Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ...

What I make my mind up on is nobody's business, that's the point. Who are you to try to influence me or anyone else? Who are you to point out to me or anyone else what is "real"? I bet your own backyard of life is royally fucked up - but unlike Nancy's situation which is transparent and thus easy for jackals like you to savage, we'll never know exactly who you are and why anyone should heed your words.

Just as we thought - a bunch of boring chickenshit nobodies. Nancy rules.

Just as we thought - a bunch of boring chickenshit nobodies. Nancy rules.

Can you tell me what Nancy has gotten right, or why I can't see "Planet X" [with my eyes, or with my camera]?

Here is your opportunity to get on stage. I'm not presenting myself as a reality expert trying to persuade others what to believe and not believe. You are. Now, again, tell us why we should listen to you. No adolescent put-downs, no cutesy animations - here is where you lay it bare like Nancy has, and let us judge YOU for who and what you are.

We're waiting...

Here is your opportunity to get on stage. I'm not presenting myself as a reality expert trying to persuade others what to believe and not believe. You are. Now, again, tell us why we should listen to you. No adolescent put-downs, no cutesy animations - here is where you lay it bare like Nancy has, and let us judge YOU for who and what you are.

We're waiting...

What I make my mind up on is nobody's business, that's the point. Who are you to try to influence me or anyone else? Who are you to point out to me or anyone else what is "real"? I bet your own backyard of life is royally fucked up - but unlike Nancy's situation which is transparent and thus easy for jackals like you to savage, we'll never know exactly who you are and why anyone should heed your words.


Why do people who promote the idea of PX not attract your ire? Don't they, also, try to influence others thinking? Why is it OK for them, but not for people with a different opinion than them?

Just as we thought - a bunch of boring chickenshit nobodies. Nancy rules.

Can you tell me what Nancy has gotten right, or why I can't see "Planet X" [with my eyes, or with my camera]?

Excellent thought. Here you go.

Nancy (Zetas?) present an idea. This is sometimes rebutted by opposing facts as best as others can present them, which is wonderful and valuable. No one is perfect, so a rebuttal with the tools and abilities one has, even if not eloquently put or exhaustively researched, is brave and good. Most often, though, the responses to Nancy's postings are comprised of snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, swamping her messages with voluminous vapid postings, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who accepts Nancy's position with blind faith and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the arguments presented.

So, I want to know the credentials of members of the latter group, who appear to outnumber the folks who try legitimate respectful arguments to Nancy. It's not enough to disrupt, put down, overwhelm, and attack the person not the idea. These are inane sandbox bully level tactics, and sway no adult on this forum. You are more than this? Then reveal who you are and convince us why we should pay any heed at all to Nancy's most vociferous critics.

Excellent thought. Here you go.

Nancy (Zetas?) present an idea. This is sometimes rebutted by opposing facts as best as others can present them, which is wonderful and valuable. No one is perfect, so a rebuttal with the tools and abilities one has, even if not eloquently put or exhaustively researched, is brave and good. Most often, though, the responses to Nancy's postings are comprised of snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, swamping her messages with voluminous vapid postings, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who accepts Nancy's position with blind faith and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the arguments presented.

So, I want to know the credentials of members of the latter group, who appear to outnumber the folks who try legitimate respectful arguments to Nancy. It's not enough to disrupt, put down, overwhelm, and attack the person not the idea. These are inane sandbox bully level tactics, and sway no adult on this forum. You are more than this? Then reveal who you are and convince us why we should pay any heed at all to Nancy's most vociferous critics.



And yet, when asked a question about whether you believe Nancy's claim tha Earth is halted in orbit, you respond with snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who rejects Nancy's position with evidence and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the contrary evidence presented.

That's precisely what you just did, and you avoided the question, to boot.

What I make my mind up on is nobody's business, that's the point. Who are you to try to influence me or anyone else? Who are you to point out to me or anyone else what is "real"? I bet your own backyard of life is royally fucked up - but unlike Nancy's situation which is transparent and thus easy for jackals like you to savage, we'll never know exactly who you are and why anyone should heed your words.


Why do people who promote the idea of PX not attract your ire? Don't they, also, try to influence others thinking? Why is it OK for them, but not for people with a different opinion than them?


Excellent thought. Here you go.

Nancy (Zetas?) present an idea. This is sometimes rebutted by opposing facts as best as others can present them, which is wonderful and valuable. No one is perfect, so a rebuttal with the tools and abilities one has, even if not eloquently put or exhaustively researched, is brave and good.

Most often, though, the responses to Nancy's postings are comprised of snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, swamping her messages with voluminous vapid postings, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who accepts Nancy's position with blind faith and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the arguments presented.

So, I want to know the credentials of members of the latter group, who appear to outnumber the folks who try legitimate respectful arguments to Nancy.

It's not enough to disrupt, put down, overwhelm, and attack the person not the idea.

These are inane sandbox bully level tactics, and sway no adult on this forum. You are more than this? Then reveal who you are and convince us why we should pay any heed at all to Nancy's most vociferous critics.

Excellent thought. Here you go.

Nancy (Zetas?) present an idea. This is sometimes rebutted by opposing facts as best as others can present them, which is wonderful and valuable. No one is perfect, so a rebuttal with the tools and abilities one has, even if not eloquently put or exhaustively researched, is brave and good. Most often, though, the responses to Nancy's postings are comprised of snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, swamping her messages with voluminous vapid postings, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who accepts Nancy's position with blind faith and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the arguments presented.

So, I want to know the credentials of members of the latter group, who appear to outnumber the folks who try legitimate respectful arguments to Nancy. It's not enough to disrupt, put down, overwhelm, and attack the person not the idea. These are inane sandbox bully level tactics, and sway no adult on this forum. You are more than this? Then reveal who you are and convince us why we should pay any heed at all to Nancy's most vociferous critics.



And yet, when asked a question about whether you believe Nancy's claim tha Earth is halted in orbit, you respond with snarky school-yard put downs, vicious personal attacks, and proclamations that, in a nutshell, condemn and ridicule the intellect and sanity of anyone who rejects Nancy's position with evidence and ALSO anyone who wants to make up their own mind by considering all the contrary evidence presented.

That's precisely what you just did, and you avoided the question, to boot.


That's how you debate? Pop up a random question that's out of context with my thread, and quote me against me? I'm off to bed, you've bored me to tears.

Here is your opportunity to get on stage. I'm not presenting myself as a reality expert trying to persuade others what to believe and not believe. You are. Now, again, tell us why we should listen to you. No adolescent put-downs, no cutesy animations - here is where you lay it bare like Nancy has, and let us judge YOU for who and what you are.

We're waiting...

Anyways hot head the post was not for you

Give it up... Zetatalk was placed there as the prediction..duh

Well now you know what the word "soon" means

Well now you know what the word "soon" means

Well now you know what the word "soon" means


You mean like what she said in 2003?

"It has been noted, during the agony of the date not known, that the Retrograde orbit of Planet X and the regular orbit of Earth would cause these planets to pass, given the passage of time. Indeed, as of the date of this writing, Planet X is well at the point where it is likely to be past standing between the Sun and Earth, a situation we have described as key to rotation stoppage and the shift. Does this mean that stoppage and the shift are immediate? As we stated on July 20, during the Lou Gentile show, days or weeks, not months, would pass [see White Lie explanation re 2003], so obviously the date is close. However, the exact date cannot be surmised by the position of Earth and Planet X vs a vs the Sun and each other, for the following reasons:

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Well now you know what the word "soon" means


You mean like what she said in 2003?

"It has been noted, during the agony of the date not known, that the Retrograde orbit of Planet X and the regular orbit of Earth would cause these planets to pass, given the passage of time. Indeed, as of the date of this writing, Planet X is well at the point where it is likely to be past standing between the Sun and Earth, a situation we have described as key to rotation stoppage and the shift. Does this mean that stoppage and the shift are immediate? As we stated on July 20, during the Lou Gentile show, days or weeks, not months, would pass [see White Lie explanation re 2003], so obviously the date is close. However, the exact date cannot be surmised by the position of Earth and Planet X vs a vs the Sun and each other, for the following reasons:

[link to www.zetatalk.com]

Reason given worked...didn't it?

:gtok.s:

Hi.
Quick question.
Is this Nancy person generating any income(however little) from her 'Zeta' activities, yes or no?
Does her website have a 'for entertainment' disclaimer, yes or no?

Hi.
Quick question.
Is this Nancy person generating any income(however little) from her 'Zeta' activities, yes or no?
Does her website have a 'for entertainment' disclaimer, yes or no?



According to some of her minutes there is a small income from sales of DVD, books, and some Donations, they are in a Non-profit status, so I am assuming that most of the money goes back into these alleged projects they had in motion, and to pay for the running of the website.

Income yes, however, it's difficult to say weather "profit" is being made without them releasing their financial records out to those that request it.

It took them a decade, but the halfwit debunkers finally realized that all the spewing they did on Nancy's threads had only one effect: to keep them alive so that everyone got a chance to read them. LOL! So, they came up with this new idea recently of starting their own Zetatalk debunker threads, and then bumping them for page after page. But, of course, they are the only ones posting their so the threads are just these inane rah-rah sessions that go something like this:

Debunker A: That Nancy sure is an idiot, and a bad person, too. I bet she is really rich from Zetatalk.

Debunker B: Yeah, Debunker A, you are so right. We alone in the debunker camp are smart and all scientific and stuff, so people should believe us a lot.

Debunker C: PXers really make me mad and that's why I call them names, cuz I care about them and wish they wouldn't throw their lives away.

Debunker A: I guess it's my turn again. ... Okay, well, let's see. Where is their evidence? We have lots of evidence, but they don't.

Debunker B: Evidence is scientific, but them guys just don't get it, so we have to swear at them a lot.

Debunker C: I was gonna say that.

What can a little old PXer say except: "Obsess much?"

Soledad

Reason given worked...didn't it?