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

Max must realize that his comments about Astro were in especially poor taste and that it's a stupid thing to post things that could be construed as support for a someone making threats on the internet. I think he's just laying low until it blows over. I for one am glad the thread isn't about him anymore. Don't miss him at all. I haven't seen volar around either lately.

I see Nancy is still stretching out her announcement prediction. How many times can she take her believers to the very brink of solid proof of her claims and then pull the rug out from under them? She maintains a perpetual tease and they never figure it out- well, some of them do, but they cleanse her site of any comments from them and new sheep come along to take their place. There really could be a book written about the Zetatalk/PX hoax.

A question for you*debunkers*. why do you feel it necessary? Popping on and off certain threads, peppering with scorn and ridicule as you go? Do you really believe that others have no discernment? That we are all gullible, stupid and unable to differentiate between fact and fiction? Surely this forum is for ,as it states, the lunatic fringe. The airing of ideas and theories that would otherwise go unsaid or unwritten. Giving an opposite opinion is one thing, asking for evidence of said theory another but why the desperate attempt to make another appear either insane, on medication or unintelligent? This really is a genuine question and I have no wish to offend, simply to understand. If you disagree with an idea why not just agree to do so? What pleasure can it give you scuttling back here to discuss your various attempts at undermining another? I hope that someone will answer this as this forum is great research for my thesis!! Lastly, I have to say that I have pretty mainstream beliefs but am willing to listen to anyone who, in their turn, believes that they have a valid argument. I may or may not agree but that isn't the issue. Free speech and free thinking, that is the issue!

What do you care? This is a public forum.

Aw come on now, a little explanation never hurt anyone.....

Sure.



Mis-information kills. A mis-informed public can make really bad decisions that affect all of us. Critical thinking should be encouraged. And, in some cases, pointing out said mis-information can, honestly, be entertaining as well.




Interesting. What about scorn and ridicule peppered by the believers about the debunkers? For myself, I attempt to remain polite at all times.




Intelligence, interestingly enough, has seemingly nothing to do with falling for particular fallacious patterns of thought. It is another quality, far more elusive. There have been plenty of highly intelligent people who have joined cults, or engage in self-destructive behavior.

And one must have *access* to the fact to discern it from fiction, too.




And, if you want something meaningful out of those ideas, they have to be examined critically. If they are just beliefs, that's fine, but that should be said up front. But as soon as they enter the realms of 'Solar Storms will kill ninety percent of us in 2012,' or 'PX has halted Earth in its orbit' we're in the realm of fact, and now we get to start *testing.* Why *not* examine those ideas critically, and respond with the results?

Why fear the opposing point of view, however mainstream?




I'm with you, here. I try, very carefully, to express disagreement with certain ideas, and rational means of testing those ideas, rather than with the person themselves. Interestingly, most purveyors of said ideas have become more and more clever about such testing. As an example: Nancy Lieder. She got bit, hard, because she put a definitive date on when her predictions would occur back in 2003. When they didn't, her cult was crippled for a time, but slowly came back with new members, and she now no longer puts definitive dates on anything. She has jumped on the 'soon' bandwagon, thus her cult has evolved to be a little more robust.

So, it is important that those newly exposed to her ideas understand precisely what and who they are getting involved with. But Nancy knows how detrimental her past mistakes are, so she hides them. Debunkers point out those hiding places.





Well, if you are talking about me and IDW, we do have quite a history, going back to about 2005. When I encountered him and his unique style, I engaged him most politely on a number of subjects that I am interested in. As you can imagine, his responses were, um, impolite. He bullied many a good poster, many whom I respected, and attempted to hound them off of GLP. I took it upon myself to start keeping track of what he claimed (this was largely due to a suggestion of his, when GLP ate my newly typed post, and he suggested Notepad). So, as a result, when he rears his head, I engage him -- and the way I engage him is by challenging his ideas. And he can't have that.

So IDW calls me names, and claims I am an entire team of government agents, and calls himself an astrophysicist despite not having the slightest idea what he is talking about, and meantime Astromut is hounded off the board, after helping the administrators build a *real* telescope that can teach *real* science, and posts real facts about the sky. Frankly, many people who contributed in similar positive ways aren't here anymore, and that's detrimental to all of us.

Sorry, I'm going to oppose IDW's kind of bullying balderdash, because every time it succeeds we all fail. The best way I know how to do that is to let people know whom they are dealing with, by pointing out exactly what he, himself, has written and claimed in the past, and why I know he is wrong, how little faith he has in his own ideas, and precise ways of falsifying those ideas.




I am with you here, again. But Nancy was famous for deleting said speech in her threads, and IDW has resorted to some of that same stuff, begging for moderators to delete posts off his thread, or his own bullying. And free thinking does need some form of validation, and so far the best tool we have for doing that is the tools of the scientific method. So you'll see me applying those now and again.

I hope this response has helped. Please feel free to ask more questions, if you wish.

74444, thankyou! Just give me a couple of minutes to read & digest!

Total agreement with 74444. If anyone reading here truly has an open mind, they will not be threatened by hearing all sides of an argument. It's called discussion, a great way to learn. Nancy and some of the posters here have a long history. We know her lies, we know where to point newcomers to her cult so that they can uncover these lies and make an informed decision. The debunkers are much more polite and tolerant than many of the people defending ideas that can be proven false. Just a few weeks ago, one of GLP's most valuable members received death threats. It was certainly not a debunker that did that. Nancy has viciously attacked and insulted all of the regular posters that started this thread. TLR, the OP has never resorted to the banning or censoring of anyone on this thread, unlike posters such as Nancy, IDW, Candace, to name a few, who can't tolerate anyone or anything that doesn't support their favorite idea, belief or delusion. I mainly check in on this thread, but if I see a thread talking about a subject that I know about, I will sometimes pop in and just lay down a post to provide another angle. I am often deleted and banned from woo woo threads, I only resort to ridicule when someone has already thrown insults my way, and I try to be polite. Debate interests me, but there is rarely any forthcoming from the supporters of bunk on this site.

I really can't disagree with you 74444 and totally respect your aspect and opinion. As far as Nancy goes, fortunately (by the sound of it) I have very little knowledge; mainly because I once googled *pole shift* and ended up reading something upon which no one was allowed to post unless they fawningly agreed and asked questions *pertinent* enough to validate a response. My * argument* is simply that I don't understand the vehemence of some (and I stress the some) responses. This seems to be an intrinsic part of particular threads...they spiral down to nothing but name calling and outright rudeness; surely this is unnecessary. Just because someone is rude towards you doesn't mean that you have to lower yourself to that level and before you ask me for examples of your own behaviour, this isn't about you or any other particular person. It's inherent on every thread by a hundred different people (obviously that's a plucked out of the air number). I understand that you want to ensure that the more easily led don't take this forum too seriously and commend your intentions. Like I said, I only have respect for anyone with their own mind.

Anyway, it's Saturday evening and I'm heading out for a meal,. Wishing you a happy weekend! Take care!

It's interesting that you're doing the same thing and NO you saying it's only for knowledge doesn't make it any different.

Common misrepresentation- that debunkers ONLY ridicule. Simply not true.



Case in point: Many people still seem to steadfastly believe that there is a rogue planet hovering near the sun; that we never went to the Moon; that the sun/moon are in the wrong places in the sky and that 'chemtrails' are constantly being spewed from airliners. Nuff said.



And that is primarily what is done, first and foremost. Your implication that it is not, is false.



"Desperate"? There is nothing desperate about it. When the person cannot or will not present any concrete evidence to support his beliefs, yet continues to profess it as "truth" in the face of all evidence to the contrary, one is left with few conclusions other than the ones you mentioned.



Your "genuine question" relies on a misrepresentation of debunker actions and attitudes. People have tried, for YEARS, to provide polite, fact-filled, debate of the "theories" presented here. The responses are so obtuse and nonsensical as to be indistinguishable from trolling. That should say something about the caliber of the arguments.



Because of the clear absurdity and lack of evidence being presented. There is no real argument as to whether there is a rogue planet hovering near the sun for the last decade which can only be imaged in cheap cameras. Still- the promoters of this "theory" maintain that no one has proven such a thing not to exist. Let me also mention the damage being done in people's lives due to such hoaxes.



What is being "undermined" is damnable HOAXES! I'm proud to be a part of debunking such things.



This question has been answered a hundred times or more, by now.



"BELIEVES" they have a valid argument? You don't assess their argument for validity? You think ALL arguments are equal? That speaks volumes about your ability to discern.



You seem unable to tell the difference between censorship and rightly telling someone they are full of shit. By the way, are you so green you don't understand that the promoters of these various hoaxes are the ones who intentionally censor? Give me a break!

By the way, I DARE you to attempt to go on the poleshift ning and ask why they don't allow ANY dissenting opinions to be posted there.

Thank you.



Ah, you have beheld the Ning! What is interesting to me is the evolution that brought the Ning about -- which basically showed that the Zetatalk idea went from knowledge seeking to knowledge confirming to confirming what the Leader believes to Leader is never wrong. If you are interested in events like this, you should look for the book "When Prophecy Fails" by Festinger. It is fascinating.




I can understand such vehemence, if not agree with it and try not to engage in such behavior myself. IDW and Nancy both attempt to take the argument to truly personal levels, and sometimes it is difficult to not drag one's self to the same level. Though I think I have done a fairly consistent job.

I was taught early that the ideas I hold are not *me.* And to be willing to change my ideas, but not easily, and with evidence. I *always* have a set of "goalposts" for any given idea that, if met, will force me to change my idea. But that idea isn't *who I am.*

Nancy and IDW *could* convince me that they are correct. But Nancy would have to completely explain how GOTO telescopes are adapting to an unpredictably moving Earth, and IDW would have to show all those calculations that he's claimed to have made step by step. Neither seem likely to do this anytime soon, so my contrary ideas stand.



Agreed.




Agreed again.



Didn't think it was. I understand your point. One of the things I think drives IDW the most crazy about me is that I *don't* stoop to his level, and moreover *don't care if he does.* I learned a long time ago that personal attacks by other posters have precisely as much damage as I allow them to have. Why should I take any such attacks seriously?

So when he calls me agent, or drunk, or a shill, or stupid, or a Nazi, or whatever, I take that to mean that he can't address my actual *points.* Witness how I provided links and sources demolishing his 'no photon' theories -- which, three months hence, he will claim as some kind of 'victory,' despite solid experimental verification.

Any rational person looking over the conversation will arrive at the same conclusion I have alluded to. The irrational will not, but there's nothing I can do about that, anyway.



Understood. As I have been personally affected by those 'easily led,' my actions are not without some small self-serving element: I would like more critical thinking people out there, and less woo, as I think it moves our species forward, however slowly. In terms of my *particular* windmills, that has meant engaging Nancy and IDW exclusively on a single message board, although IDW seems convinced that I (or a team of me) have been pursuing him from board to board since three or four years before I even knew he existed.



You, too.

"Scuttling back here". That word alone exposes your agenda and preconceived notions. Your question is not genuine at all, IMO.

Besides that this thread is not about undermining another. Here are simply people who love the truth and who wont accept categoric liars, as for example Nancy Lieder, who tries to abuse und manipulate people by inventing some scary planets and odd fantasy stories that led directly into a strange cult.

Some people have to show the truth as it is mostly censored on the pages of cults and sects like Zetatalk. On such pages there is no discussion because even their basics are lies.
There is no Nibiru and there will never be a Nibiru in the inner solar system, what is a proven astronomic fact.

So Nancy Lieder and her brainwashed followers act pretty much like in a car without wheels. They try to convince each other that the car is driving and gaining speed, but of course it does not move. So they tell each other that the car moves, make pictures behind old floppy-discs to simulate artificial movement and so on. It is necessary that some people debunk lies and gurus who try to make money with them.

And of course this is a public forum so everybody is free to write his oppinion. It is strange that some cults who complain so much about a coper-up or censorship are the worst censores themselves trying to exstinguish and block the truth as much as they can.

Everything that everybody says is all lies. NONE of it is true.

LIAR!

If Obama wants to ensure a second term as President, he better make an announcement about "Planet X" at tonight's debate. Since the topic tonight is about foreign policy, Obamba can claim he's had diplomatic relations with the "Zetas" through Nancy and they have given him all the information he needs to know about "Planet X" - except for when it will actually cause the "pole shift" of course.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 10/22/2012 08:43 AM

Before that happens Obama will proudly announce that he gets the next pope ... ;)

I see on the ning that our dear friend Flareberto has upgraded his camera to something a little more modern (if you can call a few year old digital camera modern).

He's now using an older Panasonic 6mp but makes the stupid mistake of adding even more filters in front of the lens. A UV filter, two 'red' filters and an ND8 (neutral density) filter.

Doesn't he realize that the goal is to have the fewest additional elements in front of the lens? Doesn't he realize that the more surfaces you put in front of the lens further degrades the image and increases the possibility of introducing lens flares? Obviously not.

Of course, Nancy makes a new pronouncement claiming that this combination shows planet eX and it's moons...hah!

"I combined these two photos into one blog for Alberto. It seems the Sting of Pearls we were seeing last week, in Alberto's photos and those from Spain, have disappeared and now we are seeing a singular clump! This while reports or red rain from Sweden and the Sahara are reported, or anticipated red rain. I wonder if the tail is pointing so directly at the Earth at present that is appears to us as a CLUMP?"

Jeez louise.

Just don't ask Nancy why none of this can be seen with the naked eye. If that shit was really there, I should be able to see it just glancing in the general direction of the sun.

Also, don't point out the hundreds of photos on the Internet that show absolutely nothing near the sun - facts and logic mean nothing to Nancy and the walking dead.

The older Panasonic seems to be quite good: A UV filter, two red filters, a ND8 and still no "Planet X".

Is this the reaseon why the klick on "Continue" leads to a 404: "Our apologies – this page was not found"?
LOL


.

Why don't any of these supposed huge objects transit and block any part of the Sun? We've seen Mercury and Venus do it, very clearly, but not a single moon or swirl or PX itself has ever done that. And it's been by the Sun for HOW long now?

... because these lense flares only exist in the fantasy of crazy Nancy Lieder and some of here weird followers as real objects. It`s easy like that.

lol. I just took a peek at the woo-woo-gang and it seems Nancy is bit concerned that her believers don't buy into the lenseflares anymore.

[link to poleshift.ning.com]

Comment by Nancy Lieder yesterday

Here are some snaps. Note the orbs IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE SUN do not move. DO NOT MOVE. The cameraman moves the cam to the side, up and down, to creates a lens flare movement. But the orbs RELATIVE TO THE SUN do not move. You can see this by looking at the objects in relationship to the bar at the bottom. I can't believe you people cannot see this! I am most astonished that Steve cannot see this.

I am not suprised that Steve can't see it...
Btw... did Nancy forgot that these floppie flares only remain in the same distance vs each other long as you keep the angle between camera and floppy the same?
[link to www.youtube.com]

Oh right. Nancy is not interested in factual info... but planting precast opinions in weak minds is something she obviously likes.
(Is Granma scared of loosing her face/funds?)

Then this one,

Comment by Nancy Lieder 12 hours ago

@S.K.
Keep an eye out, folks, for these sleeper debunkers who are waiting for an opportunity to gang up on what is obvious. They know that the Planet X complex is more obvious these days, and are frantic to persuade you that what you eye sees is NOT what is there. As they say 'who you going to believe? Them or your lying eyes?"


In other words: Who are you going to believe? Your own lying eyes or Alberto's floppy images!!

Biaa, biaaa.

If it was as obvious as Nancy claims - millions of people would be talking about it. But don't bother her with facts and logic. They have no place in Fantasyland.

My membership was refunded and I was permanently banned. No explanation, but I have to infer it was my comments about a.s.t.r.o. I have joined DrPostman in the great GLP in the sky ...

Thanks for your concern - reserved as I'm sure it is ...

Hey every one. I have some great stuff for you. Where is tunnel vision he will love this and needs to add it to his doc

read the comments etc on this clip. Its great. Im not saying zetas wrong, but certainly Nancy wrong.



In the video Nancy claims moon swirls but the person who made the video has reproduced it and debunked since. As much as i don't like the posters in this thread u may appreciate this.

Also interesting the timing that the two main shills left... Astro and ZetaMax both leave with in weeks