UH-OH!! BLOSSOM GOODCHILD'S WIKIPEDIA PAGE HAS BEEN DELTED!!!

[link to www.10-14-08.blogspot.com] (goto link for images)
It's been since the beginning of October since we have seen these so-called "shape glitches" that the skeptics prefer to call them. Yet we are seeing similarities in other satelite images other than from Google Earth. There's no question now that this is far more than just a simple glitch. But what does it mean?

- Is something being covered up that somebody doesn't want us to see?
- Is it indeed an anomaly we are seeing from a spacecraft?
- Why are the shapes so perfectly proportioned?

The Current Google Earth Image:

The idea of the "diamonds" reference could play a potential role here. With current estimated measurement using Google Earth, this "diamond" spans well over 4000 miles from tip to tip vertically:

Are we sure this is only going to be a one mile spacecraft, a 2000 mile spacecraft, a 4000 mile spacecraft? Regardless of what various channellers, UFO abductees and psychics have said, the size has always been generated within a state of flux. My friends, we may have no idea of the size of the vessel until October 14th.

But as I've said before, in all the times I've used Google Earth, nothing like this has ever appeared before. It's something we just shouldn't throw on the backburner. This should be investigated and should have a close eye kept on it on a day to day basis until the 14th.

Only 5 more days until those who believe (myself included) see for themselves, and the skeptics will see the very thing they thought they would have never of seen in this lifetime.

~Namaste.

UPDATE: I found this post in the comments rather interesting. A poster named "lilrose" stated the following:

"Brad, thanks, for this, I know someone who worked for NATO and defense department... they told me that The Department of Defense gets first dibs on what goes out on all satellite images and if there is anything there that they do not want us to see, they are blocked out 'for security reasons'. So no matter where the images are coming from... whatever it is they do not want us to see is blocked off. It has nothing to do with putting together 'snapshots' from previous days, or angles of the satellite images... these shapes were not there previously and they take photos daily and they have the technology to cover the whole globe. There is a coverup."

I have a strong feeling that lilrose is correct. Like I've said guys. I've used Google Earth in the past, and nothing like this has ever come up before. People can offer their 'explanations' about multiple photos causing shapes and bla, bla, bla, bla...I'm not buying it. This is a strange phenomenon that is happening on Google Earth, and on other satelites as well...And it's not going to get dismissed. We really need to not throw this aside and say, "oh, well it's just a glitch." I think with this being the 8th day of these occurences, a mere 'glitch' is definitely irrational thinking.

Another clue lilrose stated was about Blossom's book named "Snapshot." And she had no idea why it's called that. It has also been stated that Blossom's wikipedia page is gone as well. And still no forms of blip within the main media on this at all. Guys, wake up and smell the cover up coffee.

for HELLO !!!!!!!!

What a tragedy.

Seriously why should anyone care?

After the 14th comes and goes with nothing, no one will. She'll be yet another Nancy Lieder.

Blossom and her wikipedia page were taken onboard the Lightship at exactly 11:11 today.

from google cache (about 2/3rds way down on the page):
[link to 64.233.169.104]
Blossom Goodchild
Blossom Goodchild (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable individual and internet medium. I originally nominated this article for speedy deletion as lacking notability. The creator asserts notability and a google search in Australia alone reveals 50,000 hits. Many of these seem to be from special interest sites and YouTube, I can't see that the individual in question is notable, nevertheless as an act of good faith, I've withdrawn the speedy nom and brought the matter here to AfD. X MarX the Spot (talk) 05:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep for now I was created today, how would you know it isn't notable without giving people a few days at least to meet WP:NOTABILITY? ——Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 06:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete can't spy any reliable sources to establish notability; most hits are to Youtube, blogs or fringe ET sites. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
What is it that identifies something as a "fringe" ET site as opposed to a "mainstream" ET site? Just because you think the beliefs are "fringe" doesn't mean the issue isn't of broader interest (or firmly ensconced within pop culture). The theme of ETs and UFOs is standard fare of mainstream TV and cinema. Wikipedia's already a rich source of information on this stuff. Hoopes (talk) 14:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
See WP:SPS. Many websites, particularly in fringe fields such as this, are self-published and therefore not reliable as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Youtube and blogs are basically never acceptable. If you can find reliable, non-trivial coverage in print newspapers or the like, then fair enough. If you can't then the article has not established notability and should be deleted. You say it's standard fare - I agree, so go find some reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
A point well taken. There are many cultural phenomena whose success on YouTube subsequently generates coverage in major media. An example of this is the musician Tay Zonday, whose song Chocolate Rain made him a media phenomenon. (BTW, your link to reliable sources is not what you may have thought it was...) Hoopes (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Haha! Yes, well caught... it should of course be reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm the original author of the article. I do appreciate why the article was flagged for speedy deletion, since this would be entirely appropriate if the entry were created for the purposes of self-promotion or to make a non-notable individual seem notable. However, the rapidity with which the issue of Blossom Goodchild's channelled message has generated hits in an increasing number of YouTube videos and websites suggests to me that the phenomenon is notable. One of the best things about Wikipedia is its ability to distribute accurate information quickly. I anticipate that this entry will grow along with the specific phenomenon it describes. As I note above the "event" is already internationally known to a large and growing audience. As a regular Wikipedia user, my first response to encountering the increased media buzz was to ask the question, "Who's Blossom Goodchild"? I think there is a tremendous benefit when a Google search yields a worthwhile Wikipedia entry with links to relevant background information. If the issue remains "hot", users will add additional information. Hoopes (talk) 13:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I think Hoopes provides a good case for considering Blossom as a cultural phenomenon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sblonder (talk • contribs) 17:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
"Cultural phenomenon?" Oh please, this is obviously a means of promotion for a woman associated with the extremely lucrative New Age market. Let's not add to the irrational hysteria by granting her an article in what is supposed to be a respected and informative encyclopaedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.3.42 (talk) 02:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
The fact that the link to her blog takes you directly to ads for a number of her New Age books, renders this article laughable to say the least. I advocate speedy deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.3.42 (talk) 02:43, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
As the author of the article, I beg to differ. I do not see this article as a "means of promotion", rather as a contribution towards critical evaluation. The fact that her cited blog contains ads for her New Age books is relevant to the issue that her channelled announcement may be an example of undercover marketing. I don't think that one can anticipate that the average readers of Wikipedia will view her ads any differently than you have. I would object myself if the entry were modified to include references to her books as evidence of her being "notable" as if their existence were sufficient for defining that. Just because someone has published a book does not mean that they are "notable", which seems to be the issue in deciding for or against deletion. Furthermore, there are thousands of individuals in Wikipedia (people who main reaons for being "notable" is that they are well-known celebrities, for example) whose entries may be interpreted as "ads" for promoting their financial success. I think an appraisal of whether someone is "notable" or not must be independent of whether a Wikipedia entry promotes what they are selling or not. Think about Paris Hilton, for example. Hoopes (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Point taken, however I see no need for this article to be sustained following October 14th (which, I think most rationally minded individuals agree, will pass without incidence.) Her channeled 'prediction' that extra terrestrials will come to earth on the 14th is the source of her hype, and when it fails miserably, she will lose all interest and notability. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mortonrainey (talk • contribs) 05:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, would you be willing to push that to October 20 or so? How about October 31 Halloween? I think that there are a lot of similarities between BG's channeled message and premonitions of a Marian apparition. The true believers may well experience something that the rest of us don't acknowledge as "real", but that would be a "notable" event, don't you think? It took about a century or so for the fantastic story of Jesus to become gospel. I'm willing to give BG's extraterrestrial spacecraft a couple of weeks. (A Google search on "Blossom Goodchild" right now yields almost 20,000 hits.) For me, a bigger philosophical question is whether the Wikipedia entry itself is a factor is spinning this new "reality". Hoopes (talk) 05:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
No Hoopes, that won't do. You need to read WP:CRYSTAL. X MarX the Spot (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, then scratch that. Regardless of what happens, I still assert that BG has already become notable as a result of the current buzz. (Google hits are up to 20,500 today.) She has become a permanent element of UFO folklore. That doesn't take much in the way of "hard" evidence, as indicated by the examples of Area 51 and its supposed alien autopsy, or the Betty and Barney Hill abduction. Aren't you concerned that deleting this article will fuel UFO conspiracy theory? Hoopes (talk) 19:56, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 08:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC

In Australia, most people wouldn't have a clue who she is.

aussies aren't that stupid.

Beside, she's originally from the UK, that fact alone is already suspicious.

Could you give us a brief overview of who Blossom Goodchild is, and why we should be interested in the disappearance of her from Wiki.

TIA

um, you don't seem to understand.
read the cache i posted from the deletion page at wiki.
look at the circumstances.

also, blossoms computer was supposedly hacked, according to a comment at 10-14-08.blogspot.com/

blossom goodchild is the original source for the october 14th alien ship appearance.

Thread: Galactic Federation of Light First Contact Announcement: First Contact October 14, 2008

Thread: October 14th Google Earth

Was she raptured?

Because she wasn't "notorious". Here is the original page on her:

[link to 64.233.169.104]

This part makes the most sense to me at least:

This rare and specific prediction offers an opportunity to perform an empirical test of channelling, although the rational community has dismissed her claims as having the characteristics of a form of undercover marketing designed to sell New Age products and services. It also provides an example of the globalization of online news media as the contents of blog sites become "newsworthy" and op-ed pieces in local papers are read and commented upon by members of a global audience

Come the 15th it wouldnt be surprising that she would want to keep a low profile, when its proven a "no show". I would suspect there would be many people "wanting to have a word". The amount of hope this woman has instilled in others, The promise of a better life..... etc, is all going to come crashing down on the 15th; and what will follow will be misery, from those that believed her.

Just stumbled on this gem......

[link to au.youtube.com]

Blossom Goodchild is not the only one talking about Oct 14th.

She is just a messenger. There is ancient knowledge pointing to this year as the year of disclosure of et life. You guys fail if you think that oct 14 lies entirely on her shoulder. i have quite a few tools that point to late 2008 and 2009 as being significant. she gave a date that falls in the right place. also, the channeled messages are very well elaborated, emotionally appealing and full of "higher spiritual knowledge" (universal principles) that very few people posses in the world. the pope is one of them, although he is obviously working for the darkside and using spirituality to enslave people.

Does the word "bandwagon" mean anything???

what kind of uninformed question is that? the woman has become an internet celebrity and her page on wikipedia was deleted, even though she may be already notorious enough for their standards. anyway, this is a minor occurrence, but again some people are trying to spin all of this into lies and derogative comments.

so tell me again why aliens contact an australian and tell her that they'll be flying over america in a bigass spaceship.... visible only on the other side of the world.. you'd think with that kind of power and knowlage.. they'd pick an american to tell. and a noteworthy one at that

load of bullshit.. just like that other person whatshername lieder..

aliens seem to have a habbit of contacting lonely old aged women with nothing more important in there life anymore.. there kids have moved away and there husbands long ago found something more entertaining..

saddly for us all.. they have the internet

Tay Zonday has an Wikipedia page: [link to en.wikipedia.org]

You can't imagine the motives of a higher consciousness than yours. Higher consciousness is unpredictable for observers with lower consciousness.

i don't care if you don't care. why bother announcing it in the first place? do you think that you are some kind of celebrity whose opinions matter? even blossom goodchild has greater social status than you now.

Well im sure come the 15th her status will change.

OMG you're right! Other channelers are backing

Up her claims too so they MUST be right! Good logic!

And even that Casper freak is saying it will happen on

The 14th and you know HIS track record... His dumbass has

Been announcing that stupid nesara bullshit for everyday YEARS!!!

NESARA ANNOUNCED NOW!!! Expect deliveries tonight!!!

where did you read that i said she is right In this thread?

It would be fun to let her page there till the end of the month. And add a board so that people could let messages after the 14th.

Anyway, I guess she already took all the money she could get by selling her "knowledge". Clever girl!

i'm just establishing facts here, to counterbalance the lies and the uninformed opinions. whether she is right or not is an entirely different subject. better leave it as personal opinion. just discuss the facts.

Bloody hell gus read your post again......Highlighted.....

He said... your right!! = he is agreeing with what you said.