Re: OK Nancy, Where Is It?

JTRIV <JTRIV@home.com> wrote in: <3C42064D.3AFA05C2@home.com>
> I M Openminded wrote:
>> But she predicts widespread destructionin 16 months.  Recall a few
>> years ago when David Shramek mistook an over exposed star on an image
>> of Hale-Bopp for a "saturn like object" which he decided was a UFO
>> controlling the comet.  A small cult's leader announced that this
>> was the UFO he had predicted would come and take them away resulting
>> in the Heaven's Gate mass suicide in which 25 killed themselves or
>> were murdered.  I do not feel Nancy is harmless or to be admired. I
>> have been contacted by ernest folks who are concerned that her planet
>> may bring the end of the world.  Will Nancy take responsibility for
>> any suicides that she precipitates?  David Shramek (and Art Bell)
>> certainly did not do so.
>
> Mark Hazelwood has also written a book on Planet X (taking his material
> from the Zetatalk website) and will be on Art Bell next week. It is
> a genuine concern what some may do if they believe these silly end
> of the world stories. We saw what happened when the supposed "UFO"
> with Hale Bopp was reported on the Art Bell show.
> 
> I would encourage everyone to write Art Bell about these concerns. He
> may not have taken responsibility for Heavens Gate, but he certainly
> must be aware the role his show played in the tragedy. Hopefully he
> will hesitate to spread dangerous speculation again.
>
> Jim
> http://www.planet-x.150m.com/

To be concerned would be the right reaction, because "Mike Hazelwood"
is afaics /really/ conning some ppl, and using zetatalk.com information
in the proces. So this guy really is dangerous, if not to your
life/health, at least to your money.

On another matter:
Supose there really /is/ this disaster coming, saying that it isn't
going to come has the potential of killing many lives also, maybe
something to think about when you say it is "silly". Zetatalk is
just a website, it orgenizes absolutely nothing in get-togethers,
and even distances itself from it completely. I have never been asked
any money, nor given one cent.

The zetatalk.com arguments are not dealt with on this forum, they
are just obfuscated enough to become elligable for ridicule, there
is not the same ""scruteny"" towards the other (ZT=wrong) side of
the argument: The guy who posted the image, posted an image that
lacked objects that were on the old image (as far as i could tell by
blinking). That means that his image was not equal in depth (which
he sayd it was).  He has a website that looks like it was made for
the occaision, yet, he claims to be 50+ and has worked with computers
and done other debunking activities: doesn't that sound a little-bit
suspicious? He redrew Nancy's circle differently, just excluding
some object.  He doesn't want to post the image in another format
than jpeg when asked (by Jeff), why. He refuses to give his name.

regards,
jos
ps
- I don't see that image as a positive contact either, any information 
  is too unclear to distuingish it from noise.
- (As everybody knows,) an object of 11th magnitude that extends some 
  angle will be fainter compared to 11th magnitude starlight. (I'm not
  sure of the exact mathematics involved here though.)
- I don't understand why the crosses of the coordinates don't match 
  the circle in some way.