OT: Current Magnitude of Planet X, per Zetas?
From: Nancy Lieder (nancy@zetatalk.com)
Subject: Re: OT: Current Magnitude of Planet X, per Zetas?
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Date: 2002-04-11 05:55:02 PST

In Article <3CB4E1F3.3070609@wwt.net> Thomas McDonald wrote:

> Nancy Lieder wrote:
>> Here's a magnitude question for YOU, Thomas.
>
> You first.

Ah, so what is good for the GOOSE is not good for the GANDER. Chicken,
rather, Thomas is chicken.
From: Thomas McDonald (tsmac@wwt.net)
Subject: Re: OT: Current Magnitude of Planet X, per Zetas?
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Date: 2002-04-11 10:58:11 PST

Nancy Lieder wrote:

>In Article <3CB4E1F3.3070609@wwt.net> Thomas McDonald wrote:

>
>>Nancy Lieder wrote:
>>
>>>Here's a magnitude question for YOU, Thomas.
>>>
>>You first.
>>
>
>Ah, so what is good for the GOOSE is not good for the GANDER. Chicken,
>rather, Thomas is chicken.
>
Nancy,

So I have it right--you refuse to answer my question first? And,
instead, call me names for doing what you are doing--asking for a plain
statement of fact from your POV?

Now, if I were to look at your edited version of our interchange on
the website where you abstract bits and pieces of the sci.astro
discussion, would I find the complete record of this converstion? And
would I find my last name spelled correctly, as it was not a few posts
of yours ago? (Note: the attribution of a name at the beginning of a
quoted post on the NGs is generally an automatic process of the
software. Why do your name attributions seem to be written in by you at
certain points? As with my last name, noted above, and 'Idont' for
'IMO' in a significant post much earlier, in the discussion of imaging?)

YOU are dancing away from the issue as I thought you would, Nancy.

YOU made claims about the magnitude of 'Planet X.'

YOU were asked by me (and many, many others) for an update to the
present of that magnitude claim.

YOU have refused to provide what you provided so easily before re:
current and projected magnitudes of 'Planet X.'

YOU have ignored all of the excellent presentations on astronomical
optics, esp. WRT assignment of magnitude numbers to astronomical objects.

YOU have twisted, lied, and spun to try to get people to not notice
that you are backpedaling as fast as you can from claims that can be
verified by amateur astronomers, of which you have at least a couple in
Zetatalk/TT (unless they have followed JosX and split from your little
tyranny.)

And now, at the furthest extreme of your tether, you call me names.

Put up or shut up, Nancy. It's crunch time.

Tom McDonald
From: Sarah Mc (sarahmac@hotpop.com)
Subject: Re: OT: Current Magnitude of Planet X, per Zetas?
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Date: 2002-04-11 16:00:57 PST

Nancy Lieder <nancy@zetatalk.com> wrote in message news:<3CB58925.791449D8@zetatalk.com>...

> In Article <3CB4E1F3.3070609@wwt.net> Thomas McDonald wrote:

> > Nancy Lieder wrote:

> >> Here's a magnitude question for YOU, Thomas.
> >
> > You first.
>
> Ah, so what is good for the GOOSE is not good for the GANDER. Chicken,
> rather, Thomas is chicken.



Geez Nancy, stooping to the language of children now, are you?


Rather than admit you lied. Rather than admit that Planet X has never
been seen. Rather than admit that ZetaTalk isa complete farce. Rather
than admit that you've stolen money in the form of private donations
to a known scam.

You've fallen to the point of name calling - acting like a 6 year old
child that lied to his friends at school. When they found out and
asked him, he calls them names and runs away and hides. You were the
one who replied to Thomas's initial question Nancy. Just because you
refused to answer the question, don't attack the person who asked.

I understand that now that summer is approaching, you've decided that
you'll no longer post your "updated Zeta Coordinates". If that's truly
the case, then you'd best stop posting that "Amateur astronomers will
be able to view Planet X in mid 2002".

If you refuse to post the Zeta's magnitude claims, and coordinates,
you're a bigger fool than I thought you were - and that's a lot
considering I think you're the most foolish person I've ever seen on
Usenet to date. You've had some good competition, but you always win
by sheer persistence of ignorance.

But it does make sense. You REALLY don't want any amateurs to be CCD
imaging your coordinates, or looking with their 16-20" telescopes
(like we are now), now do you? For that matter you don't want anyone
looking with their TAsco 600X 60mm refractors either, do you? You
can't afford to be caught before the scam has run it's course.

Why no coordinates or magnitude predictions from Nancy any more? Why
would you do this if your "mission" is to warn the world?

1) You know you can't claim EVERY DSS image had been altered by NASA

2) You can't say that every amateur astronomer is a paid
disinformation artist

3) You can't find enough excuses as to WHY your planet isn't seen on
any CCD images.

4) You can't claim ANY visual sightings if you claim it's mag20 on a
CCD

5) You won't need to make any excuses for all the above.

6) By April 1st 2003, it supposed to be "Naked eye", and you'll need
time (at least two months) for a getaway.

By the way, we'd be more than happy to give you a one year head start.
Feel free to leave anytime you wish, just make sure you don't come
back - or there'll be no forgiveness.

Let me ask you this...what's easier to believe? Finding and paying off
every amateur astronomer in the world (100's of thousands, maybe more)
to keep their mouth shut about Planet X, or Nancy is just a con artist
and wannabe Mesiah?


You know that there's nothing there, Cult Leader - and every day that
we get closer to May 15th 2003, the more foolish and ignorant you're
looking. No sense in making yourself out to be a bigger fool by
telling people where to look, when you know there's nothing there at
all.

So now it's best not to tell them WHERE to look, just tell them it's
THERE and they can see it if they look.

You're such a foolish, dumb cluck Nancy.

But hey, that's not saying much now, is it?
BACK