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

Things are always going on Gerard, but NONE of them is Planet X, because it does not exist.

Max seems to be admitting that Nancy did in fact ban posters on this thread during her chat, when we haven't confirmed or ruled out that she did. It makes you wonder if Max is here doing damage control for Nancy, or if he is just blowing hot air. I would have expected him to claim that Nancy did not ban anyone, that we had no proof, but no. He accepts that she probably did, and feels she is justified. Way to go Max. Sometimes you do a better job making Nancy look bad than her debunkers do.

Oh come on Gerard. Anyone can post anything on the net, but that doesn't mean it is true. Even if the posters are not lying, it is possible that they are mistaken. Have you tried to test this information or do you just accept it as truth? Funny how nobody else aside from pole shift enthusiasts and 2012ers has noticed this anomaly.

We had numerous stories along these same lines leading up to May 2003. Next we will be back to another round of the Sun is not where it should be in the sky and the moon is out of position crapola. No doubt as we get nearer to 2012 we will be getting those old 2003 stories of "eye witness reports"(lol) about the sun setting minutes and even nearly an hour before its scheduled time in different parts of the world.....as Planet "X" begins to make our Earth suddenly slow to a grinding halt....etc. It will probably be just another repeat of the 2003 crap all over again.

So relax, Gerard, it's nothing to concern yourself over dude!!

Last Edited by The Lone Ranger on 10/12/2009 07:55 AM

If thousands of people post on the internet that their compasses are working just fine it means nothing, but if three anonymous people post about anomalies on a pole shift site, it must be true and those other thousands of people are lying, part of a conspiracy to hide it. It's cherry picking the bits that support what you already believe as opposed to finding the truth.

Zetards are not known for their rational thinking capabilities.

Nancy on ZetaTalk being down last night:

Perhaps some kind of maintenance, I was not notified. Sunday night just after midnight seems like a sleeper kind of time to do some scheduled maintenance. On MOST website this would pass unnoticed. Ah, but then ZetaTalk is so POPULAR!

ROFLMAO. As far as I can tell, Max is the only one that noticed it was down.

ZetaTalk is certainly very popular with a group of about 5 morons!

Nancy says her site gets more hits today than it did in 2003. I would love to see the proof of that.

It peaked in May 2003, for obvious reasons, then trailed away over the next year or so as her predictions unravelled, and it has bobbed-along the bottom ever since.

I know what you mean. And the logic is just about as silly as Nancy LIEDer claiming that 1000's upon 1000's of amateur and professional astronomers around the globe were part of some mysterious coverup to keep the evidence of her rogue planet "a secret" leading up to May 2003 and beyond....as we now find ourselves six plus years later.

Web Traffic 101

Web traffic, the performance metrics of the 21st century.
Increase Website Hits

See also: Increase Site Visitors; Increase Website Hits

First, let's take a hypothetical tour of the process of measuring website traffic. Imagine Hypothetical Jim visiting the home page of a new website he learned about on Google.com. Hypothetical Jim visits the home page, then visits the "About Us" page, which he bookmarks. Later, Hypothetical Stu visits the home page, then leaves the site. Later that evening, Hypothetical Jim returns to the "About Us" page using his bookmark, and clicks on the link to the "Contact Us" page. After looking over the page, he leaves the site.

From the text description above, you can determine that: (1) the site has had 2 unique visitors, Hypothetical Jim and Hypothetical Stu; (2) the site has had three unique visitor sessions (two for Jim and one for Stu); and (3) the site has had 5 pageviews (4 by Jim and 1 by Stu). You may wonder wether to count Hypothetical Jim's second visit to the "About Us" page as a second pageview. Count it.

What you cannot determine from the description above is the number of website hits. A hit is measured every time a specific unique file (HTML files, image files, script files, frames, etc.) is downloaded. In other words, many people refer to the total number of HTTP Requests a user makes as the number of hits the site receives. Since a single web page can be made up of any number of unique files (hundreds even), measuring hits is often meaningless in measuring the success of a website.

In this hypothetical example, the homepage consists of 24 files, so web analysis software will count 24 hits every time a visitor downloads the home page. There are 21 total images, 1 script, and one CSS file (plus the index html file itself). The "About Us" page consists of 14 files, so web analysis software will count 14 hits. There are 11 images, 1 script, and one CSS file (plus the about html file itself). The same goes for the "Contact Us" page.

As you can see, website hits do not consistently correlate with unique visitors, sessions, or pageviews. The only reason to look at hits is to measure the number of HTTP requests that a browser has to make in order to view your page. Generally speaking, the larger the hit count, the slower the download. For that reason, it is best to reduce the number of hits/page until the download speed is optimized.

Savvy media buyers ignore webmasters who claim to have thousands of hits. They measure pageviews, user sessions, and unique and return visitors.

[link to www.seologic.com]

Correct.

Geez Ms LIEDer can sure spin some . Even over something as insignificant as this.

In any case, page views is no measure of information veracity! If you publicize sensationalist bullshit you're bound to get lots of hits. People are curious.

If ZetaTalk was so good, after ten years or so of web presence it would be FAMOUS! But it is still a minor kOOk web site.

That says it all. Nancy has FAILED to set the world alight with her bullshit.

And just when I think Nancy has run out of things for me to LMAO!!

Thankyou, Nancy.

She missed her true vocation as a comedienne!

Now I predict that the Fence Shitter will be along eventually to correct the record.

Nice story. Got some evidence?

Didn't think so.

[link to www.alexa.com]

Percent of global Internet users who visit zetatalk.com:
-8%

Percent of global pageviews on zetatalk.com:
-19%

Daily pageviews per user for zetatalk.com:
-12%

Daily time on site for zetatalk.com:
-35%

She still gets more hits than I though though. The numbers above dont show what how it was in 2002/03 though ... but in the last few months its going down. But still I have to confess its more popular than I thought.

Did she had a pinned thread on GLP in 2003/03 btw ? Was GLP as known in 2002/03 like today ? This has all to be taken into consideration when evaluating the statistics.

I see NancyMax had a very busy weekend. It must be tough, being Nancy's Number One Most Bestest Favorite Sock Puppet. Always cleaning up her verbal messes...

Are these your readings? Or are they anonymous reports sent to you? If they are anonymous...what have you done to verify that the anomaly took place? In both cases, what have you done to document this? Beyond that, you obviously didn't know that the poles are NOT stationary. They do wander a bit. If you would do just a bit of research, you could save yourself a lot of trouble looking foolish.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 10/12/2009 10:39 AM

ZetaTalk is so popular? Based on what? The data I've seen shows quite the opposite.

The Kookometer

If you have used an Internet forum, you will—most likely—have encountered an Internet kook. These unhinged individuals come in many shapes and sizes. They may boast about their monumental contribution to the arts and sciences. They may desperately try to alert the world to some terrible conspiracy. They may complain about being tragically wronged. Despite this variation, every kook shares a common trait: a stubborn willingness to inflict their message upon anyone and everyone.

In previous times, these individuals were largely hidden from view. They might have harangued the local newspaper with letters written in green ink, but their public exposure was minimal. All this changed with the rise of the Internet. The dawning of the global village has elevated them to the status of global village idiots.

The Kookometer uses a Kook-Metric based on eight categories. These are “Vexatious Posting Habits”, “Irksome Writing Style”, “Narcissism”, “Ineptitude at Debate”, “Hysteria”, “Megalomania”, “Absurd Beliefs” and “Bigotry”. Each category is divided into four parameters, which are assessed by being given one of five ratings. These rating are:

[link to www.hyperdeath.co.uk]

I "thoughtfully" disagree that your name is cool. It's but another piece of evidence showing you aren't a fence sitter.

List of internet kooks (wiki)

Nancy's currently at no. 7!

Pseudoscience ...soggers?

* Alex Chiu -- Marketer of life extension cuff links.
* Alexander Abian -- Insane math professor from Iowa State University (deceased). Believed in massive rearrangement of the solar system. Was published -- in the Weekly World News.
* Ahmet Cosar -- the operator of early Usenet spambot "Serdar Argic"; went on a mad spam frenzy in 1994 pushing anti-Armenian hatred, accusing the Armenians of perpetuating a genocide on Turks and Azeris.
* David dIcke -- Weird. Not purely internet - all over the weirdscape.
* John Kwok Anti-science and evolution troll.
* Archimedes Plutonium -- Janitor at Dartmouth College; known for a bizarre fascination with the plutonium atom and a series of bogus mathematical proofs designed to establish him as the greatest genius on Earth.
* Nancy Lieder -- Frumpy channeler who hears aliens talking to her in her head. Runs the New Age apocalyptic cult ZetaTalk.
* Gene Ray -- An old guy. Likes to rant about time and cubes. Nobody knows what he's talking about, but college debating societies have invited him to campus to serve as target practice.
* Jack Sarfatti -- A PhD physicist and Geller-gawker in the 70s, a flat out loony on Usenet in the 90s.
* Frank R. Wallace -- the now-deceased promoter of Neo-Tech.
* Sanford Wallace -- the king of Internet spam (and proud of it, apparently.)

[link to rationalwiki.com]

Awesome find.

[link to rationalwiki.com]

Sounds like Nancy and Kook #8, Gene Ray, might be a good match!

We should get them together, see if (crazy) Love blossoms. Man, I can just hear those wedding vows now -- Zetas and cubes and PX and time! That would be a video worth seeing.

Eventually Nancy announced that Nibiru would pass by Earth in March of 2003, causing all sorts of problems for the unsuspecting human race, including the fabled pole shift. In the early 2000s, she started doing "Live Chat" sessions on the Godlike Productions conspiracy forums, where people would ask the Zetas questions and she would respond for them. She advised people on how to prepare for the shift - stockpile canned food, build underground shelters, and kill all of your pets. Followers posted shots of lights in the night sky, insisting that Nibiru was becoming visible to the naked eye. Nancy's star rose high enough that even Phil Plait took notice, devoting a debunking page on the still-young Bad Astronomy site to the utter ridiculousness of the Nibiru / Planet X myth.

When March 2003 came and went without any sign of catatstrophe, Nancy declared that the prophecy was a "White Lie" told by the Zetas to throw off Them. If she gave a real date for the arrival of Planet X, They would declare martial law and confine everyone to large cities so that the majority of the population would die in the pole shift. Her masterstroke complete, Ms. Lieder declared that Planet X had in fact arrived in the inner solar system, though it was currently sitting motionless behind the sun. When asked why it was not visible at any time of the year, she declared that Earth had been stopped dead in its orbit by Nibiru's gravitational pull and was similarly sitting motionless in space. When asked why different constellations were visible throughout the year, she waffled a bit and said something about the earth wobbling on its axis. Mystery solved!



From here [link to rationalwiki.com]

Whoever wrote and posted that got the date wrong...it wasn't March 2003 but May 2003. Not that it really matters...she failed either way and has continued to fail ever since.