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

DrP, will Nancy still be a mod now that the weekly chat is moving elsewhere? I always thought she got that status as a means to exercise some control over the chat adn its participants.

Then why can't you answer my simple "yes" or "no" question? Does the Moon rotate about its north south axis?

Just a yes or no, no philosophical nonsense, no armwaving, just a simple yes or no.

If it is Nancy, notice that as her time in this thread has increased, her shills have spent less time here.

I, too, find Clare's lack of direct engagement and reply somewhat...disappointing, I suppose. But, then, no believer or Zeta apologist is likely to come forward and rationally discuss the issues.

I do sympathize with their dilemma. After all, it is terribly difficult to rationally discuss the irrational...

Oh, and I am in the dark with the "T-word" thing. Perhaps someday someone may enlighten me if it is not against the forum rules. No hurry, as I am quite sure it will keep.

The reaction of the posters tomorrow who don't follow the debunker thread and therefore not know yet that Zetatalk will be no longer on GLP in the usual way might reveal how popular Zetatalk really is on GLP.

And btw ... I love that guy: [link to www.zetasquawk.com]

He did generate at least four pages of comments on the ning - all sorts of conspiracy theories - government, corporations, etc.

Finally..... no more offical zetacrap on GLP. Now hopefully we will see less of the idiotic sock puppets.

hah!

Looks like the true believers are all packing off for the compound.

...when is the kool-aid going to be mixed?

I hope they really are heading off to their bunkers. In 2012, they'll realize just how stupid they were for believing someone with a proven track record of zero percent accuracy and has to keep making up lies and excuses to explain away all her failures.

TLR ... if you read this ... you might want to email the Dr.. Sorry for posting it here , but we have no other way of contacting you.

How many people think Nancy will end up back here at GLP? It wouldn't surprise me if she does. After all, she tried to have a private forum once before but it didn't last because there was no one left after she got done banning anyone she felt wasn't worthy of being one of her disciples. This one may last a little longer. But I think once 2012 arrives with no sign of "Planet X" (again), many her believers over there will start to question her and find themselves banned.

It is a possibility ... at least she will post a pinned thread with a link to the ning every saturday for quite some weeks in the future I guess.

I went over last night and read some of the posts. Have you been there? They spent some time with remarks about you, Menow, Dr P, and TLR.

But there were a lot more posters than I expected.

Nancy now starts her posts with 'question accepted'. So I presume she will still not answer or acknowledge most q's that are asked.

From the 1146 members they have only a small percentage post regulary (not more than 30 to 50 regular posters, with regular i mean some who at least post a few times a week).

Also there are accounts by people who don't believe Nancy, I have 2 over there ... never posted though. And a lot of the 1146 members probably just came upon the ning (there are hundreds of other blogs at the ning.com about all kind of topics) and just thought "earth changes, poleshift ... sounds interesting" and they just joined, which is only click and then forgot about it.

Yeah, but I bet a lot of them don't know what Nancy said about 2012 being another drop-dead, final prediction date.

Certainly any posts or questions which imply dogged support for Nancy's claims will be allowed. Anyone who expresses any doubts about anything found in Zetatalk will find their account banned.

The Church of Nancy-ology.

Exactly. I thought about joining and just posting a general question asking what they plan to do if "Planet X" doesn't show up in 2012. After all, that will make it almost 10 years of failures. But I bet the question would get deleted and I'd be banned. Besides, I suspect that they'll just grasp on to whatever new "date" Nancy gives. If she was smart, she would say the "pole shift" will happen in 2030 or something. That will give her another 18 years to milk this thing and she'll probably pass away before that.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 05/22/2010 02:35 PM

All she has to do is attract some Hollywood celebrities who want to give her lots of money and she'll be set. Maybe she can turn Tom Cruise to the "dark side."

I wonder why Clare bumped those age-old PX threads to argue on.

I wonder how Clare FOUND those threads. Unless she'd been on them before...

Your geometry course "for me" does the following:

It is from a conflation graph, one whose purpose is to show axis location in the body, and total movement *of whatever kind*, relative to that axis. Drawn and thought of as a stationary body but accounting for non-stationary axial direction movements, yes, the Moon spins on its axis.


But if drawn to indicate not what the axis does over space, but what the body does relative to its axial forward momentum ... no, the Moon does not spin on its axis, properly speaking.

Its *axial path* in your graphical idea, is drawn on the spot and so yes, you can see the total turn made by the axis on the path, and measure the end-put angle at the end (which is 180 degrees).

But if drawn to indicate not what the axis does over space (a path with forward momentum drawn in place), but rather to show the actions of the Moon relative to that path, the Moon would show no turn on its axis, whereas the Earth would.

Hm. I wondered too.
I typed "Zeta 100%" into Google on my Work computer and got that. It did look like the wrong thread but I was tired.

Sorry if it ended up bumping an old thread.

I got the right one this time.

Clare

So, again, if the Earth vanished, and the Moon continued in the path and with the motions that it has now (it still falls toward the Sun, after all...) would it 'suddenly' be spinning?

Ah. Thank you for the explanation.

Choice of definitions?

Mathematicians who are not conflating on their graphs forward momentum with axial total rotation OF WHATEVER KIND, call the two different things ROTATION around another body (or barymetric centre), and SPIN on an axis.

However, Cartesian graphs CAN be used to conflate forward momentum of the axis with stationary position for a thought-experiment. As such, the body "rotates around its axis" in the pinned graph, but the physical rotation remains relative to the Earth-Moon barymetric centre.

But it is not representing the same thing as a Cartesian graph which shows spin relative to its own axis in reality.

Does the Moon do what the Earth does?

To answer your question about other Moons: since I am not familiar with all the Moons I'll leave it to you to find that out, but the answer is simple if I use Earth:

it is a satellite (moon) of the Sun. It spins on its own axis relative to its path.

Our Moon does not spin relative to its own path (true proper rotation about its axis); however its axis moves forward on a path which rotates, and with a consistent axis, so it's possible to graph that AS IF in place.

It is always possible to graph any motion as if the axis were static, and see total movements; in this case, however, you guys are confusing your graph with that which shows motion in a body when it is not due to orbiting another axis. The Earth would show that, the Moon wouldn't.

It is the former graphing which you are imaging.

It is the latter differential understanding which I am graphing.

Ciao

You_are_an_idiot.

No problem.
Thank you for your civility in not attackng me as though I were lying AND had offended by making that post.

:)

Ciao
Food calls. :)

By the way, do YOU understand the difference between a pinned-axis graph showing rotation even when representing forward momentum around another axis ... versus a graph showing what the axis relative to the body is doing, when the pinned axis is representing NO forward movement of the axis?

The Earth would continue to show spin; the Moon would not.

That is because in real space, the Earth takes more of a turn than its path (orbit) requires, whereas the Moon follows its orbit face forward. These people are graphing the axial movement, directing the body at each point, but not the body's movement relative to its axis on the path -- with or without a path.

You-misunderstand-the-things-your-graphs-graph,-and-how-to-di​stinguish.

I suppose you think a map of a country is the country, or more properly, a topographical map is a political one?

LOL