Re: Shepherds of the Sheep of sci.astro

In Article <3AD932B3.17DE647C@navix.net> David Knisely wrote:
> There is no need for access to a large observatory or digital
> images to verify this fact.  The person making these claims
> has done so before, and is just as wrong now as she was then.
> She just wants attention.  DON'T GIVE IT TO HER.

In other words, this self-appointed shepherd of you sheep in sci.astro
is saying DON’T LOOK! DON’T LOOK!  I’ve looked for you and am telling
you what you’ll find, in God’s name, DON’T LOOK!

In Article <tdi6nn9qj0urb2@corp.supernews.com> William Dell wrote:
> Observation:
> The logical action would be a look through an appropriate
> telescope, follow directions recognizing the magnitude
> differences as explained in original senders posts.
> And ascertain the reality of situation, returning to this
> group with pictures to prove either way.
> Instead we have ad hominem attacks.
> The following response by Greg Neill as an example avoids
> the direct question as to whether an attempt at a sighting had
> been undertaken, ...
> To me, this calls into question what efforts if any have been
> made to ascertain anything.

No sheep, he :-)