Re: Planet X: ALTERNATIVE Garbage <= THOLEN! 3

In Article <Pine.BSI.4.05L.10107141627370.26035-100000@shell.golden.net> John Latala wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Nancy Lieder wrote:
>> I'll repeat the Zeta coordinates, to set this straight:
>>          RA 4.45732 Dec 11.91793 on Sep 30, 2001
>
> So is your RA degrees or hours?

It’s what RA is understood to be by the world.  If I say John Latala, no
one is confused, whether I also refer to you as a twerp, an adolescent,
a gamesman, or an air-head lacking in serious purpose.  They know it’s
you.

In Article <%6147.1266$0s2.235876@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> David Tholen wrote:
>> The article stated 2001 KX76 was:
>>     RA     16 16 06.12
>>     Dec   -19 13 45.6
>> and the Zeta coordinates for Planet X on July 3rd were
>>     RA      4.96112
>>     Dec    15.74311
>
> The point on the sky opposite the location of 2001
> KX76 is at RA 04 16 06.12 and DEC +19 13 45.6.
> That means your coordinates are less than 4 degrees
> further to the south.

I didn’t say the POINT OPPOSITE the KBO known as 2001 KX76 was 34
degrees further south, I said IT was 34 degrees further south than the
July 3rd coordinates for Planet X given by the Zetas. You guys work at
this, right?  Anything to confuse the public.  You go to NASA school to
learn how to spin a thread in a direction that confuses the public?
When we were talking about Magnitude, you and xxx tried to move the
thread in the direction of discussing a THEORETICAL magnitude for Planet
X, thense everafter the public not knowing the basis would take that
given as real.  You get paid for this, David?  Part of your job?  Want
to answer my questions, which you endlessly evade, on your relationship,
direct or indirect, with NASA and their lackies?

In Article <%6147.1266$0s2.235876@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> David Tholen wrote:
> It won't change the fact that you originally reported the
> right ascension difference in degrees, .. You treated
> YOUR OWN coordinates as if the right ascension was
> expressed in DEGREES.  That puts your coordinates in
> the Pisces-Pegasus border region, not Orion.

It puts them at RA 4, etc. whether I call them tomatoes or carrots.  It
puts them in the map at the
     Path as Viewed from Earth page
     (http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword03h.htm)
which I have forever been pointing to.  It puts them at the coordinates
by date on the
     Coordinates page
     (http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword03m.htm)
which I have forever been pointing to.  If I call Orion a star cluster
instead of a constellation, this does not change the position of Orion
on a skymap I’m pointing to.  It means I don’t understand what term to
use when referencing Orion.  Only someone attempting to confuse would
say so.

In Article  <N%047.1265$0s2.235304@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> David Tholen wrote:
>>>> And they move in egg-shaped orbits in the plane
>>>> of the ecliptic? So we have motion ALONG the
>>>> ecliptic, lateral, not plunging ACROSS,  right?
>>>> So known KBO's would not be likely to take the
>>>> path the Zetas have laid out for Planet X between
>>>> now and May 2003, right?
>>>
>>> Your path is non-gravitational.  KBOs behave according
>>> to a gravitational ephemeris.
>>
>> Wha'zat?  Can you expand and explain?  Just what can
>> we expect KBO's to DO?
>
> Get back to me when you've demonstrated an ability to
> understand.  My sentence above already contains the answer.

And here, where you HAVE an opportunity to clarify, you don’t.  That’s
because clarifying the orbits of KBO’s would make them LESS of a disinfo
tool, and that’s not your current assignment, right? So I ask again,
David, why you can address these issues, and be silly or mis-directing
or respond with non-answers, but CANNOT answer my repeatedly asked
questions!  Do you have to ask NASA, first, before you can respond?  Is
someone who knows you at the University likely to call you on a lie,
posted here?  Do you have to say “Captain May I?” before you can tell a
lie OR the truth?  I ask again:

In Article <3B4F09EF.5BED2AE4@zetatalk.com> Nancy Lider wrote:
> Are you, or have you ever been, a Principal Investigator, received
> data provided by NASA? Information that was given to you and
> your associates, but not to others due to this arrangement? Did
> you work on the NEAT program, in any capacity?  Do the University
> of Hawaii and NASA collaborate - share expenses, equipment, and
> results? ...  Can [NASA] punish you by
> refusing future collaboration, or a failure to get future Principal
> Investigator assignments, or the like?  Can they influence your
> employer, which I assume to be the University of Hawaii, to make
> your life miserable?