Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tt-watch] Re: Planet X, Nancy, Zetatalk (from Wikipedia)

Expand Messages
  • pee wee Jenkins
    Dear Mr. Hap, I supposed that you have never skaken the hands of a STO space alien before or admit to having seen a UFO? If you havn t ,( and I suspect that
    Message 1 of 32 , May 31, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Mr. Hap,
      I supposed that you have never skaken the hands of a STO space alien before or admit to having seen a UFO? If you havn't ,( and I suspect that you know far more about Aliens than you are letting on to in this forum), you have zero right in trying to convince others who have do so!
      Why are you so persistent in this course sir?
      thanx peee wee

      Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...> wrote:

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Thomas Mosher" <tgmosher2000@...>
      To: <tt-watch@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 10:03 PM
      Subject: [tt-watch] Re: Planet X, Nancy, Zetatalk (from Wikipedia)


      > --- In tt-watch@yahoogroups.com, "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@s...> wrote:
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> From: "franci66" <oshosananda@i...>
      >> To: <tt-watch@yahoogroups.com>
      >> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 9:00 PM
      >> Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Re: Planet X, Nancy, Zetatalk (from Wikipedia)
      >>
      >>
      >> > ----- Original Message ----- From: Hap Griffin
      >> > Nanci, claims that it works over small distances...the distances
      > between
      >> > planets. There is absolutely NO evidence nor measurement to
      > support her
      >> > playschool science.
      >> > Try again. Just give us ONE single astronomical prediction that
      > has come
      >> > to
      >> > pass.
      >> > Hap
      >> > ................
      >> > In October, 1995 ZetaTalk stated that Newton's Laws in
      > Ephemerides are
      >> > inaccurate, Contradictions exist, and the Dark Ages are still with
      > us; in
      >> > March, 1998 due to an expanding Universe discovery, Newton came under
      >> > attack.
      >> >
      >> > Anti-gravity surprises astronomers
      >> >
      >> > Except for gravity that attracts mass towards mass, on a cosmic
      > scale
      >> > another force exists that pushes bodies away from each other. That
      > is what
      >> > American and Australian astronomers conclude in Science of
      > February 27th,
      >> > 1998. 'If it's not some kind of sneaky effect, than history of the
      >> > universe has to be re-written', Adam Reiss of the universe of
      > California
      >> > says. 'My own reaction is that of amazement and terror', Brian
      > Schmidt,
      >> > spokesman of the investigation-team, says. 'Amazed because I never
      >> > expected this, terror because I know most astronomers will never
      > believe
      >> > it.' http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword23i.htm
      >> >
      >>
      >> You're in WAY over your head here. Newton's Laws as far as
      > ephemerides go
      >> are not inaccurate. We still navigate interplanetary probes
      > accourding to
      >> Newton's Laws. GOTO telescopes derive their extraordinary aiming
      > accuracy
      >> using strictly Newtonian equations. Contradictions do not exist.
      > Only when
      >> conditions go to extremes, i.e. near light speeds and extremely strong
      >> gravity do we need to invoke the modifications to Newtonian mechanics
      >> provided by Einstein's Relativity.
      >>
      >> Here is a pretty good synopsis of modern cosmology, including the
      >> accelerated expansion of the universe...
      >> http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect20/A1.html . Please show me in there
      > where
      >> virtual particle expansive energy works on a small scale as nanci
      >> pontificates. Your argument that she somehow predicted this is dead
      >> wrong...what she predicted in NO WAY resembles real expansive
      > energy. Your
      >> lack of understanding of basic physics is showing brightly.
      >>
      >> Again, I ask...show us ONE single astronomical prediction that has
      > come to
      >> pass. I'll give you a few hints...
      >>
      >> "Planet X will move through the solar system in a matter of
      > weeks"..Oops,
      >> wrong.
      >> "Venus cannot transit the sun"...Oops, wrong.
      >> "The moon is out of place"...Oops, worng...daily occutations of
      > stars and
      >> planets as well as solar and lunar eclipses happen exactly as
      > calcultaed
      >> decades ago.
      >> "The earth is stopped in its orbit around the sun"...Oops, wrong...all
      >> constellations and planets appear in exactly the right positions and
      > there's
      >> no possible tilting that could simulate this.
      >> "The equinoxes won't happen at the right time"...Oops, they did.
      >>
      >> etc, etc, etc
      >>
      >> Hap
      >
      > Hap you're arguing with someone who operates under the blind faith
      > rule. Franci regards everything that Nancy says as fact and anyone who
      > disputes her claims is wrong.
      >
      > I can guarantee that Franci has never bothered to do any independent
      > research to prove to himself that what Nancy claims is actually
      > happening. I wouldn't be surprised if he has never bothered to use a
      > program like Cartes du Ciel to compare what the program shows to the
      > skies above.
      >
      > Unfortunately for people like that there is no hope. They are
      > close-minded and will never be persuaded to change their views no
      > matter how wrong they are. They lack the basic understanding of
      > science and have no desire to change their views as it provides them
      > some comfort about an outside world they cannot begin to understand.
      > They want to be lead and have everything spoon fed to them.
      >
      > No matter how hard you try, they'll always believe whatever
      > 'messenger' seems to fit their views at the moment. In the end,
      > they'll never realize that they've wasted their lives waiting for
      > something that their supposed 'messenger' said would happen.
      >
      > Franci is a lost cause.
      >
      > Tom Mosher

      I agree. However, I'm attempting to demonstrate how these bunkers have
      based their entire belief system around a cult with NO successes to point
      to. The hard fact of the matter is that nanci has NEVER ONCE predicted an
      astronomical event that came true. In fact, just the opposite has
      occured...she predicted that many scheduled events would not happen, but
      they did. Even she herself ironically stated "If they have no evidence and
      can't predict why pay them any attention". I'm curious to know whether
      franci and the other bunkers agree with nanci on this.

      In any case, you're right...it doesn't matter in the least since people with
      this mentality need no evidence or successes to believe and I couldn't care
      less what they believe. If they want to waste their life...so be it. What
      is so funny is that they have no shame in posting absolute foolishness in an
      attempt to somehow justify their failed belief system. But the problem is
      that their cult is based around astronomy...something that is very easily
      observable and verifiable. They should have picked another basis that is
      not so easily debunked and not so obvious when their predictions fail!

      Hap



      ---------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      tt-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



      ---------------------------------
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • pee wee Jenkins
      Dear Mr. Hap, I supposed that you have never skaken the hands of a STO space alien before or admit to having seen a UFO? If you havn t ,( and I suspect that
      Message 32 of 32 , May 31, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Mr. Hap,
        I supposed that you have never skaken the hands of a STO space alien before or admit to having seen a UFO? If you havn't ,( and I suspect that you know far more about Aliens than you are letting on to in this forum), you have zero right in trying to convince others who have do so!
        Why are you so persistent in this course sir?
        thanx peee wee

        Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...> wrote:

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Thomas Mosher" <tgmosher2000@...>
        To: <tt-watch@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 10:03 PM
        Subject: [tt-watch] Re: Planet X, Nancy, Zetatalk (from Wikipedia)


        > --- In tt-watch@yahoogroups.com, "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@s...> wrote:
        >>
        >> ----- Original Message -----
        >> From: "franci66" <oshosananda@i...>
        >> To: <tt-watch@yahoogroups.com>
        >> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 9:00 PM
        >> Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Re: Planet X, Nancy, Zetatalk (from Wikipedia)
        >>
        >>
        >> > ----- Original Message ----- From: Hap Griffin
        >> > Nanci, claims that it works over small distances...the distances
        > between
        >> > planets. There is absolutely NO evidence nor measurement to
        > support her
        >> > playschool science.
        >> > Try again. Just give us ONE single astronomical prediction that
        > has come
        >> > to
        >> > pass.
        >> > Hap
        >> > ................
        >> > In October, 1995 ZetaTalk stated that Newton's Laws in
        > Ephemerides are
        >> > inaccurate, Contradictions exist, and the Dark Ages are still with
        > us; in
        >> > March, 1998 due to an expanding Universe discovery, Newton came under
        >> > attack.
        >> >
        >> > Anti-gravity surprises astronomers
        >> >
        >> > Except for gravity that attracts mass towards mass, on a cosmic
        > scale
        >> > another force exists that pushes bodies away from each other. That
        > is what
        >> > American and Australian astronomers conclude in Science of
        > February 27th,
        >> > 1998. 'If it's not some kind of sneaky effect, than history of the
        >> > universe has to be re-written', Adam Reiss of the universe of
        > California
        >> > says. 'My own reaction is that of amazement and terror', Brian
        > Schmidt,
        >> > spokesman of the investigation-team, says. 'Amazed because I never
        >> > expected this, terror because I know most astronomers will never
        > believe
        >> > it.' http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword23i.htm
        >> >
        >>
        >> You're in WAY over your head here. Newton's Laws as far as
        > ephemerides go
        >> are not inaccurate. We still navigate interplanetary probes
        > accourding to
        >> Newton's Laws. GOTO telescopes derive their extraordinary aiming
        > accuracy
        >> using strictly Newtonian equations. Contradictions do not exist.
        > Only when
        >> conditions go to extremes, i.e. near light speeds and extremely strong
        >> gravity do we need to invoke the modifications to Newtonian mechanics
        >> provided by Einstein's Relativity.
        >>
        >> Here is a pretty good synopsis of modern cosmology, including the
        >> accelerated expansion of the universe...
        >> http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect20/A1.html . Please show me in there
        > where
        >> virtual particle expansive energy works on a small scale as nanci
        >> pontificates. Your argument that she somehow predicted this is dead
        >> wrong...what she predicted in NO WAY resembles real expansive
        > energy. Your
        >> lack of understanding of basic physics is showing brightly.
        >>
        >> Again, I ask...show us ONE single astronomical prediction that has
        > come to
        >> pass. I'll give you a few hints...
        >>
        >> "Planet X will move through the solar system in a matter of
        > weeks"..Oops,
        >> wrong.
        >> "Venus cannot transit the sun"...Oops, wrong.
        >> "The moon is out of place"...Oops, worng...daily occutations of
        > stars and
        >> planets as well as solar and lunar eclipses happen exactly as
        > calcultaed
        >> decades ago.
        >> "The earth is stopped in its orbit around the sun"...Oops, wrong...all
        >> constellations and planets appear in exactly the right positions and
        > there's
        >> no possible tilting that could simulate this.
        >> "The equinoxes won't happen at the right time"...Oops, they did.
        >>
        >> etc, etc, etc
        >>
        >> Hap
        >
        > Hap you're arguing with someone who operates under the blind faith
        > rule. Franci regards everything that Nancy says as fact and anyone who
        > disputes her claims is wrong.
        >
        > I can guarantee that Franci has never bothered to do any independent
        > research to prove to himself that what Nancy claims is actually
        > happening. I wouldn't be surprised if he has never bothered to use a
        > program like Cartes du Ciel to compare what the program shows to the
        > skies above.
        >
        > Unfortunately for people like that there is no hope. They are
        > close-minded and will never be persuaded to change their views no
        > matter how wrong they are. They lack the basic understanding of
        > science and have no desire to change their views as it provides them
        > some comfort about an outside world they cannot begin to understand.
        > They want to be lead and have everything spoon fed to them.
        >
        > No matter how hard you try, they'll always believe whatever
        > 'messenger' seems to fit their views at the moment. In the end,
        > they'll never realize that they've wasted their lives waiting for
        > something that their supposed 'messenger' said would happen.
        >
        > Franci is a lost cause.
        >
        > Tom Mosher

        I agree. However, I'm attempting to demonstrate how these bunkers have
        based their entire belief system around a cult with NO successes to point
        to. The hard fact of the matter is that nanci has NEVER ONCE predicted an
        astronomical event that came true. In fact, just the opposite has
        occured...she predicted that many scheduled events would not happen, but
        they did. Even she herself ironically stated "If they have no evidence and
        can't predict why pay them any attention". I'm curious to know whether
        franci and the other bunkers agree with nanci on this.

        In any case, you're right...it doesn't matter in the least since people with
        this mentality need no evidence or successes to believe and I couldn't care
        less what they believe. If they want to waste their life...so be it. What
        is so funny is that they have no shame in posting absolute foolishness in an
        attempt to somehow justify their failed belief system. But the problem is
        that their cult is based around astronomy...something that is very easily
        observable and verifiable. They should have picked another basis that is
        not so easily debunked and not so obvious when their predictions fail!

        Hap



        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        tt-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        ---------------------------------
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.