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

Okay, Max, I can understand your concerns about the economy. I'm concerned too. While I'm skeptical about a cataclysmic geological or astronomical event, an economic cataclysm (econoclysm?) is frightenling plausible, and it could occur so quickly we'd all be left standing there with "Huh?" expressions (and worthless cash).


Indeed.

Now, for the all demonizing of Nancy and Zetatalk everyone has been doing, just exactly **WHAT** is she suggesting that people actually ***DO***???

Get seeds
Get water distillers
Get survival literature
Learn about wild edibles
Learn some basic medical skills
Learn, acquire, focus on anything and everything that can aid self-sufficiency without the assistance of modern infrastructure.

If we had a currency collapse, we would lose our modern infrastructure almost as certainly as if it was destroyed by a "pole shift". We'd face the same challenges, the same dangers, the same problems.

In the end, **ALL** of Nancy's material is aimed SOLELY at encouraging individuals to prepare and be as self-sufficient as possible.

If instead it was about some "rapture" or "initiation" into some cult where you surrender your wealth and possessions and go live in some commune in Oregon where you parade around in orange robes, well then I might be more inclined to "approve" of what the debunkers are doing.

But instead, the debunkers are working tirelessly to destroy ALL of Nancy's message, including the parts that are really the keystone for the whole of Zetatalk which is ***NOT*** cosmology, but rather establishing SELF-SUFFICIENCY.






Very well put, Max!!!

I completely agree with you here.

"Victims" helping "victims" can only go so far. One victim can indeed help dig another "victim" out from the rubble - but once that is accomplished, where will EITHER of them get a sufficient supply of potable water?


Very STO of you Max. I guess you didn't read what I wrote. In an emergency, everyone is in the same boat. So you would help a little, but save your sorry ass, let the others work it out while you go home and drink the water you saved. Nice. I hope that if you ended up being in the rubble, some STS dude like myself takes the time to pull you out, wrap your wounds and give you a drink. Let me ask you a question, given that you are supposedly a survivor of 911. How did the people in the street react? I am sure there was probably a spontaneous desire to help those in need, over and above the desire to run away to a safe place. Stories of the bravery and selflessness of average citizens that day abound. Did you learn nothing from your experience, or did you just make up that you were a survivor?



>> My view of our spiritual nature is that we largely attract what we focus our attention on.

Indeed - my focus is SURVIVAL, not "disaster" but SURVIVAL. I visualize myself as the "rescuer", not the "victim".



Uh huh. A rescuer that is more motivated to save his own ass than to do what is needed to help others, as you said in the paragraph above.


>> I believe it is a waste to spend what little time we have worrying about something that might or might not happen in the future.

So you have no "insurance" I take it?? No fire, medical, homeowners, auto etc.? - because you "might" or "might not" ever need it?

My medical is provided because I live in Canada. I pay a small premium every month because that is the healthcare system we have here. Auto insurance is mandatory, so yes, I have it. Home insurance? I am native, and my home is on the reservation. Yes we have insurance, but our greatest insurance is how we band together in a crisis, like this summer when there was a serious fire that threatened to burn down a whole neighbourhood. At the drop of a hat, the people region wide banded together to provide shelter to the people evacuated from their homes with no notice. Does having insurance make you feel secure? Do you think that after Nancy's disaster you will be paid out on your claim? ROFLMAO.

>> let the others work it out while you go home and drink the water you saved.

Wrong - I **KNOW** how to purify water, collect clean water, even how to carry it. I am **EDUCATED** because I "bothered" to study the topic ahead of time.

whatever, Max. The fact is that if we are to believe that you really were at the WTC on 911, you have admitted to being too chickenshit to stick around once you were safely out to see how you could help others during the worst crisis the city had seen in a very long time. And you call that being a survivor? You call that being STO? Anyone can purify water. You don't need to be all that educated on the topic. It's called boiling the shit out of brackish water and filtering it. Not rocket science.

Okay, Max, I can understand your concerns about the economy. I'm concerned too. While I'm skeptical about a cataclysmic geological or astronomical event, an economic cataclysm (econoclysm?) is frightenling plausible, and it could occur so quickly we'd all be left standing there with "Huh?" expressions (and worthless cash).


Indeed.

Now, for the all demonizing of Nancy and Zetatalk everyone has been doing, just exactly **WHAT** is she suggesting that people actually ***DO***???

Get seeds
Get water distillers
Get survival literature
Learn about wild edibles
Learn some basic medical skills
Learn, acquire, focus on anything and everything that can aid self-sufficiency without the assistance of modern infrastructure.

If we had a currency collapse, we would lose our modern infrastructure almost as certainly as if it was destroyed by a "pole shift". We'd face the same challenges, the same dangers, the same problems.

In the end, **ALL** of Nancy's material is aimed SOLELY at encouraging individuals to prepare and be as self-sufficient as possible.

If instead it was about some "rapture" or "initiation" into some cult where you surrender your wealth and possessions and go live in some commune in Oregon where you parade around in orange robes, well then I might be more inclined to "approve" of what the debunkers are doing.

But instead, the debunkers are working tirelessly to destroy ALL of Nancy's message, including the parts that are really the keystone for the whole of Zetatalk which is ***NOT*** cosmology, but rather establishing SELF-SUFFICIENCY.






Very well put, Max!!!

I completely agree with you here.

So you agree her science is questionable but her heart is in the right place?

No George, I didn't say that.

I think her survival data is top drawer stuff ... there is very much of it, and I haven't seen anybody else put as much forth with as much honesty as her.

Her science is sound ... way against mainstream, and that's what the backlash is all about. Her science scares people. And her spiritual writing I have yet to see anybody else's concepts seem so complete and correct to my way of thinking.

And that's MY point of view ... everybody else has their own way of thinking about especially THIS.

Very well put, Max!!!

I completely agree with you here.

Max,

Since you’re a trained officer of the court would you be willing to place Zeta Talk claims on trial? Say one from a list that is agreed upon by the bunkers and debunkers. Each submit three and then an agreement is made to select one for trial. The court will select a judge and a jury. We will attempt to use civil court rules so the ruling will be decided by the preponderance of the evidence not beyond a shadow of a doubt. This means that a jury of maybe three people will decide, and majority rules. I would even give two positions to the bunkers with one to the debunkers.

Her science is sound ... way against mainstream, and that's what the backlash is all about. Her science scares people.

And that's MY point of view ... everybody else has their own way of thinking about especially THIS.

Max,

Since you’re a trained officer of the court would you be willing to place Zeta Talk claims on trial? Say one from a list that is agreed upon by the bunkers and debunkers. Each submit three and then an agreement is made to select one for trial. The court will select a judge and a jury. We will attempt to use civil court rules so the ruling will be decided by the preponderance of the evidence not beyond a shadow of a doubt. This means that a jury of maybe three people will decide, and majority rules. I would even give two positions to the bunkers with one to the debunkers.

Oh, we've already tried that with him...but gotten no where because he knows that should you treat the evidence at hand as you would in court, the jury would come back with a verdict not in Nancy's favor.

Prof. Rabbits evidence using simple observation and logic provides an understanding of the weak force magnetism plays in the solar system.

As a further note, Venus does not have a planetary magnetic field, vis.
When Mariner 2 flew by Venus in 1962 at a distance of 6.6 planetary radii (Rv), it did not detect any evidence of an Earth-size magnetosphere. Mariner 5, passing within 1.4 Rv in 1967, detected the signatures in the solar wind of deflection around an 'obstacle' at Venus. The small inferred size of that obstacle placed an upper limit on the magnetic dipole moment of Venus of ~ 10-3 that of Earth. Later Venera 4 made magnetic measurements down to 200 km altitude, still detecting no planetary field but providing data that reduced this estimate by about an order of magnitude. In a 1974 flyby, Mariner 10 merely confirmed the existence of a small, nearly planet- size obstacle. Venera 9 and 10 were put into orbit around Venus in 1975, but did not approach Venus closer than ~ 1500 km. Nevertheless, the data that these spacecraft obtained in the wake of the planet provided the first evidence that an Earth-like magnetotail was absent, and that instead a structure related to the interplanetary magnetic field occupied that region of space. The most definitive measurements of the magnetic moment of Venus were obtained during the Pioneer Venus Orbiter mission in its first years of operation (1979-1981). Repeated low-altitude (~ 150 km) passes by that spacecraft over the antisolar region, coupled with dayside observations to the same altitude, proved the insignificance of a field of internal origin in near-Venus space.

[link to dawn.ucla.edu]

Ergo, no Nancy eddy cups, tea cups or Px cups to halt Venus with, something Nancy never checked.

Gravitational factors account for all known solar system effects.

No, not really, the solar wind, radiation and other factors also affect the solar system, however it is fair to say that gravitation plays the largest part.

3) If I understand Reality 791899.
Once a planet of any size has set into a stable orbit,(such as Earths orbit and distance from the Sun) it would not matter what size the planet was, it would still maintain the same orbit.

I would disagree somewhat, the relative size and orbital speed are factors, along with the origins of the solar system.

There is one theory that a sideswipe of Earth by another body spun off a molton mess to form the moon,

And under this theory, the big question is, what hit us?

And could it hit us hard enough to change the earths orbit and distance from the Sun.(6 billion years ago or so)

The "glancing blow" of another large body is one hypothesis, another is a large rogue asteroid impact, a third is the early capture of the moon as a passing object (formed with the rest of the solar system) slow enough to be caught in Earth's gravity well.

Theoretically, the Moon could have been formed by a collision of Earth with another planet, the scene of the accident around the asteroid belt.

Perhaps, although opinion is that an impact collision would not have spread the asteroid belt out so evenly, another suggestion is that the asteroid belt never got to coalesce into a planet.

Earth losing 40% of its mass (in moon and asteroids) could have been knocked into a chaotic orbit, with the whole system eventually finding its balance again with earth in its present orbit.

That would depend on the impact variables, playing some pool or eight-ball will show some of the potentials for the impact theory.

Does the Earth wobble every day with a figure-8 motion, rather than the traditional circular motion, as Zetatalk claims?

Max,
Since you’re a trained officer of the court would you be willing to place Zeta Talk claims on trial? Say one from a list that is agreed upon by the bunkers and debunkers. Each submit three and then an agreement is made to select one for trial. The court will select a judge and a jury. We will attempt to use civil court rules so the ruling will be decided by the preponderance of the evidence not beyond a shadow of a doubt. This means that a jury of maybe three people will decide, and majority rules. I would even give two positions to the bunkers with one to the debunkers.

Oh, we've already tried that with him...but gotten no where because he knows that should you treat the evidence at hand as you would in court, the jury would come back with a verdict not in Nancy's favor.

No George, I didn't say that.
I think her survival data is top drawer stuff ... there is very much of it, and I haven't seen anybody else put as much forth with as much honesty as her.

Her science is sound ... way against mainstream, and that's what the backlash is all about. Her science scares people.

And her spiritual writing I have yet to see anybody else's concepts seem so complete and correct to my way of thinking.

And that's MY point of view ... everybody else has their own way of thinking about especially THIS.

JWD

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

The N.Korean missile looks in focus..

This is a UP photo.

.

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

The N.Korean missile looks in focus..

This is a UP photo.

.


Did I say the Sun was out of focus?

Idiot.

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

The N.Korean missile looks in focus..

This is a UP photo.

.


Did I say the Sun was out of focus?

Idiot.

Take a break. The question was not fielded to you.

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

The N.Korean missile looks in focus..

This is a UP photo.

.


Did I say the Sun was out of focus?

Idiot.

Take a break. The question was not fielded to you.


Idiot.

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:



The Sun in the photograph looks white to me.
Also the object below it looks mostly black.
What colour is the lower object supposed to be?

If you adjust your colour balance to make the lower object its true colour, you might get a better rendering of the Sun's colour. And then again, possibly not as the Sun is a pretty intense light source.

Regards
JWD

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:



The Sun in the photograph looks white to me.
Also the object below it looks mostly black.
What colour is the lower object supposed to be?

If you adjust your colour balance to make the lower object its true colour, you might get a better rendering of the Sun's colour. And then again, possibly not as the Sun is a pretty intense light source.

Regards
JWD

OK Thanks,JWD

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:


The Sun is not even visible in that photo. The image is completely oversaturated at that location.

The N.Korean missile looks in focus..

This is a UP photo.

.


Did I say the Sun was out of focus?

Idiot.

Take a break. The question was not fielded to you.


Idiot.

There are many pictures like this one so don't lose your mind over it>

JWD

I would like to ask William a question.
What color is the Sun in this photograph. William.

Thanks

:sn.nny:



The Sun in the photograph looks white to me.
Also the object below it looks mostly black.
What colour is the lower object supposed to be?
If you adjust your colour balance to make the lower object its true colour, you might get a better rendering of the Sun's colour. And then again, possibly not as the Sun is a pretty intense light source.

Regards
JWD

OK Thanks,JWD