Debunking ZetaTalk, Have They Ever Succeeded? on Blog Radio 3/1

Every day Nancy comes up with bunkum we debunk it.

bunkum (countable and uncountable; plural bunkums)

1. (slang) senseless talk; nonsense
2. (Washington circa 1828) any bombastic political posturing or an oratorical display not accompanied by conviction; speechmaking designed for show or public applause.

debunking or not to debunk.

you cant blindly take information and say its the truth. You have to rationalize and continue on the topic in question.

its just taking a bible in one hand without reading it and saying it is so because bible says so.

The fact that Nancy has never once gotten an astronomical prediction or claim correct debunks her better than we ever could.

Nancy Lieder is a Dumb Ass. I approached her on this subject back in early 2003 when she predicted the approach of Planet Sex and alleged Pole Shift in Summer of 2003 and I told her directly to stpo scamming people by sending false fears to people in an effort to buy her stupid emegency plan books. I told her in Feb 2003, "...the summer of 2003 will come and go just like any other summer, with no pole shifts, no Planet X, no end of times, and people will continue paying their taxes, and having their coffee and what will you say then? You will either go off into hiding or make up another false conspiracy in desparation saying 2003 was symbolic for something else."

Her remark simply was, "You go on with your smug attitude. You will be praying for dear life in the summer of 2003."

And she is still making up false, stupid prophies based on fears of others all for the sole reason of making moneyu. What an idiot! And to all those that follow her and give her money, even bigger idiots!!

Wednesday night Mar 1 (?) (Sat. is March 1- what day is the show?)

Nancy's weekly rant for the gullible is Saturday night in the US but Sunday morning for those of us in Aussie.

has even one of you claims/predictions ever happened Nancy? I would say no! And remember Nancy "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Where is your extraordinary evidence, Nancy?

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

This seems to be the mantra of hard nosed skeptics.

Now it would help if the skeptics who proclaim this argument specify what they would accept as extraordinary evidence. Otherwise, arbitrarily stating this argument gives one an out no matter what evidence is shown. While it is reasonable to expect a higher standard of evidence for more extraordinary claims, there are nevertheless 6 difficulties to keep in mind.
1) First, although this rule is good as a general guideline, the fact that 3 possible alternatives exist make this rule fallible.
a) It is possible for something to exist without leaving behind collectable evidence as a souvenir to us. For example, planes, radio waves, electromagnetism, and light move around without leaving "hard evidence" yet they exist. Therefore, extraordinary phenomena can easily exist without leaving behind extraordinary evidence.

b) It is possible for something to exist yet the evidence for it hasn't been found or understood yet, which is the case for almost every discovery in history from fire and wheels to gunpowder and gravity, to planets, atoms and electromagnetism.

c) It is possible that the evidence is already there but that it's subject to interpretation, making it controversial. This is true for instance, of the alleged mysterious implants found by doctors and surgeons in alleged alien abductees. So even when something leaves a trail, residue or mark, they are subject to interpretation anyway.

Of course, skeptics have argued that all these things are possible but not probable, hence the requirement for extraordinary evidence. However, in order to really know all that is probable and improbable in the universe and reality, it would require that one have complete knowledge of every dimension and reality that exists in the universe and beyond. No one, neither skeptic nor believer, has that kind of knowledge, at least not consciously. Therefore, it would be more accurate to state that:

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to convince skeptics, but not necessarily to exist in objective reality."

2) Definitions of "extraordinary claims" vary based on prior beliefs and experiences. Not everyone agrees on whether a claim is extraordinary or ordinary. Suppose we were fishes for example, and lived underwater our whole lives without ever seeing or hearing about land. The claim of land existing above water would be an extraordinary claim to us, though not to the creatures living on the land above. Now obviously just because the claim of land is extraordinary to us as fishes does not mean that the land doesn‚t exist. The point is that extraordinary claims are not extraordinary to everyone. What is extraordinary to some is ordinary and natural to others depending on their experience and level of consciousness. For example, the internal body energy of chi gong (or quigong) is mystical to Westerners but has been a natural everyday part of life for thousands of years in Asia. Chi is used, felt, and observed by its practitioners much the same as the effects of gravity are felt and observed by us. Likewise, the concept of Astral Projections and Out of Body Experiences is extraordinary to those who have never experienced them, but for those who experience them regularly, it is an ordinary thing to them that they know is a reality. In the same way, our cars, radios and cell phones are extraordinary to tribal natives in remote parts of Africa, but ordinary to us. The best solution, in my opinion, is for everybody to put their cards on the table by honestly specifying their prior beliefs. This sets the standards for what is to be expected and leads to a better mutual understanding of each other.

3) Different people have different standards for what is "extraordinary evidence." Depending on your definition, it could be said that we already have some extraordinary evidence for certain types of paranormal claims. Take the following 4 types of phenomena for instance.
a) UFO's (Unidentified Flying Objects): It can be said that there is extraordinary evidence to support the existence of UFO's from unexplainable photographs, video camera footage, multiple eyewitness sightings, abduction reports, Air Force radar reports, etc. All of these constitute convincing evidence for some people, but not for others. Although much of it can be explained as misperceptions, natural phenomena, weather balloons, aircraft, birds, balls of lightning, luminous Earth lights, etc. there are still many cases which are unexplainable and display features not known of any natural phenomena. One example is the White House Merry Go Round Incident of July 1952 where Air Force fighters repeatedly chased UFO‚s that kept appearing on Air Force radar was never adequately explained. Even skeptics admit that some cases are unexplainable, though they claim that unexplainable does not mean inexplicable. (See Argument # 11)

Since it‚s not always possible for extraordinary things to leave behind some type of tangible evidence, if I saw a UFO at close range and didn't have my camera with me and then it flew away, how am I expected to have extraordinary evidence? Am I supposed to be able to call that UFO back as if it were under my command or chase it like Superman? The fact that this event happened without our control makes us unable to satisfy this criteria. The same goes with ghosts and other things.

For hard nosed skeptics though, even good evidence will not be enough, since their mentality is to debunk rather than to discover and learn. You see, even if I had a piece of a crashed flying saucer and showed it to them, they would just say that it is probably just a piece of top secret military aircraft that we don't know about yet. They would want the full saucer itself to be convinced. Then if I found a whole saucer and showed it to them, that would still not be enough because then they could say that there is no proof that the saucer is extraterrestrial in origin and that it could just be a secret type of aircraft invented by the military. Of course, if they had real alien bodies in front of them, then it'd be much harder to dismiss <g> but you get the idea here. They will continually raise the bar. It's their mentality that causes them to close their minds and ignore everything that doesn't fit into their viewpoint.

Just recently in fact, a press conference for the UFO Disclosure Project ( [link to www.disclosureproject.com)] took place in Washington D.C. at the National Press Club on May 9, 2001. At the conference, over 20 government, military and scientific officials testified that they had known of the reality of UFO's for a long time and the secrecy behind them imposed by the government. You can view a two hour video broadcast of the conference over the internet at [link to www.connectlive.com] (I strongly recommend it) So far, all the skeptics and CSICOP have had to say about this conference is "so what?" Obviously, they'd rather pretend that it didn't exist. But then again, who likes to be proven wrong?

b) Ghosts and Spirits: The same goes with ghosts. There are many credible witnesses who have seen ghosts and experienced unexplainable things taking place in haunted houses, such as sudden apparitions, the feeling of an unseen presence, unnatural movement of objects, frequent displacement of things around the house, sounds, voices, etc. Paranormal investigators have even used geiger counters that detected electrical activity in a haunted area. Plus, there are also countless stories of hauntings in all around the world from the mundane to the incredible and uncanny. Although these claims are largely anecdotal, we must understand that while anecdotal evidence is not completely reliable, it is not completely unreliable either and is considered to be evidence in societal functions depending on various factors. (See Argument # 5 regarding the validity of anecdotal evidence) In addition, the amount of anecdotal evidence is also relevant because the higher the number and the more credible the witnesses, the stronger the evidence.

However, die hard skeptics will not consider anecdotal evidence to be valid evidence regardless of the amount. To them, credible evidence has to be measurable in some conventional way and reproduced at our beck and call. The problem with this is that what we can measure is limited to our level of technology. For instance, before we had the technology to measure seismic-activity in the Earth‚s crust, they still existed even though they couldn‚t yet be measured. Furthermore, since we can‚t see radio waves, electromagnetism, air, gravity, magnetic force, etc. but they exist anyway, it is logical to assume that there are other things that could exist but aren‚t yet measurable. Our technology may not be up to the level to measure other things that could be there. Or it may be that our technology can only detect things of the physical plane and not the spiritual plane. Looking for physical evidence of something spiritual is like looking for evidence in the ocean for the existence of Mars rather than looking for it in space.

c) ESP (Extra Sensory Perception) and Telepathy: This is also especially true for ESP and telepathy. Experiments under controlled conditions have been done that revealed consistent well above chance results, which strongly point to the conclusion that ESP and telepathy exist at least to a small degree. (See Dean Radin‚s The Conscious Universe and Bernard Gittelson‚s Intangible Evidence for more specifics) These experiments, particularly the Ganzfeld and Autoganzfeld experiments done from 1974 to 1997, were repeatable too, with 2,549 sessions showing above average results. (See Argument # 17) The problem is that not all scientists and researchers are able to produce the same results. Skeptics usually point to the failures of psi experiments and ignore the successes. They will accept the failed psi experiments as evidence against psi, but not the successful psi experiments as evidence for psi. This is an obvious double standard, which is typical of closed-minded skeptics. One skeptic I debated did not consider the high success of the Ganzfeld experiments as evidence for psi. She pointed out that the few failed experiments invalidated the other successful ones! She wanted a 100 percent success rate. (and even if she got a 100 percent success rate, she would obviously have moved the goal posts and charged fraud! Very few things are 100 percent!) Of course, not all skeptics are that closed-minded, but this gives you an idea of the mentality of closed-minded skeptics. I‚m not saying that we should only pay attention to the successes and ignore the failures either, but that we should take them both into account, and when we do so, there is in fact strong consistent evidence that psi exists, both from scientific experiments and overwhelmingly large anecdotal evidence. It is possible of course, that some scientists skew the psi results because they are eager to find evidence for psi, but why do skeptics automatically assume that it must be that? Obviously it‚s because of their preconceived beliefs (which they will not admit). If ESP and telepathy exist, it doesn't mean that it has to be controllable at our beck and call like some raw energy. We've only begun to scratch the outskirts on the nature of the whole thing anyway.

Besides experiments, countless accounts of psychic experiences abound, both documented and undocumented. Studies show that about 2/3 of Americans claim to have had psychic experiences, making them quite common rather than "extraordinary". The most common type of psychic experience is telepathy, such as when loved ones and close friends from vast distances apart know at the exact time when something traumatic happened to the other. Sometimes, every detail of the traumatic event is observed or felt from afar. They are extremely powerful personal proof. I've had a few of these kind myself. Often, what was suddenly felt out of nowhere about what happened to the loved one is later verified to be true, occurring at exactly the time it was dreamt or felt. This suggests some subconscious telepathic link between people who are close. Experiences of this kind are in fact very common. Skeptics of course say that these kind of things are nothing but pure coincidence, but this is unsubstantiated and a rush to judgment. They just don‚t realize that just because something happens that they can‚t understand doesn‚t mean that it MUST be coincidence or chance. In the same manner, if someone spoke Spanish and I didn‚t, that doesn‚t mean that the person speaking Spanish is speaking random gibberish. If someone living in a tribe in Africa saw me turning channels with my remote and didn‚t understand how remote controls work, that doesn‚t mean that my pushing buttons on the remote and the channels changing are just a coincidence!

d) Mystical Experiences: And what about mystical experiences, spiritual enlightenment, being "born again", Near Death Experiences and Out of Body Experiences? These can also be said by those who experience them to be extraordinary evidence as well, because they are often self-authenticating and life changing in themselves. As the 1994 New Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia states under Mysticism:
"Mysticism in general refers to a direct and immediate experience of the sacred, or the knowledge derived from such an experience.……. First, the experience is immediate and overwhelming, divorced from the common experience of reality. Second, the experience or the knowledge imparted by it is felt to be self-authenticating, without need of further evidence or justification. Finally, it is held to be ineffable, its essence incapable of being expressed or understood outside the experience itself……. the experience itself is always of an Absolute that transcends the human efforts or methods of achieving it." (New Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia 1994)

Experiencers will describe these experiences not as faith-based, but an "inner knowing." The fact that these type of experiences are dramatically life changing makes them "extraordinary evidence" themselves simply because ordinary experiences don't alter people's lives in this way. To say that these self-authenticating, life changing experiences are just pure imagination is closed minded to say the least. As Faith, a practitioner of Shakti Gaivism and one who has had all-pervasive cosmic transcendental experiences of God in Unity state, constantly reminds us on my email group:
"But remember .. there is "Belief" a chosen activity of mind... and there is an actual Knowing... via direct experience. They are 2 differnt things. I never could accept chosen Belief.. THAT is why I was an Agnostic.

I like the example of the person working in an inner office with no windows. A co-worker could come in and tell them it is raining out. IF they accept That as truth... it is ONLY a chosen belief. But.. If they were to go outside themselves and stand in the driving rain and get soaking wet... then that is no longer a chosen belief... that would qualify as an actual Knowing.. by Direct experience.

Your Mind is Limited... but "YOU" are far greater than your mind... you are ALL that is..... you just cannot see it yet. Mind keeps you contracted.... but You can go beyond individual mind and tap the All Knowing. The only way you can KNOW this... is by experiencing it. I am not talking about "Belief" here... but direct experience. IF you were to accept what I say here.... THAT would be a Belief.... No Good in my book or yours either I am sure. So... I will NOT be disappointed if you do not ACCEPT what I say.... on the other hand..... You cannot really know that what I say is really illogical babble either...... I think the fairest thing to do is... stay open to the possibilities.... That there are things beyond the scope of Science, things that your current logic based min has not been exposed to.... but that are none the less Possible." - Faith ([email protected])

4) "Extraordinary evidence" is subject to perspective because those who have firsthand direct experience of the phenomena already have their "extraordinary evidence" while others who haven‚t, don‚t. (See Argument # 5 regarding anecdotal evidence.) For instance, those who have had full blown OBE‚s already have a realization and knowing that separation of body and spirit can and has taken place, and that there is life after death, especially if they are able to witness specific details at a distance which are later verified as accurate. For them the experience is as apparent as it would be apparent to you whether you were in your own car or house. Similarly, those with transcendent mystical experiences describe it as an "inner knowing" that transcends all description and removes all doubt. In the same fashion, those who have seen Bigfoot or ghosts firsthand at close point-blank-range also have their "extraordinary evidence."

5) The argument is based on an unproven premise. It is based on the premise that paranormal phenomena are either impossible or extremely improbable. The reason it reflects this premise is obvious. Someone who believes that paranormal events are impossible is obviously going to need a lot more proof than someone who believes that they are possible and normal. However, just because miracles, ESP, sightings of apparitions, or OBE‚s haven't happened to skeptics doesn't mean they haven't happened to others. Likewise, just because I haven‚t been to Spain doesn‚t mean that everyone who has is mistaken or deluded. In order for one to know what is impossible or improbable, one would have to be an all knowing creator of the universe who possesses every knowledge that there is. But none of these hard nosed skeptics are anywhere near that level, so their assumption that paranormal events are impossible in my view is baseless. As scientist and author Arthur C. Clarke states in his first law:
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."

6) The argument favors conservatism or retaining the established theory in spite of contrary evidence. This has its pros and cons. Obviously, it makes sense to retain what works until something better comes along. However, when it comes to modifying our paradigms or world view we also tend to resist change, even when the data calls for it. This argument I fear, is used as an excuse for those who resist change. But if we never abandoned theories or expanded them, then science would not make progress. History has shown that progress comes with new discoveries and abandoning old outdated theories that no longer fit the new data acquired. This skeptical rule does not specify a sufficient condition for sufficient evidence. Therefore, rules should be established to clarify whether a competing theory is promising enough to warrant further research so that when those rules are satisfied, excuses can‚t be used to try to dismiss the evidence off hand. Otherwise, as Ron Pearson says in his article Theoretical Physics Back Survival: ( [link to www.ozemail.com.au]
Science, however, cannot progress by theory alone; it requires a synthesis of theory and experiment. When observation runs ahead of theory to provide anomalies which seem inexplicable, then as history has shown by repeating itself over and over, the anomalies are avoided, ignored or discredited in order to maintain the status quo: to avoid the need to injure existing intellectual vested interests.




.

you write(copy&paste) a long answer full of NOTHING! No evidence, no extraordinary evidence, no nothing! You Zeta people are full of shit

They are simply sock-puppets, when Nancy gets lonely she puts one on and has a conversation with her keyboard.

Hey debunkers, thanks for the noise...there's not enough of it.

Don't forget Sat. night around 6:30 is the live ZetaTalk chat, and you can walk with the aliens, talk with the aliens-
who else offers that!!!?

Yeah Nancy you got pretty well debunked last Saturday, which is why you had to come back and delete all of the posts that debunked you, which only served to further debunk you. What kind of fantasy land do you live in?

Here is some food for thought that will be reiterated tomorrow...

The Zetas have mentioned that the current Bush in office is a clone. They've also mentioned that this current clone was a replacement because the last one was prone to too much cocaine and booze. They've mentioned that The Puppet Master was harboring the replacement clone (who is now in office).

Question - why would they state that the current Bush clone wants support in Africa, as a possible place to stay after the shift? Is not the current Bush "in with" The Puppet Master so that he would be provided a place? The current clone should be working with The Rothschilds now (as his forefathers have done). Perhaps because he is a clone he fears he will be treated as the prior Bush regardless? Something seems conflicting with this...

I have a better idea...why don't you try providing evidence that anyone is paid to be here. Why is it that anyone who doesn't believe you is labeled a disinfo agent or government debunker? Why don't you try showing how anything the "debunkers" say is wrong or incorrect. And jealous of ZetaTalk popularity? You're joking right? Have you seen your stats lately?

are you high?Youve been debunked on a daily basis.Get over yourself and quit wasting peoples time with your bullshit.

[link to www.badastronomy.com]

[link to www.badastronomy.com]

[link to www.badastronomy.com]

Nancy claims that observable effects of her imaginary planet ex are all around us. Please show us one iota of evidence that YOU can defend without reference to her own writings.




Nancy claims that observable effects of her imaginary planet ex are all around us. Please show us one iota of evidence that YOU can defend without reference to her own writings.




Nancy claims that observable effects of her imaginary planet ex are all around us. Please show us one iota of evidence that YOU can defend without reference to her own writings.

None of your possibilities apply in the case of zetatalk, where Nancy has made huge numbers of claims, all of which are verifiably false.

So, again I ask you, please provide just one single instance of an astronomical claim or prediction from ALL of zetatalk that YOU can defend WITHOUT using Nancy's own writings.

so thats why i got banned for a day! Nancy didn't like my opinions...

so thats why i got banned for a day! Nancy didn't like my opinions...

Nancy banned me and deleated all my posts for posting copies of HER OWN WORDS!

Here is what got me banned. See if you can figure out why.

Nancy's failed predictions (just a few of many):

"The Zetas have commented on Hale-Bopp since it first hit the press in mid-1995. They have stated that Hale-Bopp is a fraud, designed to get the populace looking in the wrong direction, not toward Orion." – Date unknown

"We know that the 12th Planet will make its passage in late spring or early summer of the year 2003 because we are observing the planet approaching your solar system." – Date unknown

"We have given the correct dates for the return of the 12th Planet as the year 2003 for the devastating first pass. All other dates are incorrect." – Date unknown

"Thus, you have Planet X in the news, under every subject but the inbound planet that will pass on May 15, 2003 or shortly thereafter." – June 2002

"Since the inception of ZetaTalk, the passage with rotation stoppage and pole shift has been described as occurring ´shortly after May 15, 2003.´" – Date unknown

"By May 15th, it will be utterly clear that earth changes are in process, most humans walking about in shock, numb. There will be no debate about a mistake. We have stated that the rotation will stop for approximately a week." – Date unknown

"Slowing rotation is so pronounced that even those not aware of the prediction are noticing their clocks minutes slow, on a regular basis, from ´official´ time." – March 22, 2003

"...nor will the war progress to the point where a regime change occurs." – Commenting on Iraq, March 22, 2003

"In short, they are not heeding the warnings of the Council, so stronger measures will shortly be taken. These measures will be, like the Columbia disaster, of a magnitude to stop the onslaught of the invasion as though the breath had been taken out of the body." – Commenting on Iraq, March 22, 2003

"We have stated that Planet X will be visible in the daytime sky, 7 weeks before passage. Given that we have stated that passage is shortly after May 15, 2003, as at this time those wanting to survive should be at their safe locations, this is putting the visibility into the last week of March at the earliest." – March 2003

"Since we were precise about the dates, even the number of hours for rotation stoppage (5.9 days) [on the Loud Gentile show], we have no problem with being precise on the meaning of the Pole Shift date as May 27." – May 16, 2003

"On this date, May 30, 2003 the Earth is poised to experience great quakes and stretching of rifts, so that discussions of the exact date of rotation stoppage or the shift will be replaced by frantic efforts to deal with one disaster after another." – May 30, 2003

"You have only weeks not months" – July 20, 2003

"We have stated that Planet X would travel the span of Saturn’s orbit in 3 short months. In that Planet X has been visible to the naked eye since the very last days in March..." – August 28, 2003

"But at the current time, by late August, there is no question that the Planet X complex has arrived between the Earth and Sun..." – August 28, 2003

"Despite loud evidence that Planet X has arrived..." – September 21, 2003

"Given the increasingly obvious fact that Planet X is in the vicinity and not going away before trashing the neighborhood..." – October 11, 2003

"Those not willing or able to make changes in their lives before the Holidays may find the Holidays possible, but just barely, as the next sweeping arm of the Sun will put all doubt aside." – November 15, 2003

"The last arm swept by Earth around Dec 25, the next expected by the anxious humans watching the drama to start around Feb 9, 2004." – January 30, 2004

"The Earth´s dark twin, approaching from behind her, has scant months to reach her and create a crisis. Earth stopping on Dec 25 allows for a full half orbit by this twin by June 25, 2004, but the crisis will occur sooner and for many reasons. This twin cannot go to the left, where Venus lies, nor the right, where Mars rides, and cannot move forward. The effect of such a traffic jam is not within man’s knowledge bank." – April 2004

"Certain death on the International Space Station lies ahead for any who would remain there during the coming weeks." – December 10, 2004

"If fireballs have been an occasional entertainment, they will soon become a daily affair almost everywhere" – February 4, 2005

"The Earth is now coming into a similar period, when the N Pole of Planet X is swinging, slowing, around to point away from the Sun for the 3 days of darkness time those in the northern hemisphere of Earth will inevitably experience." – November 17, 2005

I feel sorry for her Dog..

This is some of the BEST entertainment around!!!!

You have the delusional (nancy) leading the deluded (the believers)!!!

I just hope when nancy gives the date that PX is supposed to show all the believers will give us a chance to buy their stuff at rock bottom prices.

88145, nice to see someone else posting that list I compiled. I should go through CrazyTalk and see what else can be added to the list.

Why would anyone "debunk" ZetaTalk.......there is no money in it.

You've not succeded in debunking Zetatalk. That is only your relative opinion from a certain perspective.