From: Sarah Mc (sarahmac@hotpop.com)
Subject: Re: Planet X: COMPARISON on Jan 5th Images
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.astro.amateur
Date: 2002-02-27 15:54:26 PST
Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@zetatalk.com> wrote in message news:<3C7D2A70.3890F00@zetatalk.com>...
> Open Minded (openmind@telocity.com) wrote:
> > To reiterate: The object you point to on my Jan 5
> > image was imaged by Palomar on the PSS-1E plate
> > in 1955 and again on the PSS-2R plate in 1998.
> > It was not your predicted planet. The same object
> > shows up on the Jan 19 image and both the objects
> > circled on that image are present on the PSS-2R
> > 1998 plate. Again, none of these objects are your
> > predicted planet.
>
> Open Minded has stated, on his website at
> http://us.geocities.com/openmindxx/compare3.htm
> that there are NOT two objects on the Jan 5th image, but an existing
> star, and taken great pains to demonstrate his position. In fact, he's
> demonstrated MY position.
Nancy, the closer we come to your "date", the more you wiggle like one
of those worms out in your barn.
>
> 1. The Star MOVED (!?!)
>
> By his own words, the only way he can explain what he calls
> repositioning of the existing star is that it MOVED. I quote "The
> object appears in the same right ascension on all three images and only
> a few seconds of arc different in declination" and "The total image
> shift here is only about 3 arc-seconds or about 65 mas (milli
> arc-seconds; 0.065 arc-seconds) per year. This is not a surprising
> differential shift for a star". I guess it not only moved, but changed
> its shape to become larger and a small star on top of a larger one.
> Perhaps its in the process of division, like an amoeba.
You're obviously clueless. Do you know what precession is? And you
obviously have no idea of how optics work, by your own admission. All
of a sudden, you're an expert? When asked what the diameter of your
Planet X is in arc-seconds on the the image, you (and your ZetaPals)
replied:
"1/20 the diameter of the circle, per the Zetas"
Now that was an intelligent reply, wasn't it? Yet you're going to
argue with someone who knows how to measure such things accurately.
Why don't you start by measuring the size of the sun at the horizon
and at midday, then work your way up to measuring in arc-seconds. You
might not want to do that though, it will make your ZetaPals look
pretty dang stupid.
>
> 2. NEW Object LARGER
>
> He has not addressed why the NEW object appears STRONGER and LARGER on
> the image taken on Jan 5th than on the Palomar. All other dim objects
> are DIMMER and SMALLER on the Jan 5th image than the Palomar.
> http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/use90446.htm
Didn't you say in another post that the object wasn't in the Palomar
image? Now it is? Get your story straight.
Must have been the magnitude knob on the camera, wouldn't you say?
Must be because he set the magnitude knob to mag 20 like you said to.
After all, if you set the knob for mag 20, nothing else should show
up, right? That's why Steve Havas saw it at mag 11, because the mag
knob was at 11 on that telescope.
>
> 3. NEW Object PLUS Old
>
> In the Jan 5th image, there are TWO objects at the location of Planet X,
> unless the existing star is growing and becoming an amoeba in division.
> The first is the existing star that indeed is on the Palomar, stronger
> and brighter on the Palomar as all dim objects are. The second is the
> NEW object, just below the existing star. That there are TWO objects
> there is clearly seen, Planet X just below the existing star.
> http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/use90446.htm
It's pretty obvious that if I imaged different coordinates with a
similar star field, and sent you the fits images, you'd find planet X
there too.
Apparently the cult leader must rely on her own "expert analysis" in
an area that she admittedly knows nothing about, and refuses to accept
the analysis of anyone else, no matter how unbiased. The Cult Leader
is beyond reproach, the Zetas are always right.
By her own admitance, she *doesn't even know which end of the
telescope to look into", yet she's an expert in the field.
Her whole post is nothing more than Cult rhetoric, posted here so that
she can copy it and post it on her website as "proof" because it was
in sci.astro. Cult members who accept those pages as proof without
reading here, should be ashamed of themselves. Her posting of her
sci.astro articles is only intended to decieve those reading her web
pages. It's pretty obvious by recent happenings on the TT-watch site
that opposing views are now considered taboo, and will not be
tolerated by the "Service-To-Other" Zeta emmisary, Nancy; or her new
lap dog, Jan. Democracy, open minds, and individualism will not be
tolerated now, or after the pole shift.
Fall in line, or fall out of the cult. You will NOT be "lifted" to the
next dimension, be offered an implant, or be saved from the pole shift
if you show any kind of individual thought. You are to look to Nancy
for how you are to behave, what you are to believe, and how you are
to live your life. No exceptions are allowed.