Andrew... Show me. Take Nancy's "Moon facts" page and go through it line by line while you explain it. I DARE you!

Here it is:

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Now... YOU explain how the Moon isn't supposed to rotate 360 degrees over our heads every 24 hours with all the rest of the sky. You DO know that Earth rotates once every day while the sky holds still, right?

Go right ahead. You have the floor.
 Quoting: Menow 1119283


per Z's Moon doesnt rotate around its axis, it orbits around the Earth, with its one side constantly 'glued' to Earth

its totally possible, its in fact better explanation than two regular rhythms (rotation around Earth and Moon around its own axis) synched so perfectly that we see one side all the time!

but you all well know this, as you have been debating this to death with mcclareck and Max and ...
awile ago.

Last Edited by andrew on 10/31/2010 02:12 PM
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 02:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Wrong as it may ultimately be, you have to admit, it's a project VERY few have ever attempted to undertake. For that ALONE, my hat is off to Nancy. At the very least it's "interesting" for that reason alone.


So, you take your hat off to someone who has lied every step of the way, even to the point of convincing her followers to threaten to commit suicide if what she claimed didn't happen?

Really? Are you THAT sick?


wait, wait, wait, hold on - Nancy doesnt do personal counseling. Neither she nor Zetas direct people's personal lives and personal decisions. They give info, predictions, signs, and advice, at most.

what will people do with it, will they even listen and believe it at all, is up to them!

--------------
if brought to extreme one could demand a lawsuit on school textbook editors, because they've had an urge to commit suicide after having read there that Moon is not a Cheddar cheese!
 Quoting: andrew


Are you at all familiar with the notion of shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater when there is actually no fire?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1143118
United States
10/31/2010 02:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
zetas DID foresaw - increase in natural disasters, erratic weather and severe weather conditions, globally. its not a question is it happening or not - its the question of measuring its scale and impact.

Certainly it's a question of if what she claims is actually happening. Show me any evidence you have of the "increases" she has claimed over the last decade and how things are any different than they have been at times in the past.


Natural Disasters on Increase – Insurers confirm
"There has been a dramatic increase in frequency and severity of natural disasters, now killing and injuring many millions of people every year and causing mounting economic losses".
- UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director,
former German environment minister
Klaus Topfer, 1999.

Insurance companies, globally, are already feeling the effects of this.

The Rising Cost of Natural Hazards
As recently as the 1950s, the average cost of catastrophic events was a mere $3.9 billion per year. Since 1950, the cost of natural disasters worldwide has increased, dramatically.
Violent weather cost the world a record $89 billion during 1998, more than in all of the 1980s, per the Worldwatch Institute and Munich Re.
Total disaster-related economic losses hit record 232 billion US dollars in 2008, continuing a long-term trend.

On the Rise
"Have climate-related disasters increased? The answer is yes".
- Debarati Guha-Sapir, director of the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED).

In a report issued December 1999, Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer (insurer of insurance companies), noted that the number of natural disasters has increased more than fourfold since the 1950s.

Disasters Quadruple over Last 20 Years: Oxfam
Nov 25, 2007
From 120 disasters a year on average in the early 1980s, to 2007, which alone had 950 – the highest number since Munich Re records began, in 1974.

During the 2000-2009 period, there were 385 disasters on average, an increase of 233% to 1980-1989, and 67% to 1990-1999, according to CRED data.

Weather-related events, such as droughts, storms and floods, have made up the majority of disasters overall, increasing by as much as 350 percent since data was first collected in 1950. Increase of deluges by 57% and droughts by 47% comprises for most of these numbers.
Since the 1980s, Earthquakes, which are not weather-related, have risen by around 50 percent.
- Munich Re in a study with the UNEP

The group acknowledges that we should not be misled by the absence of "mega-disasters", and warns that much more such extremes are to be expected in the future.

Increasing Storms
A rise in the world's ocean temperatures is putting more water vapor into the atmosphere. This provides additional fuel for storms as they travel overland.

Since the 1970s the average number of intense Category 4 and 5 hurricanes that draw their force from the ocean, occurring globally, has nearly doubled, averaging about 18 per year.
In 2005 the hurricane and typhoon season not only broke records, it doubled in ferocity and count.

[compiled by me from various news sources for ZetaMovie-2]
 Quoting: andrew


Key points that do no support Nancy claims:

"Since 1950, the cost of natural disasters worldwide has increased, dramatically.

Where was planet eX in the 1950's, 60's, 70's....etc?

Part of the rise is...wait for it...inflation!

3.9 billion in 1950 is the equivalent of $34 billion today.

"Disasters Quadruple over Last 20 Years: Oxfam"

Where was planet eX in 1990?

Not one of these claims supports Nancy. Not a one.
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 02:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Andrew, look up Nancy's 'science' of "Moon facts" that she touts in saying that the Moon shouldn't appear to rotate as we watch it move across the sky. What she says there is nothing but a pack of lies, Andrew. She misdefines terms and twists them so that people who read and believe her will think that the have been able to see confirmation for themsleves that the Moon is doing something 'wrong'.

The truth is, the Moon HAS to appear to rotate as it crossed the sky. It is utterly NORMAL for it to do that, but it has become Nancy's pet 'proof' that PX is affecting things. It's all a DAMNABLE LIE, Andrew! I'll take you through it sentence by sentence if you want, but you don't WANT that, do you? No... you don't WANT to see the lies in Zetatalk no matter how obvious they are!


Menow, if you think about it, and not just accept everything that science preaches, you see that what Nancy/Zetas say about the rotation of the Moon is very much possible, probable.


If *I* think about it?? How about if *YOU* think about it, hmm? Try real hard, Andrew... Show me. Take Nancy's "Moon facts" page and go through it line by line while you explain it. I DARE you!

Here it is:

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Now... YOU explain how the Moon isn't supposed to rotate 360 degrees over our heads every 24 hours with all the rest of the sky. You DO know that Earth rotates once every day while the sky holds still, right?

Go right ahead. You have the floor.


per Z's Moon doesnt rotate around its axis, it orbits around the Earth, with its one side constantly 'glued' to Earth
 Quoting: andrew


And that is utter nonsense, of course. Why do you accept and parrot such 'scientific' dogma as that without question? I thought you said that was not right to do?

its totally possible, its in fact better explanation than two regular rhythms (rotation around Earth and Moon around its own axis) synched so perfectly that we see one side all the time!
 Quoting: andrew


"Totally possible"?? What does that even mean? No, in fact, that "Zeta" explanation is totally bullshit. What would happen if Earth suddenly went missing? Would the Moon be rotating? There is your answer.

but you all well know this, as you have been debating this to death with mcclareck and Max and ...
awile ago.
 Quoting: andrew


Yes, I am aware of the "Zeta party line" on it, and it's pure bullshit. See my thought experiment above and answer the question. Of course you won't, as that would prove "Zetas" wrong once again.


NOW... YOU DIDN'T EVEN LOOK AT THAT PAGE BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE THINGS IN YOUR RESPONSE.

Care to try again?

MOON FACTS: [link to www.zetatalk.com]
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
10/31/2010 02:24 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
per Z's Moon doesnt rotate around its axis, it orbits around the Earth, with its one side constantly 'glued' to Earth
 Quoting: andrew

Glued is not the proper way to describe a moon's rotational period equaling it's orbital period around the earth, which is called tidal lock. Most moons are tidally locked to their parent planet. If you don't think the moon is actually rotating, then I invite you to load up this simulator:
[link to www.acsoft.ch]
Load up one of the Apollo 11 scenarios that already has the LM landed on the moon. Forget about docking to the command module for a moment, just launch to lunar orbit due east and then launch to lunar orbit due west the same way. Which way required more fuel to reach orbit?

If you want to cheat, just read this; the westward launch required more fuel. Why? Because the moon IS rotating, and that rotation can either act to decrease the delta-V, the velocity, you need to reach orbit or increase the delta-V needed to reach orbit. If you launch with the rotation, it will decrease it, if you launch against the rotation, it will increase it.
astrobanner2
andrew

User ID: 1147954
Ukraine
10/31/2010 02:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Andrew, look up Nancy's 'science' of "Moon facts" that she touts in saying that the Moon shouldn't appear to rotate as we watch it move across the sky. What she says there is nothing but a pack of lies, Andrew. She misdefines terms and twists them so that people who read and believe her will think that the have been able to see confirmation for themsleves that the Moon is doing something 'wrong'.

The truth is, the Moon HAS to appear to rotate as it crossed the sky. It is utterly NORMAL for it to do that, but it has become Nancy's pet 'proof' that PX is affecting things. It's all a DAMNABLE LIE, Andrew! I'll take you through it sentence by sentence if you want, but you don't WANT that, do you? No... you don't WANT to see the lies in Zetatalk no matter how obvious they are!


Menow, if you think about it, and not just accept everything that science preaches, you see that what Nancy/Zetas say about the rotation of the Moon is very much possible, probable.


If *I* think about it?? How about if *YOU* think about it, hmm? Try real hard, Andrew... Show me. Take Nancy's "Moon facts" page and go through it line by line while you explain it. I DARE you!

Here it is:

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Now... YOU explain how the Moon isn't supposed to rotate 360 degrees over our heads every 24 hours with all the rest of the sky. You DO know that Earth rotates once every day while the sky holds still, right?

Go right ahead. You have the floor.


per Z's Moon doesnt rotate around its axis, it orbits around the Earth, with its one side constantly 'glued' to Earth


And that is utter nonsense, of course. Why do you accept and parrot such 'scientific' dogma as that without question? I thought you said that was not right to do?


its totally possible, its in fact better explanation than two regular rhythms (rotation around Earth and Moon around its own axis) synched so perfectly that we see one side all the time!


"Totally possible"?? What does that even mean? No, in fact, that "Zeta" explanation is totally bullshit. What would happen if Earth suddenly went missing? Would the Moon be rotating? There is your answer.


but you all well know this, as you have been debating this to death with mcclareck and Max and ...
awile ago.


Yes, I am aware of the "Zeta party line" on it, and it's pure bullshit. See my thought experiment above and answer the question. Of course you won't, as that would prove "Zetas" wrong once again.


NOW... YOU DIDN'T EVEN LOOK AT THAT PAGE BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE THINGS IN YOUR RESPONSE.

Care to try again?

MOON FACTS: [link to www.zetatalk.com]
 Quoting: Menow 1119283


i thought about it and tried to visualize it many times and i conclude for myself that what Nancy/Zetas claim about the Moon IS POSSIBLE and probably it is the way it really is.

that link tells about the Wobble! (i did look into it when you first posted it!)
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 02:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here you go Andrew:

"Moon FACTS are that the Moon will appear to be upside down if viewed from the S. Pole vs the N. Pole, and every change in latitude skews this view. But the view for any given latitude should vary only by 7° 7 minutes, a movement called Lunar Libration, equivalent to the hour hand of a clock moving a mere 1/2 hour. The rotation of the Moon's face during a lunar night moved from a reported 45° on Mar 7, 2004 to 60° by July 31, 2004 to 95° by Sep 26, 2004 and for real drama, see that animation of the 95° turn. This Netherlands Feb 27, 2005 photo covering a mere 3 hours shows an almost 30° turn."


How about explaining why Nancy LIES about the definition of 'libration' in order mislead people into thinking that the Moon shouldn't APPEAR to rotate as we watch it cross the sky.

That page: [link to www.zetatalk.com] is a really good example of the intentional distortions of fact in which Nancy engages on a regular basis. In fact, this 'Moon rotation' thing is Nancy's PET method of convincing people that something is wrong with Lunar motions, and it is nothing but a steaming pile of bullshit.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
10/31/2010 02:37 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
i thought about it and tried to visualize it many times and i conclude for myself that what Nancy/Zetas claim about the Moon IS POSSIBLE and probably it is the way it really is.
 Quoting: andrew

Wow, your idea of proof is that you visualized it? You did no emperical testing whatsoever. Had you done the simple test I provided above you would see that you and the zetas are wrong. I see you're avoiding addressing anything I've posted here today, I wonder why that is?
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/31/2010 02:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
wait, wait, wait, hold on - Nancy doesnt do personal counseling. Neither she nor Zetas direct people's personal lives and personal decisions. They give info, predictions, signs, and advice, at most.

what will people do with it, will they even listen and believe it at all, is up to them!


 Quoting: andrew


Convenient. Jim Jones said the same thing.
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 02:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
NOW... YOU DIDN'T EVEN LOOK AT THAT PAGE BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE THINGS IN YOUR RESPONSE.

Care to try again?

MOON FACTS: [link to www.zetatalk.com]




i thought about it and tried to visualize it many times and i conclude for myself that what Nancy/Zetas claim about the Moon IS POSSIBLE and probably it is the way it really is.
 Quoting: andrew


What do they claim about that? I doubt you can even explain what you THINK they are claiming, because it makes no sense at all.

that link tells about the Wobble! (i did look into it when you first posted it!)
 Quoting: andrew


The word "wobble" appears exactly once on that page, clear at the bottom, and doesn't even refer to the Moon. That wasn't the point of my post about that page. It was about what Nancy calls "Moon facts" near the top of the page.


Again... do you realize that Earth rotates once a day, or 360 degrees every 24 hours and that the sky, basically holds still so that we as Earth-bound observers looking up see the sky rotating overhead that same amount? Do you realise that the Moon is sort of 'attached' to the sky and 'moves' with it?

Please answer these questions.
andrew

User ID: 1147954
Ukraine
10/31/2010 02:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here you go Andrew:

"Moon FACTS are that the Moon will appear to be upside down if viewed from the S. Pole vs the N. Pole, and every change in latitude skews this view. But the view for any given latitude should vary only by 7° 7 minutes, a movement called Lunar Libration, equivalent to the hour hand of a clock moving a mere 1/2 hour. The rotation of the Moon's face during a lunar night moved from a reported 45° on Mar 7, 2004 to 60° by July 31, 2004 to 95° by Sep 26, 2004 and for real drama, see that animation of the 95° turn. This Netherlands Feb 27, 2005 photo covering a mere 3 hours shows an almost 30° turn."


How about explaining why Nancy LIES about the definition of 'libration' in order mislead people into thinking that the Moon shouldn't APPEAR to rotate as we watch it cross the sky.

That page: [link to www.zetatalk.com] is a really good example of the intentional distortions of fact in which Nancy engages on a regular basis. In fact, this 'Moon rotation' thing is Nancy's PET method of convincing people that something is wrong with Lunar motions, and it is nothing but a steaming pile of bullshit.
 Quoting: Menow 1119283


well, that's only elderly, "illiterate" Nancy, not Zetas, hehe.. :P

well, even with a 'glued' one face of the Moon, it would have its side parts lightened slightly from time to time.

Are all them lying, too?

[link to beforeitsnews.com]
andrew

User ID: 1147954
Ukraine
10/31/2010 02:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
i thought about it and tried to visualize it many times and i conclude for myself that what Nancy/Zetas claim about the Moon IS POSSIBLE and probably it is the way it really is.
Wow, your idea of proof is that you visualized it? You did no emperical testing whatsoever. Had you done the simple test I provided above you would see that you and the zetas are wrong. I see you're avoiding addressing anything I've posted here today, I wonder why that is?
 Quoting: Astronut


its better to vizualize the actual orbit - how could it not rotate around its axis and do rotate around Earth, and how its possible and explains one visible side.

Apollo simulation? im sceptical about such things. its like science for kids, who do not question, and are "served" everything in without controversy and avoiding mentioning where it is still a debate.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
10/31/2010 02:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Andrew, look up Nancy's 'science' of "Moon facts" that she touts in saying that the Moon shouldn't appear to rotate as we watch it move across the sky. What she says there is nothing but a pack of lies, Andrew. She misdefines terms and twists them so that people who read and believe her will think that the have been able to see confirmation for themsleves that the Moon is doing something 'wrong'.

The truth is, the Moon HAS to appear to rotate as it crossed the sky. It is utterly NORMAL for it to do that, but it has become Nancy's pet 'proof' that PX is affecting things. It's all a DAMNABLE LIE, Andrew! I'll take you through it sentence by sentence if you want, but you don't WANT that, do you? No... you don't WANT to see the lies in Zetatalk no matter how obvious they are!


Menow, if you think about it, and not just accept everything that science preaches, you see that what Nancy/Zetas say about the rotation of the Moon is very much possible, probable.
 Quoting: andrew


No, Andrew, as an astronomer I can tell you that it absolutely isn't. If YOU think about the moon orbiting the earth and us standing on the sphere of the earth observing it in three dimensions, it will be instantly clear to you that it does exactly what it SHOULD be doing.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
10/31/2010 02:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Are all them lying, too?

[link to beforeitsnews.com]
 Quoting: andrew

Wether lying or incredibly mistaken matters not, either way I already disproved this claim during my broadcast yesterday, which indeed I mentioned in the comments section of that link and was of course, ignored. I wonder how long those who believe it, you included, can continue to ignore the debunking it already received here?
Thread: Come see live video of the moon, stars, and a telescopic sunrise! (Page 2)
Come on andrew, man up, why did my telescope find the moon and sun to be precisely where they should be in the sky?
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
10/31/2010 03:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
zetas DID foresaw - increase in natural disasters, erratic weather and severe weather conditions, globally. its not a question is it happening or not - its the question of measuring its scale and impact.

Certainly it's a question of if what she claims is actually happening. Show me any evidence you have of the "increases" she has claimed over the last decade and how things are any different than they have been at times in the past.


Natural Disasters on Increase – Insurers confirm
"There has been a dramatic increase in frequency and severity of natural disasters, now killing and injuring many millions of people every year and causing mounting economic losses".
- UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director,
former German environment minister
Klaus Topfer, 1999.

Insurance companies, globally, are already feeling the effects of this.
 Quoting: andrew


Yes, simply because of the rising population that chooses to live along the shore and in areas known for earthquakes and other natural diasters. This is a MANMADE phenomena simply becuase of the choices people make of where they live and build cities. One only has to look at New Orleans being rebuilt BELOW SEA LEVEL to realize this.



Increasing Storms
A rise in the world's ocean temperatures is putting more water vapor into the atmosphere. This provides additional fuel for storms as they travel overland.

Since the 1970s the average number of intense Category 4 and 5 hurricanes that draw their force from the ocean, occurring globally, has nearly doubled, averaging about 18 per year.
 Quoting: andrew


So, your imaginary planet ex was around in the 1970's?


In 2005 the hurricane and typhoon season not only broke records, it doubled in ferocity and count.

 Quoting: andrew


So, what has it been doing ever since? The last several hurricane seasons have been VERY mild. Where did your imaginary planet ex go?
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
10/31/2010 03:04 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
its better to vizualize the actual orbit - how could it not rotate around its axis and do rotate around Earth,
 Quoting: andrew

Wrong. First you're abusing the vocabularly horribly, second, empirical data is the higher standard here.
Apollo simulation? im sceptical about such things.
 Quoting: andrew

I really do not care if you are skeptical or not, you are in no position to critique it, you've never even used it. It is a very robust simulator which has been shown to agree with reality. For instance, some people use it to simulate real space missions in realtime in tandem as those missions actually occur and the simulator is found to agree with the real timing and position of the events (the simulator is not limited to Apollo by any means, any real spacecraft can be simulated).
its like science for kids, who do not question, and are "served" everything in without controversy and avoiding mentioning where it is still a debate.
 Quoting: andrew

LOL, no, it's nothing of the sort. It's a high fidelity tool you can use to find the truth, but it's clear you're scared to death of finding out the truth. It's also painfully clear you don't know what you're talking about at all.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 10/31/2010 03:06 PM
astrobanner2
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 03:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here you go Andrew:

"Moon FACTS are that the Moon will appear to be upside down if viewed from the S. Pole vs the N. Pole, and every change in latitude skews this view. But the view for any given latitude should vary only by 7° 7 minutes, a movement called Lunar Libration, equivalent to the hour hand of a clock moving a mere 1/2 hour. The rotation of the Moon's face during a lunar night moved from a reported 45° on Mar 7, 2004 to 60° by July 31, 2004 to 95° by Sep 26, 2004 and for real drama, see that animation of the 95° turn. This Netherlands Feb 27, 2005 photo covering a mere 3 hours shows an almost 30° turn."


How about explaining why Nancy LIES about the definition of 'libration' in order mislead people into thinking that the Moon shouldn't APPEAR to rotate as we watch it cross the sky.

That page: [link to www.zetatalk.com] is a really good example of the intentional distortions of fact in which Nancy engages on a regular basis. In fact, this 'Moon rotation' thing is Nancy's PET method of convincing people that something is wrong with Lunar motions, and it is nothing but a steaming pile of bullshit.


well, that's only elderly, "illiterate" Nancy, not Zetas, hehe.. :P
 Quoting: andrew


You mean you think "Zetas" would not agree with what said on that page? Why don't you ask them? I DARE you!

well, even with a 'glued' one face of the Moon, it would have its side parts lightened slightly from time to time.
 Quoting: andrew


Huh? You're blathering nonsense. The Moon has one whole side 'lightened' by the Sun all the time, so wtf are you even talking about?

Are all them lying, too?

[link to beforeitsnews.com]
 Quoting: andrew


Lying? Sometimes they are just making shit up, yes. Sometimes they beleive what they are saying... all that is just like the mix Nancy engages in. In the end, it's all indefensible bullshit which could only fool people who are ignorant about astronomy.



I asked you this:

How about explaining why Nancy LIES about the definition of 'libration' in order mislead people into thinking that the Moon shouldn't APPEAR to rotate as we watch it cross the sky.

Here is the lie, in case you couldn't find it:

"But the view for any given latitude should vary only by 7° 7 minutes, a movement called Lunar Libration, equivalent to the hour hand of a clock moving a mere 1/2 hour."

Please explain why Nancy is falsifying that information. It is THE basis for her claim that the Moon is abnormally rotating as it crosses the sky and it is FALSE!
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 03:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
its better to vizualize the actual orbit - how could it not rotate around its axis and do rotate around Earth, and how its possible and explains one visible side.

Apollo simulation? im sceptical about such things. its like science for kids, who do not question, and are "served" everything in without controversy and avoiding mentioning where it is still a debate.
 Quoting: andrew



Earth to Andrew: If Earth suddenly went missing, would the Moon be rotating? Yes or no... why or why not?
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 03:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
its better to vizualize the actual orbit - how could it not rotate around its axis and do rotate around Earth, and how its possible and explains one visible side.

Apollo simulation? im sceptical about such things. its like science for kids, who do not question, and are "served" everything in without controversy and avoiding mentioning where it is still a debate.
 Quoting: andrew



No... on second thought, let's try it like this:

Andrew, is Earth rotating? Yes or no. If yes, how do you know that?
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 04:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
From that same site, Andrew... A story showing Nancy and "Zetas" WRONG AGAIN about the Tunguska event.

[link to beforeitsnews.com]

102 Year Old Mystery of Tunguska Blast Solved

102 years after the fall of the famous celestial body in Tunguska taiga, scientists finally managed to identify the crash site of one of its fragments and examine the unusual composition of the substance of this space creature. The study was conducted using a unique instrument - GPR. As a result, it was proved that it was not a meteorite, but a comet.
The_Returner

User ID: 1148062
United States
10/31/2010 04:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh look. Andrew is back. I *knew* I smelled something; the odor of unwashed socialists with a chronic masturbating habit is hard to miss.

If he sticks around, can we open a window? Maybe light a couple of candles?

Phew. That's better. Now I'll sit here quietly and chuckle to myself as Andrew of the Sticky Hand espouses his dim-witted observations on Lunar rotation.

Popcorn, anyone?
Well-Paid Government Shill
KeepingItReal

User ID: 1038225
Canada
10/31/2010 04:42 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
you are a fool assuming i am the fool you assume me to be.

its good that people at least have a feeling of guilt over what have they done to our planet. that doesnt mean it caused warming, or "climate change".

zetas DID foresaw - increase in natural disasters, erratic weather and severe weather conditions, globally. its not a question is it happening or not - its the question of measuring its scale and impact. and some also delude themselves that they can DO something about it, so also what to do about it.
if you want to be rigid fool you are now attempting to be - fine, its your choice. but rest of the world is not that well off - they are counting economic and crop losses, their food prices are soaring because of this and soon enough they can have nothing to eat in some places!

re Sun and Moon - ask Inuit, IS it normal [not should or shouldnt].

 Quoting: andrew

re Sun and Moon - ask Inuit, IS it normal [not should or shouldnt].


 Quoting: andrew

Do you know what an Inuit is? I have friends that are Inuit. Yes, they are concerned that the ice is melting, winters are warmer, but this is due to the ozone depletion. There are studies that show arctic warming and cooling run in cycles. So yes, I have asked "the Inuit" and I have actually been in a place called Inuvik, land of the midnight sun, in the summer a couple of years ago, watching the sun circle the horizon.
why are you so convinced that ancient megaliths were indeed astronomical devices? it is only a guess!
they are not so precisely lined with compass, and you can make probably anything to align if look at it at certain angles.
 Quoting: andrew

No, it isn't a guess. My people's ancestors have erected these structures precisely to mark certain phenomenon, and the practice of observing them has been passed down through the ages. It is impossible to "accidentally" mark the solstice in a cave when you are not even on the tropic of cancer. You can't accidentally cause an intense band of light to form and penetrate a small orifice to illuminate a cavern at the precise moment of the solstice. You again demonstrate how you don't even know what you're talking about.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
***ZetaMaX***

User ID: 659972
United States
10/31/2010 05:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh look. Andrew is back. I *knew* I smelled something; the odor of unwashed socialists with a chronic masturbating habit is hard to miss.

If he sticks around, can we open a window? Maybe light a couple of candles?

Phew. That's better. Now I'll sit here quietly and chuckle to myself as Andrew of the Sticky Hand espouses his dim-witted observations on Lunar rotation.

Popcorn, anyone?
 Quoting: The_Returner


Damn, who put The_Returner back on his DEFAULT setting???
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
Menow
User ID: 1119283
United States
10/31/2010 05:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here is the "Zetas" in utter contradiction to their act of simulating normalcy in the skies. It is plainly stated that the coverup of the existence of PX runs AGAINST the spiritual growth of Mankind.

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Man, in the main, is doing poorly in handling the coming pole shift. The elite are informed, the common man denied the facts. The wealthy elite, self centered and greedy, who rule the world by virtue of the great clout their wealthy wields, are concerned only so that their worker class can survive intact to serve them in the future. This is considered an unbalanced situation, by the Council.

The Council does not interfere when the schoolhouse will simply be rearranged, as happens during every pole shift. New opportunities for spiritual choices are vastly increased during times of great change, with established leadership collapsed, need and hardship everywhere, and little to stand in the way of helping others. In the words of Wall Street, these are growth opportunities, spiritually speaking.

The Council interferes when the opportunities for spiritual growth are being restricted to a handful of individuals operating the cover-up. They agonize over whether to help or abandon others, while the common man is told only that the weather and skies are normal, and a return to shopping is in order. Imagine the difference if the coming pole shift, the presence of Planet X in the inner solar system, were a reality for the common man. All would weigh their life, their choices, live with their choices for some days and perhaps have regrets. A larger growth opportunity, for more individuals, for a longer period of time.



The statment is unequivocal in its insistence that Man's spiritual growth would be ENHANCED by full knowledge of the presence of PX. Whom are the main players in keeping Mankind from having this information? "Zetas", of course! What a DAMNING contradiction, in a nutshell!
The_Returner

User ID: 1148062
United States
10/31/2010 05:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Oh damn. Look over there, in the corner -- no wait, I take it back, DON'T LOOK.

Andrew, STOP THAT! And put some clothes on. They stink but for Pete's sake, man, this is not your bedroom in Dumbfuckistan.
Well-Paid Government Shill
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 1090932
United States
10/31/2010 05:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
oh really? why?
who can forbid them?
 Quoting: andrew

Proof positive that Andrew has no grasp of physics.
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.

News