ZetaTalk - On Paid Debunkers

Pertinent to Zetatalk discussions.

"If the debunkers support the use of obscene depravity, how do they justify it?

Is it alright to behave in a morally desolute manner, in order to stifle a message they find unappealing?

Or is the argument that they are morally jutified to sink to the lowest depths necessary when trying to stifle a message as long as it's for the good of others?

How do they get past the hypocricy of their own position?

Are they the crusaders and this their virtual crusade? Where the end justifies the means?

They attack the person, they attack the message, they attack people who come to this thread out of simple curiosity or interest.

They come off more or less like religious fanatics rather than the scentifically grounded reasonable men that they keep assuring us that they are.

Frankly I just don't see it.

I'd like to be able to read this stuff without all of the sociopathic behaviour coming from the debunking crowd. If they think that turning every thread that comes from Nancy Lieder into a cesspit is the proper approach to use in order to refute her message then these are not the people who I would want policing my interests.

Why are they policing these threads anyway?

Is it their job? Is it their moral obligation to shout down and besmirtch every idea that threatens their paradigm?

The arrogance of the debunker is beyond question.

Their purpose is crystal clear.

The logic behind their purpose escapes all reason.

Why must those with the curiosity and courage to look beyond the narrow scope of our officially sanctioned reality always have to search and struggle against a current of antagonism and ignorance?

Debunkers are satisfied with memorizing facts and data and repeating the logic of their betters.

While science is good, it is only a tool and the scientist must always recognize that what we know is always changing as our perspective increases and the scope of our understading increases.

There are others for whom the tedium of collating data is not enough, and understanding is the brass ring for which we strive.

How can those for whom the material world is all that exists possibly understand that?


To them, all we ask is that we be left to our own devices. In peace.

It's so little to ask."

288652,

Very well said!!!!

Bravo.

Why are you so afraid of valid and pertinent questions? Is your position so weak? If what Nancy said was true, and "Planet X" existed, any one claiming to believe her would easily be able to support their positions with supporting evidence. There would be little room for debate. As it stands, there is little room for debate because no ONE has been able to prove that "Planet X" exists. A user of this forum has offered to let anyone use his professional grade telescope to search for and photograph "Planet X." This would be a big win for Nancy. Not only would a "debunker" be present when "Planet X" is spotted, it would also be with equipment owned by a "debunker." But no one has bothered to take him up on his offer. Why? Are you afraid that by doing so, "debunkers" will be proven right?

Very well said!!!!

Bravo.


"User # 78/68" hates anyone who doesn't believe what Nancy says. If you question her on anything that would prove her wrong, be prepared to be attacked. Instead of simply providing supporting evidence to support Nancy's claims or proving your claims wrong, he only responds with insults. See the list below.

Challenges "User # 78/68" Continues To Run Away From

1) When asked for proof that "Planet X" exists, he simply insults others and runs away.
2) When someone wanted to bet him money (something that's very important to him) on Nancy's accuracy, he disappeared. And each time it is brought up, he ignores it.
3) I provided photographic proof that the sun was NOT rising 20 minutes early. When I asked to dispute this, he ran away.
4) I provided a diagram proving that constellations behind the sun CANNOT be made visible by simply tilting the Earth or lowering it in the ecliptic. Instead of providing charts of his own to show it would be possible, he simply threw out insults and ran away.
4) When I personally invited him to Tampa to prove that I am exactly who I say I am, he initially showed interest and then ran away.
5) ID 88145 invited "User # 78/68" to call him at work or e-mail him, instead of doing so he threw out more insults and ran away.
6) When asked why GOTO telescopes continue to accurately track the moon if it were moving unpredictably (i.e. too far north, too far south), he spewed more insults and ran away.
7) ID 88145 has now invited ANYONE who believes in "Planet X" to come view the skies with him to search for this elusive "rogue planet" that "believers" all claim is so easy to see at sunrise. Instead of taking up that invitation, he threw out more insults and ran away.
8) ID 74444 suggested that Nancy is NOT the most popular poster on GLP and explained how he came to this conclusion. Instead of providing any evidence to prove otherwise, "User # 78/68" spewed insults and ran away.
9) When asked if he believed that Earth was halted in orbit, or if he believed that "Planet X" would cause a "pole shift" and wipe out 90% of Earth's population (both of which are claims made by Nancy) - "User # 78/68" called them trick questions, refused to answer and ran away.
10) "User # 78/68" claims that "debunkers" lie. When asked for examples of these lies, he spews insults and runs away.
11) He claims that "debunkers" are government agents. When asked for proof of this, he spews insults and runs away.
12) Since "User" refuses to take 88145 up on his offer to search for "Planet X," it was suggested "User" contact a local astronomy club and view with them. "User" spewed insults and ran away.

Wow, Loser...this list is getting longer and longer. It really speaks volumes about you doesn't it?

Posted AGAIN so Dr Postspam and Circuit Breaker will read again. I don't think the words sunk in yet. Maybe a re-read will help.




"Pertinent to Zetatalk discussions.

"If the debunkers support the use of obscene depravity, how do they justify it?

Is it alright to behave in a morally desolute manner, in order to stifle a message they find unappealing?

Or is the argument that they are morally jutified to sink to the lowest depths necessary when trying to stifle a message as long as it's for the good of others?

How do they get past the hypocricy of their own position?

Are they the crusaders and this their virtual crusade? Where the end justifies the means?

They attack the person, they attack the message, they attack people who come to this thread out of simple curiosity or interest.

They come off more or less like religious fanatics rather than the scentifically grounded reasonable men that they keep assuring us that they are.

Frankly I just don't see it.

I'd like to be able to read this stuff without all of the sociopathic behaviour coming from the debunking crowd. If they think that turning every thread that comes from Nancy Lieder into a cesspit is the proper approach to use in order to refute her message then these are not the people who I would want policing my interests.

Why are they policing these threads anyway?

Is it their job? Is it their moral obligation to shout down and besmirtch every idea that threatens their paradigm?

The arrogance of the debunker is beyond question.

Their purpose is crystal clear.

The logic behind their purpose escapes all reason.

Why must those with the curiosity and courage to look beyond the narrow scope of our officially sanctioned reality always have to search and struggle against a current of antagonism and ignorance?

Debunkers are satisfied with memorizing facts and data and repeating the logic of their betters.

While science is good, it is only a tool and the scientist must always recognize that what we know is always changing as our perspective increases and the scope of our understading increases.

There are others for whom the tedium of collating data is not enough, and understanding is the brass ring for which we strive.

How can those for whom the material world is all that exists possibly understand that?


To them, all we ask is that we be left to our own devices. In peace.

It's so little to ask."





THE LOGIC BEHIND THEIR PURPOSE ESCAPES ALL REASON ... no shit!
More people every day can see right through these GLP shills.

Luser, while we all understand the bitter and lonely existence that is your lot in life only you can make a difference, your world is so much hate and bile, yet even you must realize this is the internet, no one can hear you scream, imagine yourself five years in the future, what will you have done? try just one small positive event per day, you, and only you can make a difference to your life.

Was that a brain fart Prof-Rabid?
Your need to come to Nancy threads says it all, doesn't it?

And the "Prof" part of your name ... wow, talk about insecure. You should have keep up with your studies Rabbit and you wouldn't have to look like such a wannabe.

Nighty, night.

Good night Loser, your insults are woeful today, you should try to emulate a wannabe, at least they have ambition, you live the life of a never was, never tried and never amounted to anything.

Please. Posted AGAIN so Loser will read again. It's obvious the words haven't sunk in yet. Maybe reading it again will help him realize what a fool he makes of himself:

Challenges "User # 78/68" Continues To Run Away From

1) When asked for proof that "Planet X" exists, he simply insults others and runs away.
2) When someone wanted to bet him money (something that's very important to him) on Nancy's accuracy, he disappeared. And each time it is brought up, he ignores it.
3) I provided photographic proof that the sun was NOT rising 20 minutes early. When I asked him to dispute this, he ran away.
4) I provided a diagram proving that constellations behind the sun CANNOT be made visible by simply tilting the Earth or lowering it in the ecliptic. Instead of providing charts of his own to show it would be possible, he simply threw out insults and ran away.
4) When I personally invited him to Tampa to prove that I am exactly who I say I am, and not some "government agent," he initially showed interest...then he spewed insults and ran away.
5) ID 88145 invited "User # 78/68" to call him at work or e-mail him, instead of doing so he threw out more insults and ran away.
6) When asked why GOTO telescopes continue to accurately track the moon if it were moving unpredictably (i.e. too far north, too far south), he spewed more insults and ran away.
7) ID 88145 recently invited ANYONE who believes in "Planet X" to come view the skies with him using his professional grade telescope to search for this elusive "rogue planet" that "believers" all claim is so easy to see at sunrise. Instead of taking up that invitation, "User # 78/68" threw out more insults and ran away.
8) ID 74444 suggested that Nancy is NOT the most popular poster on GLP and explained how he came to this conclusion. Instead of providing any evidence to prove otherwise, "User # 78/68" spewed insults and ran away.
9) "User # 78/68" was asked if he believed that Earth was halted in orbit, or if he believed that "Planet X" would cause a "pole shift" and wipe out 90% of Earth's population, both of which are claims made by Nancy. A simple yes or no response was all that was needed. However, "User # 78/68" called them trick questions, refused to answer and ran away.
10) "User # 78/68" claims that "debunkers" lie. When asked for examples of these lies, he spews insults and runs away.
11) He claims that "debunkers" are government agents. When asked for proof of this, he spews insults and runs away.
12) Since "User" refused to take ID 88145 up on his offer to search for "Planet X," it was suggested "User" contact a local astronomy club and view with them. "User" spewed insults and ran away.

One problem with your theory. The things that myself and other debunkers say about Nancy's claims are NOT misleading or misinforming. What we say is true when we point out Nancy's lies. If you disagree, then why don't we discuss Nancy's lies about the Moon abnormally rotating as it crosses the sky?

Debunkers have presented the rational behind explanations of why Nancy is wrong for YEARS, ever since Nancy began spewing her crap on sci.astro. The "bunkers" rarely engage in any discussion of the real issues showing where Nancy is lying. At some point, it began to be futile to try to be rational and some people decided to return Nancy's crapola in kind-- with more crapola. People give Nancy the horse-laugh because it's all it really deserves. If the bunkers didn't invariably run away from real discussion, there would be more of that. As far as you being left alone... get a clue...this is an internet discussion forum. People are going to post whatever they want to post.

ZetaMax posts some image of the Sun, claiming that it is "evidence" that Earth is halted in orbit. When challenged to explain WHY that image is evidence of a halted Earth, he can only produce a tortured definition of the word "evidence" which he thinks justifies his refusal to explain his claim.

It is that sort of behaviour, and also the habit of most "bunkers" of offering nothing but insults, which has taken any discussion about Nancy's claims to the low level it has reached.

ZetaMax posts some image of the Sun, claiming that it is "evidence" that Earth is halted in orbit. When challenged to explain WHY that image is evidence of a halted Earth, he can only produce a tortured definition of the word "evidence" which he thinks justifies his refusal to explain his claim."


His "tortured" definition of evidence is nothing of the sort. You try and spin absolutely everything MeNow, why is that?
You might try harder to read and learn what ZetaMax writes ... you may learn something from it. Now, go back and quote his definition of evidence if you dare, and prove it is tortured ... for your credibility of course!

What's Dr Postspam lying about now?

I think he is pissed lately that he and his friends have lost steam and people are openly mocking them now. They're old tag line "all is normal" sure makes a fool out of em.

What colour is that Sun again, Postspam?

Oh. Then you should have no problem explaining exactly HOW that image is evidence that Earth is halted in orbit.

Go ahead. Don't be scared. Really. You could at least TRY.

The point being, of course, that "evidence" is meant to contribute significant information toward a certain end. If somone wants to maintain that ANYTHING could constitute
"evidence", then it sorta precludes any useful definition of the term, don't ya think? On second thought, no, you don't.

78/68 wouldn't know the definition of "evidence" if it bit him in the butt. He's never been interested in facts...only insults. He's a child.

BTW, the total eclipse of the moon tommorrow night proves Nancy wrong yet again. Will you bunkers even watch as your beloved fairy tale goes down the drain?

"The point being, of course, that "evidence" is meant to contribute significant information toward a certain end. If somone wants to maintain that ANYTHING could constitute
"evidence", then it sorta precludes any useful definition of the term, don't ya think? On second thought, no, you don't."


You've just precluded your own credibility. Spin, spin, spin away Menow.

Dodge, dodge, dodge. What is YOUR definition of "evidence"?

The debunkers arrogantly refuse to understand why the people of this forum don't engage them in conversation. Like anybody has time to talk to a bunch of mislead artists and liars.

Complete arrogance and selfishness displayed.

Funny... You can never actually show where we have lied. You can only SAY we have and then run away.

Funny how the allegedly lying debunkers correctly predicted that last night's Lunar eclipse would occur right on time.

Funny... if Nancy was telling the truth it never could have happened.

Any Nancy supporters care to explain? Wait... I know... the "zetas" scooted the Moon to the right place at the last minute.

Right...

Soo.... ZetaMax... you ready to discuss apparent rotation yet?

Yes, 78/68, we see your fear of engaging them with every post of yours. Why don't you just come out and admit that you aren't up to the task? All you can do is call names...which I predict you'll do to me.

MY CHECK BOUNCED!!

"In one of history's more absurd acts of totalitarianism, China
has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnation without
government permission."

LOL

Well, if **THIS** is the zeta prediction about bridges, it has so far failed miserably.

"ZetaTalk Prediction 8/16/2006: What does this do to the N. American plate? It pulls it at a diagonal, ripping the rock fingers along the New Madrid fault such that the land to the East of the Mississippi moves up and to the East, toward New England, and the land to the West of the Mississippi moves down and to the West. This does more than tear most of the bridges along the Mississippi."

Get back to me when "...most of the bridges along the Mississippi" fail. Until then, your signature line is just a constant reminder of "zeta accuracy" FAILURE.

Perhaps you care to explain why are you still prowling this forum?