Re: Zeta Questioning 12/27 Update
To: Oh Brother;
This attempt below to baffle with bullshit not withstanding.
Your contribution to the analysis and discussion of the images is nil.
Your questions have been answered by me.You may not like my answers?
Tough.
What you fail to grasp is the validity of the images.
Your continued attempt to suggest that no one else knows how to
process images is overshadowed by your inability to process the images
yourself and present any findings. When you do so, you might have some
credibility.
This chorus of Nattering Nabobs you consort with has contributed
nothing save parroted statements on "camera noise".You sound like a
bunch of bleating sheep. BTW where did your shepherd go?
Isn't it amazing how this "noise" can find itself at the Zeta
coordinates or projected flight path over 8 sets of images?
Isn't it amazing how this "noise" can increase in brightness over
those 8 sets of images?
Isn't it amazing how the latest sets have more "noise" recognized on
the images trailing behind.
Thats some amazing "noise" ;o)
Oh, almost forgot ;o)
New set of images from Dec 27 2002 by Steve and Naji @
http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/tteam342.htm
J.William Dell
O'Brother wrote in message <XA3P9.28000$%[email protected]>
> All,
>
> For those of you who are following the saga, here is a quick update and
> status of what has transpired in the continuing drama of divining whether
> PlanetX is real or a HOAX.
>
> The list of 10 questions has been posed to various proponents of ZetaTalk and
> PlanetX to determine whether they are able to span the serious gap between
> the 'Zetan Science' and human science. The purpose for this is to clear
> away the many inconsistancies between their assertions about their supposed
> planet and the plain fact that no one is able to see the planet besides
> those in the Zeta Inner Circle, and must rely on human science and physical
> reality by which to image and determine the particulars of the to date,
> unseen object.
>
> Here is the scorecard as of 12/21/2002
>
> 1. Steve Havas, the author of the images was asked and has refused to
> respond and continues to ignore the questions. Instead he continues to post
> his interpretations of the various images he produces, inserts circles, etc.
> but is unable to supply a clear picture of anything besides noise artifacts.
>
> 2. JWilliam Dell was questioned as well. He attempted to gloss over the
> questions with a few flippant remarks but it was clear he was avoiding the
> questions as well. This is one of the more vociferous posters who at
> various times has made huge claims about his background and abilities, but
> whose actual posted content is bluster and nothing more. (WC Fields sort of
> character?) Eventually, he posted his detailed report which, like his other
> efforts focused on noise artifacts in the images and the appearance of his
> 'other object' which he claims is attracting and repelling Px and its moons.
> When re-asked the questions his PT Barnum like replies basically consisted
> of more ZetaTalk cut and paste and other unsubstantiated comments. Products
> of an over active imagination and a bloated self-opinion about sums up his
> latest contributions.
>
> 3. Observer on the Fringe has appeared three times now and has had the
> questions posed to him in response to many blustery comments. He has
> attempted once to answer the questions but the responses were nonsensical
> and rooted in ZetaTalk lore which clearly is of no use when attempting to
> search for astronomical objects in the real and physical world. Indeed
> at each encounter it is become plain that he was simply
> parroting what he had read on Zetatalk. Three strikes he's out, showing
> he has no clue and not interest in what is actually going. To date, he
> has not posted anything even resembling coherent and logical explanations
> of Zeta dingbattery so expectations are low from this quarter.
>
> 4. Wag the Dog weighed in earlier in the week and was posed the questions
> however he or it was too preoccupied with being lascivious and rude than to
> answer any of the questions and his responses gained him a well earned label
> of 'wanker' from the assembled sci.astro group. Later comments again
> reinforced this pronouncement.
>
> 5. Jan was asked the questions and in a very civil way, excused himself
> as not having knowing anything about nor having anything to offer in
> regards to clarifying the disparities between human and Zeta Science. He
> attempted a couple sideway's responses with his usual disclaimers, but our
> quest for truth is no closer as a result.
>
> 6. Another poster, CNote appeared and fired off a few comments but has not
> replied to the detailed question list as of today.
>
> So as of today, the list of questions has been posed to 5 very vocal
> representatives of Zetatalk. 100% of them have failed
> to answer even one question. This does not bode well, and it is becoming
> clearer and clearer that there is a HOAX afoot. The purpose of which is
> to perpetuate the ZetaTalk infrastructure and cult, and is being used as
> a ruse to gather unsuspecting individuals into its net of deceit.
>
> Once again, newcomers drawn to this would do well to avoid being trapped
> into this ruse.
>
> QUESTIONS
> ==========
>
> Here are the ten questions posed :
>
> (1) How is it every star in the sky has only 1 image but yours has two?
> Just go outside on a dark night and look up, how may images of betelgeuse,
> sirius, polaris, etc. do you see? A serious and inquiring mind would be
> wondering abou this. How about yours?
>
> (2) How your star, since it is HUGE, 11th Mag (S.Havas' report from last
> year, 20thMag, has a LONG Tail (Mr. Dell's words) and swirling moons,
> but is only being seen by only Zeta Believers and no one else? Don't
> you wonder why the Zeta's are picking so many different positions
> if they are all-knowing? shouldn't there be one and only one position?
> What's the deal with 'letting the team' pick the star first? Don't they
> know? Especially since the Zeta's are looking at the FITS and
> pointing them out? Could it be Nancy doesn't have the foggiest and
> wants someone else to point it out so she has deniability?
>
> (3) How is it that if the government has it covered up so well, that the
> ZetaFaithful cannot even identify? Dell says it's here, Havas says it's
> there. Nancy draws circles and they pick out what they think is
> what she means. As I said above, somehow the evil government already
> knows about PlanetX and it's location but is surpressing all of the world's
> astronomers not to look at it? Seriously, since you pay taxes, aren't
> you a little incensed that every astronomer including amateurs are on
> the payroll? How many gazillion zeta grickles do
> you suppose it costs to keep this hushed up?
>
> (4) What is the trajectory of this HUGE and AWSOME image? The Zeta's have
> had no problem identifying all sorts of interesting and invisible aspects of
> the BLOOD RED SLAYER PLANET except its trajectory. Using your natural 'zeta
> induced' wisdom, can you shed some light on this? JWD draws straight lines,
> invents obstructing objects, moon swirls and god only knows what else to
> try to show *something* is out there, but they've yet to produce a
> believeable trajectory.
>
> (5) How can PlanetX get brighter and dimmer be HUGE and obstructed at the
> same time? Now remember Dell, 20th magnitude is invisible to the naked eye,
> 1st magnitude is real bright. And by the way - it's not "film" for the
> umpteenth time.
>
> (6) How can moons and dust "swirl" behind it with no atmosphere to cause
> this phenomenon? If there is a tail and there is ejecta from the object,
> what is causing this phenomenon so far off since it can't be ice crystals
> boiling away because its a 'brown dwarf'?
>
> Do you really see the moons in those diagrams? Perhaps one of the Nandroids
> should provide a detailed scientific dissertation on this so as to convince
> us that we are all close minded unlike their enlightened example.
>
> (7) If the image is filtered with a RED filter, how can 'white' light make
> it through? The Nandroids tried to answer this before with 'human sense'
> but they are blocked by their lack of knowledge. One of the faithful event
> thinks the Red and White 'personas' are some sort of notational tag, like
> the color codes on electronic components. sheesh!
>
> (8) You say there has been no scientific inquiry into your planet, aren't
> the above questions ALL VERY RELEVANT towards proving your planet exists?
> Do the Nandroids expect the world to scan the heavens, pick any candidate
> object - anywhere, label it planet x and then ask you if its the one you're
talking about? 'Cause we just ain't seeing it.
>
> (9) If the nandroids are so totally convinced that these are real observations,
> why haven't they submitted them to the IAU and other bodies? (According to their
> mindset, these bodies are probably part of the grand conspiracy that will
> suppress the knowledge of 'Planet Havas'. But, on the other hand, what have
> they got to lose?) They've have been told by posters on sci.astro precisely
> how they might get thousands of professional and amateur astronomers to search
> for their object - just submit your results.
>
> (10) Less than 100 days from now, (May 2003) is "naked eye" (or mag 4-5),
> still going to be a 45 minute CCD image of readout noise, hot pixels and
> artifacts or is the claim going to be another dodge such as "naked eye
> to the Zetas"? How long is Nancy going to string us along?
>
> None of the questions are unreasonably difficult, but since the nandroids are
> limited to only what Nancy tells them and are not capable of using their own
> brains, I suspect they questions will remain unanswered. Sigh!
> O'
