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

Thread: THERE IS SOMETHING BY THE SUN!!!



OMG!!!! IT'S PLANET X!!!!!

Call The Whitehouse....sms The President!!!!

Call ALL the networks around the freaken world...

No; call the poleshit ningers first....

No; call Nancy LIEDer. She has a "NEED TO KNOW" clearance surely.....

No; call Mr FrEaKy; call "The One"; call ZitaMax; call LUser(wherever he may be).....

No No we must call NASA....no that won't be enough....we need to "move" planet Earth....NOW!!!!

I've got it.......CALL THE FREAKEN ZETAS!!!!

They can move planets around at will.....we will BE SAVED!!!

I will attempt to verify this new development myself tomorrow. I will post my findings here.

Actually, I had no idea you were joking.

Therefore: my ORIGINAL question stand:

Precisely what claims of Nancy have you abandoned? And have you discussed said abandonment with *her?* What was her reaction? What evidence can you present demonstrating you discussed said abandonment with Nancy at *all?* What convinced you to abandon those particular ideas? Why those? What could make you abandon the rest? Did you learn any discernment in finally admitting those ideas of Nancy's were false? Then why do you fill the voids those failed ideas left with similar ideas that have even *less* to do with reality?

I am quite serious asking those, and I'd appreciate a courteous, truthful, and accurate reply.

>> Precisely what claims of Nancy have you abandoned?

All and None. I am a FENCE SITTER. It is not possible to abandon what was never embraced.

Melfy why must you LIE so continuously about your known position in regards to supporting zetatalk?

Your quoted statement above Melfy, in relation to something that is so obvious to all of us, is an example of what brings you so much scorn and disdain on our thread.

Amazing that for a `computer professional' she has had so many computer problems....
(remember the `modem saga' how long did it take her to fix a simple swap and install new drivers???
Months

(hint nancy, knowing how to turn on a computer and use windows does not make you a `computer professional' any more than knowing how to start and drive your car makes you a professional racing car driver....)

Ah. Back to the non answer answer, eh?

Ah well. I'll leave off with this, then:




If all you do is defend fringe pseudoreligious theories despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary -- holding on to them like a brainwashed follower holds onto the religious doctrine of a cult leader, even unto death -- how is anyone supposed to differentiate you from a cult member?

You've become what you've defended. Congratulations.

It's my very nature as a FENCE SITTER that enables me to "discuss" and offer for consideration other theories. If I was a TRUE beleiver of any one thing, I would simply stick to that one thing and not "wander".

She's makes a miniscule amount of money on them. I don't think she's even recovered the printing cost. It's hardly a best seller - thanks in no small part to the debunkers!

Ah the old `fence sitter defence...
You offer anything doomtardish up for `consideration', but not once have you ever `considered' that maybe everything is normal???
Good things happen, bad things happen,shit happens and the world goes on as usual????

Admit it maxipad- you aren't a fence sitter and never have been- all you are is a doomtard- you get off on it

You were a dedicated nancy believer (despite your protests to the contrary- just saying something doesn't make it so- else I'd be supreme overlord of the entire Earth LOL) what matters was what you DO, not what you say....

and what you did made it obvious which side of the `fence' you sat on....

Lately you have expanded your horizons admittedly, now you have started dragging in every other whacked out doom `merchant' out there (and they are merchants, no doubt about it- look at cliff- at ten bucks a pop, even if only sold 1000 of his cliffnotes a month- that's a cool $10000 a month, $120000 a year (and if he's smart, tax free to boot)

Anything that ends up with mayhem, death and destruction- that's what gets you off
You don't like to `admit' it- but anyone who `believes' in any of these doom scenarios is (just IMHO mind you) a slightly psychopathic personality...

what else can you call a person who feverishly wishes death and widespread destruction to all (OK well `most') humanity- even when all the evidence is against them???

You wander -- but only to the same subset of theories. You have never offered for consideration that the debunkers are, in fact, completely correct about Nancy and the veracity of PX.

I have NEVER seen you "discuss" and offer for consideration the idea that PX doesn't exist, for example.

Thus, you've become what you defend: a cult follower. That's precisely what you are defending.

Frankly, I tend to doubt the debunkers made all that much difference in the success of her book. I expect that it's sales performance was all pure Nancy.

WRONG!!! I ***DON'T*** feverishly wish death on anyone. No, those who wish death are those who know of danger, but keep it to themselves and don't warn others.

You're on it again aren't you?.....

Then let me ask a question that you keep avoiding:

If the Zetas know that Indonesia is sinking, why did they choose an American woman to put out the warning instead of someone capable of warning the Indonesians in their own language? Or do the Zetas only wish to save the few Indonesians that understand English and are privileged enough to have an internet connection? Sounds pretty sick to me! What did the Zetas do to warn the Japanese of the tragedy before it happened, in their language, or the Haitians or Chileans? It seems to me by that using Nancy as their only emissary they are selectively warning people based on their economic situation and their ability to speak English, while deliberately not warning the vast majority of the people affected by these disasters which they claim to know in advance.

Can you give us even ONE SINGLE example of when you have EVER defended the anti-zetatalk side? Just one?

BULLSHIT!!

Don't thank us...her book was out before I ever heard of her and most of the reviews come prior to 2003. The reason she didn't sell many is because of the few people that bought it, many thought it sucked and stated so in their reviews. End of story.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 04/24/2011 08:30 AM

+1000000000000000000000

Not only do they choose to use some woman in Wisconsin...they also failed to put out a specific warning that the events mentioned were about to happen. There's no mention or warning of these events weeks or days prior to them happening.

It's a GENERAL warning to mankind. GENERAL warnings require small general actions - like keeping a crescent wrench in your car. It's awareness of the hazards more than anything - not the date or the time.

Lame Max...very lame. What you basically just said is that every prophet is just giving a general warning and urging people to be prepared...something everybody knows (or should know) to do as it is. I guess the big difference is that the false prophets put fear behind it in an effort to make money.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 04/24/2011 09:31 AM

Her sucess or lack of success in selling that book has no bearing on my question.

Sure it does. It reveals the "hierarchy of intent". No one disputes that at *some* level, making money is a GOAL. It has to be - how in the world would we be able to pay for anything? How would she eat? Pay taxes? Heat the house? Pay for bandwidth? Pay for the printing costs of those books?

So yea, at some level, making money is a "goal". No - the issue is, where is that goal in relation to other motivating factors???

You're asserting (an even stronger verb than "suggesting") that her PRIMARY motivation is personal financial gain. But where is the evidence of that?

For someone like J.Z. Knight or Elizabeth Claire Prophet, there is no shortage of evidence that financial gain was a primary - if not THE primary - goal of the organizations they led.

But where is the similar evidence for Nancy? She does not charge for the material she disseminates, ALL the material in her book is on her website. She charges little more than shipping and handling for her CD's that she creates herself one order at a time. Last I knew, she was selling only one or two a month. No one is going to get RICH doing that!

I can tell you why she's not successful - the ZetaTalk message is not directed towards "individual" salvation - unlike the other two mentioned above. She does not do individual readings of ANY kind. There is no "plan" she offers people other than Troubled Times where folks are expected to do THEIR OWN preparation without ANY kind of organizational assistance - again unlike the other two which are clearly more "cult-like" in the way they function, and offer "memberships" that require a high level of financial and material commitment. With ZetaTalk, there is nothing to JOIN.

You are as a much a member of any "ZetaCult" - as I am.

If her "primary" motivation is financial, then she's picked one of the WORST business models imaginable.

Which - contrary to debunker "assertions" - SUGGESTS that it is indeed ****NOT**** her PRIMARY motivation.

Tell that to L. Ron Hubbard, and successors.




No.

It merely suggests she FAILED at it.

Good point. There are similarities between scientology and Nancy's pseudo-religion. L Ron Hubbard was quite successful in making money, so it stands to reason that Nancy may very well have hoped to do the same. The difference is that L Ron Hubbard was there first to fill the void. It also didn't help that Nancy wasn't as good at packaging and selling her story as L Ron Hubbard was at his.

>> Tell that to L. Ron Hubbard, and successors.

WHAT are talking you about? Did you even READ my post? Someone suggested that some shills are actually software responses from the NSA. After reading that reply, I can almost believe it!

L. Ron Hubbard would fall into the J.Z. Knight, Elizabeth Claire Prophet bucket. Scientology is registered as a church, and has memberships that require increasing levels of financial, material, and social committment the deeper you get involved.

That is ***NOT*** the ZetaTalk model at all, AND NEVER HAS BEEN. Not from day one.

You're failing to make a distinction between ANY of them, when in fact the differences are MUCH greater than the similarities.

That response is the PUREST form of "disinformation" response I've seen you post to date. Congratulations on OUTING yourself 74444.

>> It merely suggests she FAILED at it.

That's like saying I've failed at ballet dancing - when in fact I've NEVER tried it. Nancy never even TRIED to build a "cult" the likes of the above mentioned, ESPECIALLY and including Scientology.

Now it has been said, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. That is true. But if I'm practicing tap dancing, there is no way I'm going to emerge a ballet dancer, no matter how hard I work at it.

In order to create a cult, you actually have to attempt activities designed to bring about that reality.

Nancy has NEVER engaged or pursued such "activities" that would logically in ANY way result in such an organization. Furthermore, her VERY WORDS peppered liberally throughout the ZetaTalk material (all free online) assert forcefully that she was NOT the scion of any "member" based organization.

Nice try SHILL.



Last Edited by **ZetaMax** on 04/24/2011 02:42 PM

Of course you'll say she never tried...you, honestly, have no idea because you weren't there from the beginning. You weren't in on all the meetings that took place. You really have no idea what her motivations were or would have been. L Ron Hubbard may not have had intentions of becoming wealthy...but he did, because he was successful at selling his story. Because of that, his fantasy morphed into what is now the "church" of Scientology. He could just as easily ended up like Nancy today had people not bought in to what he was selling. Had things gone differently for Nancy, I can almost guarantee that her fantasy would have morphed into something just like Scientology. The only reason you're saying what you did is because you're a proven shill of ZetaTalk and will do whatever it takes to defend it.




Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 04/24/2011 03:04 PM

Right.

NASA is part of the massive cover up except for those SOHO images of giant objects next to the sun that they constantly post to the internet.

Absurd. A cult-member, by very definition, supports all pronouncements of the cult leader regardless of how wrong-headed they might be. This discribes YOU perfectly in your perpetual appologist stance. How can someone who speaks out against, say, the Catholic Church be deemed, thereby, a member of that church??



The selling of a book which is demonstrably full of utter BS is highly suspect. Nancy has used the whole Zetatalk thing as a means of financial support for herself. She has used others both by way of $ donations and other forms to support HER PERSONAL AGENDA. Monies were taken in for specific projects which were never accomplished, yet the Money is gone. I'd say "you do the math", but you are incapable of any balanced inquiry where Nancy is concerned.

End of conversation.

Now THAT'S funny!

"Oh my God, honey, the poles are shifting! Quick get the crescent wrench out of the trunk!"