Zeta Talk: Direct Answers from the Zeta Reticuli People

A CUSTOMER REVIEW
16 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars Puerile garbage, November 10, 2001
By A Customer

This book contains inconsistent and self-contradictory rubbish. All of the author's bizarre theories are easily debunked, and she seems unaware of even the most basic physics (not to mention the evident mathematical failings of an alleged "computer professional"). Indeed, scientific principles are grossly misrepresented from start to finish, either from ignorance or by design.

Her "facts" are also either incorrect or are interpreted in a facile and incompetent way. For instance, she asserts that the corals off Norway "prove" that it was recently in tropical zones. Actually, those corals (Lophelia) cannot survive in water warmer than 10 C or colder than 4 C, and are found below 200 metres depth off Norway, with some living colonies more than 7000 years old, and many older but deceased colonies at similar depths (they obtain nutrients in part from hydrocarbon seeps, which individually last only for centuries to millenia). They also occur in somewhat deeper waters in temperate zones, such as off Ireland. Lophelia even thrives in the tropics, but only at depths of 600-1400 metres, where the temperature range is suitable. So, rather than supporting her stupid theory about *physical* pole shifts or large crust movements every 3000 years, the distribution of these corals emphatically contradicts it. So does all the other evidence, but the author does not look for it or conveniently ignores or misrepresents it.

Updated ravings and commercial pitches for her paraphernalia are available on the author's web site, which conveniently ignores the fact that her predictions in 1996-1997 were utterly false. She thought comet Hale-Bopp was a supernova, which NASA was covering up(?!?!), and that some planet-X brown dwarf would arrive in the Solar System in 1998. Due to its repeated non-arrival, her infallible projected arrival date has now been revised to May 2003, but it will be visible to the naked eye in late 2001 - no, no, mid 2002 with a big telescope - um, make that late 2002 with a long exposure CCD image using the big telescope. To support her fantasy and its repeated revisions, she has concocted the most amusingly absurd replacement theories for almost everything in human science. Of course, her theories are contradicted by even the simplest experiments and observations.
[link to www.amazon.com]

I found this review of Nancy's above book quite well put. Especially the first paragraph.