Debunkers are like TV commercials . . .

he fucked up in his own posts. classic. by that you can see how emotional he gets over stupid crap like that.

That's what's funny....they call people "debunker" which means: to expose or excoriate a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc. as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated.

So, by calling anyone "debunker" they're admitting that their claims are false or exaggerated.

As for the other two...they're going back and forth high fiving one another when they failed to prove that "debunkers" lie and don't back up their claims with evidence. So, while I got IDs mixed up, they still failed in the grand scheme of things.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/07/2009 07:31 PM

it's not so much a matter of checking user ids first, but a matter of understanding and actually reading posts...and what they mean. reading comprehension and all that.

how can one read a obvious peacefully meant comment, which evidently shows that another one is trying to come all the others down, and then go ahead with weird accusation and a lil portion of bashing of said peaceful commentator?

either it's bad or misunderstood reading comprehension, or...i really don't know at this point any longer.

anyway, hope this clears up now. i don't even expect a 'i'm sorry'. i just expect the commentators and readers to first read and the to understand the real meaning of a comment before they post what they post.

thank you in advance...

i think you've lost him there

[link to failness.com]
</thread>

You guys can argue back and forth for the next year if you want to, but the bottom line is that the results of px showing up or not will determine if the bunkers were correct, or the debunkers. So let's set some limits here...for the bunkers...by what date will you accept that px isn't coming? If you have the courage of your convictions, then you will have a date in mind. However, if you state that you will never admit that it isn't coming, then you have a religion instead of a belief. If that's the case, fine...but admit that you are believing in something simply on faith rather than evidence.

So, let's see who has the courage to set a deadline...

the floor is yours, bunkers.

Yeah, it's wild that they want bullshit to float and truth to sink. Hey, it's the internet. ;)

They aren't here to debate any conspiracy theory. They're simply here to stir the pot. If you were to go back and read the posts, one can see why it got confusing and I suspect that one of the two changed his user ID by leaving the forum and coming back with a different IP address.


To be honest, Soledad wasn't necessarily talking about "Planet X." Although that seems to be her main interest right now. She simply stated that "debunkers" try to sell others, what she claims, is bullshit. Which is a rather bold claim considering the bullshit some "debunkers" provide is backed up by evidence. I'll admit that not all "debunkers" provide evidence. But, it does go the same for "bunkers." So, let's get this discussion back where it belongs and ignore the other two. Let them keep slapping each others back ends in the end zone.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/07/2009 07:56 PM

And if you're still around 697325. Here's what started it:



Then I said:


To which you said:


If you looked on page 3, near the middle of the page, I provided a link to another thread where I did provide evidence. Since Soledad considers me a "debunker," I proved that ID 679226's claims that "debunkers" do not provide evidence is a lie.

On that same page, you responded with:


If you did your research, I proved he was lying and therefore did not fail.

Then, ID 660840 decided to pipe in:


By this point, I had already presented evidence that "debunkers" do provide evidence. Therefore, making his claim a lie.

ID 660840 then went further and said:


As already shown, I was not lying. And you calling me a liar was a lie in itself.

Then ID 697325 said:


Technically, that is incorrect. Soledad was the one to essentially call "debunkers" liars.

Then on page 4, ID 660840 said:


Sorry, but you didn't expose me of lying. See above.

Hope that clears it up for you.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/07/2009 08:16 PM

Me thinks Circuit Stupid protests too much. Where there is smoke there is fire!

Lots of people are sick of your bullshit in here Circuit Breaker ... get a life ... get a job!

Me thinks Loser makes an ass of himself too much.

Challenges "User # 78/68" Continues To Run Away From
(also known as The Number Of Ways "User # 78/68" Continues To Embarrass Himself)

1) When asked for proof that "Planet X" exists, he simply spews insults 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, he initially showed interest and then ran away.
5) Hap, ID 88145, invited "User" 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) Hap 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, "User" 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" 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" called them trick questions, refused to answer and ran away.
10) "User" 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 Hap 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.
13) "User" claims earthquake activity is increasing. But instead of providing data to support this claim, he spewed insults and ran away.
14) Nancy claimed that Adam Air Flight 574 crashed in an inland lake. "Debunkers" have provided several links showing that Nancy is wrong. Instead of providing evidence showing otherwise, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
15) "User" contends that "Debunkers" are always wrong. When asked for examples of when "Debunkers" have been wrong, he spewed insults and ran away.
16) When asked for examples of when Nancy was right, especially when pertaining to astronomical claims and predictions, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
17) "User" has seen this list several times and has yet to dispute anything on it. Instead, he spewed insults and ran away.
18) "User" doesn't believe that vaporized water contaminated with arsenic was responsible for the illness in Peru after a meteor strike. When asked what HE thought caused it, he spewed insults and ran away.
19) Nancy claims that the Minneapolis bridge collapse was caused by some "stretch zone." When asked for evidence of this, "User" spewed insults and ran way.
20) "User" claims that I lied about amateur radio operators using their equipment and the moon for EME communications. When asked for evidence to support his claim that I lied, he spewed insults and ran away.
21) "User" claimed that many, many people are seeing the moon "not right." When asked for links of these claims or some form of evidence to support the claim that the moon is "not right," he spewed insults and ran away.
22) "User" claimed that Menow lied when he said the sun is not setting further north each day during the fall months. When asked for supporting evidence, he spewed insults and ran away. (Prof-Rabbit supplied a link showing the sun does not move north during the fall months in the north hemisphere.)
23) "User" demands that "debunkers" provide evidence or, in his words, "to put up or shut up." When "User" is asked to do the same, he spews insults and runs away.
24) Hap sent some photos to Nancy. He never stated what they were or what he believed them to be, instead he asked her what she thought they were. Nancy, and Nancy alone, stated they were photos of "Planet X." When asked which photos are "Planet X" and which ones are just lens flare, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
25) "User" continues to say I've exposed my lies. He has been asked what lies those are and to provide supporting evidence. Instead, he spews insults and runs away.
26) "User" tasked Nighthawk to demonstrate some contradictions from "ZetaTalk." Nighthawk came up with four. "User" made a weak attempt to explain them away, then spewed insults and ran away.
27) Hap provided a link to a website with photos of his equipment. "User" claimed it was all fake, spewed insults and ran away.
28) Hap's contact information is provided on the website, but instead of using it to verify Hap is who he claims, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
29) Several weeks ago, Hap again extended his invitation for anyone to come look for "Planet X" using his observatory. "User" again spewed insults and ran away.
30) "User" claimed that Nancy predicted the current economic recession...when in reality, Nancy said the recession would happen in 2003 and that the DOW would be worth a quarter of its value. When this was pointed out, "User" spewed insults and ran away. 31) "User" implied that Hap shouldn't be taken seriously because he doesn't have any credentials in astronomy...even though none are needed to be an amateur astronomer. When asked what credentials Nancy had that makes her more believable, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
32) "User" claimed that the Zetas never said they were preventing asteroid strikes. When shown exactly what the Zetas said, proving they did say it, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
33) "User" claimed that "The Commentator" outed himself as a NASA shill. When asked to explain exactly how this was done, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
34) "User" once again claimed that "The Commentator" is a NASA shill. When asked to provide evidence to support this claim, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
NEW to the list:
35) "User" stated that "debunkers" spend thousands of hours on Nancy's threads. When asked for supporting evidence, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
36) "User" claimed that only NASA would hire "debunkers." When asked for evidence of this, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
37) "User" once again claimed that "debunkers" lie. When asked for evidence of this or examples of such lies, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
38) "User" claimed I was squirming. When asked for specific examples of how I was squirming, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
39) "User" presented an article describing how GPS satellites might fail within a year. He claimed that Nancy and the "Zetas" predicted this. However, "User" failed to post the whole article which stated the reason for the potential failure is due to neglect and failure to replace key satellites...not because of some "rogue planet" as Nancy claimed. When this was pointed out to him, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
40) "User" claimed that Hap was afraid to answer his questions. Hap said he would answer any question "User" had. Instead of asking any questions, "User" spewed insults and ran away.
41) "User" claimed I tried to become a police officer and failed the psychological examination. I never tried to become an officer. When asked for evidence to back up his claims, User spewed insults and ran away.
42) "User" claimed I couldn't hold a job as a dispatcher. I was neither fired or laid off. I resigned when my wife accepted a job in Colorado. When asked for evidence to back up his claim I was fired or laid off, "User" spewed insults and ran away.

Lots of people are tired of your lies and insults. Get a job and a life, Loser. You might not be so angry all the time if you did.

More then likely you've disappeared under the rock from which you came, until Nancy pages you again to make more insults.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/08/2009 01:33 PM

Hmmmmm ... angry?

Who's threads do YOU stalk? Stalker.


That's how stupid you are ... it is YOU that stalks threads the writter of which you think is insane OR completely wrong. Who does that?

Paid weirdos ... we know that much.

And yet you make claims about what I do all day. Hmm, doesn't that make you a stalker? Ooops! You just outed yourself.


Uh, apparently you do. That's how stupid you are. You can't even see when you're embarrassing yourself.


Yes...yes, you are. At least you can admit it.

I'm on Nancy Lieder and/ or PlanetX threads because I am interested in the topics discussed and to perhaps learn some things, you are on these same threads to chase people away and/or to insult them.

Big difference ... you moron. YOU are the stalker!

I've got a test for you brainiac ... stop coming to Nancy Lieder threads, and see if you get any responses from me on any other thread you are in OR thread you create?

This will prove who is stalking whom!

We all know you cannot do this ... your handler will not let you. You are a shill, and we can all see you. Hmmmm.

Then why do you ignore everything everyone is trying to teach you about basic science?




YOU are the biggest insulter on GLP! Did you actually say that with a straight face?

ROTFLMFAO!

Insult them? And you don't? You throw out more insults and attacks than I ever have. Were you able to type that without an ounce of shame? And if I insult someone, it is because they attacked me first...and in no way to they ever come close to the low level that you demonstrate.

I come to these threads because I also find the topic interesting. Over the years I have simply asked for evidence to show that "Planet X" exists. If someone claims something about it, and it can be proven wrong, then I will say so. You, on the other hand, insult and attack anyone who simply disagrees with Nancy Lieder.


Yes. There is a BIG difference. Most "debunkers" are able to provide evidence to show why Nancy is wrong. All you're able to do is provide more insults and attacks. Much like you're doing now.


The fact that you're doing the very thing you're accusing me of makes you guilty of being a stalker as well. Isn't it YOU that makes claims about my personal life? Only a stalker would know such things. I, on the other hand, have made no claims about Nancy's personal life. Again, making you the stalker.


Ah, it's that censorship thing you want. This is a public forum, is it not? Doesn't that mean I can go to any thread I choose? Why does it bother you so much that I question Nancy and provide evidence showing how and why she is wrong? What are you so afraid of?


It won't prove anything. I have a challenge for you. If a "debunker" responds politely and provides evidence to show how and why Nancy is wrong, I challenge you to respond to it in a civil manner. If you disagree with what the "debunker" posted...fine. But respond politely. It would also help if you provided supporting evidence of your own.


And we know you can't accept my challenge because you haven't been able to meet any of the others put before you. Your master won't let you. You are a shill, and everyone here can see it. Hmmmm.

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/08/2009 04:26 PM

You want your personal life left alone?

Then you leave Freestore's personal life alone.

It's unbelievable you can't figure this out on your own.

The only reason you come to Nancy Lieder threads is to push people away from her information ... you don't agree with any of it. That's stalking ... 101!

Nobody is chasing you around GLP on different threads. On Nancy threads you get back what you give ... tough shit for you! Now, who's stalking whom again?

Hey Circuit Breaker, the poster that you are debating
(AC 678192) is none other than IO The Volcanic Moon.

Give up! you haven't a chance.

/sarc.



Last Edited by Is It EEvil? on 06/10/2009 01:10 PM

Isn't Free Store capable of defending himself? I don't comment on your personal life until you attack mine.


It's unbelievable that you can't let Free Store speak for himself. Do you not think he is capable of doing so? As I said, I don't comment on your family life unless you comment on mine. Why you can't figure this out on your own is beyond me.


No, I come to post my points of view and any evidence I have. It is YOUR goal to push away anyone with opposing points of view. You attack anyone who simply disagrees with Nancy's claims. You don't provide any evidence of your own to show how she is right. You can't simply disagree with what "debunkers" present...no, you have to insult and attack hoping they won't come back because their evidence scares you.


Considering I don't usually post to Nancy's threads until after her chat is over and the fact that she very rarely comes back to her threads once the discussion is over, how do you get that I am stalking her? You have a very twisted view of what stalking really is. So, here's the definition:




Hmmm, if we go by that definition...then that makes YOU guilty of stalking. Ooops! You've just been exposed.

This is a public forum. I don't see her complaining. If you're so concerned, perhaps you should tell Nancy to move all her discussion to a forum where she can set passwords and only allow those of her choosing. Oh, that's right, she tried that once but only two or three people showed up on a regular basis.


And nobody is chasing Nancy Lieder around on different threads or websites. She starts these threads and then leaves. She doesn't post in other threads.


I don't attack Nancy. I don't call her names like others do. I have questioned her mental health, but I have not called her names. Yes, others have. But I have not. I have posted questions and even provided evidence showing how and why she is wrong. And somehow you interpret that as an attack. Again, just one of your many twisted views. But instead of attacking back by answering questions and providing evidence to show how she's right...you attack by name calling and throwing insults.


That's pretty obvious...you.

Haven't got a chance for what?

sarcasm my friend!

Io is a mental midget

Questioning Nancy's mental health is an ATTACK Circuit Breaker! And it's probably the most slanderous of attacks.

What planet do you live on?

And you wonder why you sometimes get attacked?

Last Edited by User # 78/68 on 06/12/2009 03:18 PM

Bravo!

bump

How is that an attack? An attack would be to come out and say, "Nancy is a nutjob." Or say that she is delusional, as some have said. But, I have never made such claims. I have simply questioned her mental health...and that is not an attack.


Earth...which, apparently, isn't where you're from.


And you wonder why no one takes you seriously? Case in point - here's a serious question for you:

Nancy claims that "Planet X" can be seen setting just before the sun...and then rising just after the sun. How is that possible? Have you ever thought about that? Have you ever questioned her about it?

Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 06/16/2009 02:01 PM

I, too, get curious about #78/68 letting truly outlandish lies that the believers claim sail by unchallenged, while attacking debunkers. It makes his motives most suspect.

He won't even answer questions about whether he believes the Zeta claims about Earth being halted, or an object both rising AND setting after the Sun does. After all, if he does admit Earth appears to be moving normally, NOW he's trapped into explaining why he can let obvious believer lies stand without challenge, if he really seeks the truth.

But, such is #78/68's lot. He painted his corner. Now he's stuck in it, just waiting for 2012 to come with no PX. What I wonder is will he even apologize to a single debunker then, when PX is the no show we know its going to be? Or will he make up more lame excuses, suggesting that it doesn't MATTER that the debunkers were absolutely right about the non-existence of PX and the non-sense of Nancy Lieder? He will suggest that if the debunkers had been more polite about PX, he would have chosen the right side of the issue -- this, too, being a lie since he for the most part won't even acknowledge the polite debunkers, or converse with them, choosing instead to engage loud obnoxious ones, thus supporting their behavior.

He will almost certainly claim his erroneous position is the fault of someone else, and will continue on from there, having learned nothing.

Thanks. Isn't fun how easy it is to goad these debunker dum-dums into frothing fits of rage? Kind of puts the lie to their self-image as "objective" doesn't it?

Many nice posts User #76/68. Your clarity and humor come through clearly, even if your intended audience is just a bunch of angry Nancy groupies (come to think of it, they need Nancy even more than we do, else they'd be out of a job!)