Re: Planet X: Revisions on the Way?

In Article <c6cdf9f8.0205171202.6a98829b@posting.google.com> Open Minded wrote:
> This exchange during Nancy's last chat is interesting: 
> (I've snipped the extraneous material)
> ----begin Nancy Quote-----
> (AOk) How fast will Px travel during nearest earth flyby?
> (NancyL) AOK, travel is a good Q and should be added 
>   to next weeks agenda, I'll do that. SPEED, and when and 
>   how fast, etc.
> (NancyL) I think the distance chart developed by TT 
>   members is not all right, as it is poky at times, faster at 
>   others, etc
> ----end Nancy Quote-----
> She appears to be referring to 
> http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword03a.htm.  She 
> is certainly correct, its "not all right" if you want it to 
> make physical sense as was shown in detail by an 
> analysis by Greg Neill which I posted with permission 
> at http://us.geocities.com/openmindxx/gravity.htm some 
> time ago.  It will be interesting to see what editing she 
> does on this (and why). Lets watch what she says 
> tomorrow at her regular chat session.

Being a math dummy, I certainly WON'T be editing Robert's math, or even
trying to digest what Greg posted.  Human math, which is being "revised"
all the time too (ala Newton and Einstein, etc.) is based on wrong
assumptions anyway, per the Zetas, who don't use zero in their math. 
Human assumptions, as NASA's in late 2000 that the Sun's magnetic
orientation had flipped, are seldom "revised", even when the facts are
in, proving them wrong, as the Ulysses probe results demonstrated.  This
is why the Flat Earth Society still exists, here on Earth. And I won't
be hosting a session on Zeta math vs human math, for many reasons not
the least of which I'd not be the proper vehicle.  The Zetas also state
you would not be able to follow, given the wrong assumptions you'd cling
to like Gospel, and are not supposed to be educated enough to get off
the planet and raise havoc elsewhere in the Universe in any case, being
the spiritual babies you are, immature, etc.  Stay in your play pen, in
essence. 

Looking forward to having you at the chat again, Open Minded, as you
focus on the issue at hand and actually try to have a DISCUSSION, unlike
the occasional disrupter, and only dash through the room waving your
placard with your web site and pronouncements ONCE, unlike others trying
to press their agenda endlessly.  Anyone planning to come to the chat
and DISRUPT can expect to be silenced quickly.  We have bouncers at this
club. Robert was describing, in his math, a lineal progress.  My sense
is that the Zetas want to discuss where the inbound passage, re speed
and distance, is NOT lineal, or exponentially lineal, or whatever the
math terminology to express "not without deviation from the formula". 
To save time during the chat, we are writing the preliminary ZetaTalk
now, saving the chat for followup questions.  To set the stage for this
discussion, I'm posting background on the Distance/Speed issue, followed
by the Zeta update. 

Interesting note on Zetas RIGHT Again! In gathering this background and
checking the pages linked from the TOPIC on viewing specs, I noted a
ZetaTalk statement that has been out there since Mar 29, 1998 (below). 
And then we recently had the Neat NEAT Trick occurrence to counter the
Jan 19th images! Zetas RIGHT Again!

    Your hope for an early brightness will not be met, as 
    [Planet X] is too far away for reflected sunlight up 
    until 6 months before passage. Likewise, it does not 
    grow in size to where it is obvious that is not a fading 
    nova at a great distance until it begins to reflect 
    sunlight. Thus, up until these last few months, the 
    excuse that this is a faded nova of sorts will be put 
    forth, and even supported by doctored images.
        ZetaTalk™, Brightness
            (http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword03d.htm)