Re: ZetaTalk Bashing: Cuts Both Ways

In Article  <[email protected]> I Don’t wrote: 
> Ian wrote in message news:<[email protected]>
>> If one can accept (if only for the sake of the argument) that 
>> something is speaking through Nancy, as she claims the Zetas 
>> are, it is obvious that sometimes things get distorted by 
>> "NancyTalk". 
>
> So, were the magnitude claims just "Nancytalk"? Were the 
> visual sightings claims just "Nancytalk"? Were the red circles 
> drawn on images and the "You CAUGHT it" just 
> "Nancytalk"? Is the claim that PX has been IMAGED just 
> "Nancytalk"?

If it’s ZetaTalk it either started (in the format used in the old days)
with “Begin ZetaTalk” and ended with “End ZetaTalk”, or in the postings
during 2001 and 2002 is indented and ends in the signature “ZetaTalk”,
and on the web site is a page headed by “ZetaTalk: “  else it is NOT
ZetaTalk.  On the IRC chats, it is those lines that start with “ZT:”
else it is NOT ZetaTalk. 

If I interpret what the Zetas said, outside of this direct transciption
process, it is NANCYTALK.  They told me to plunk a circle and when I
drew it where I sensed they wanted it and they said “good enough” to me
(the 1/5 image was within, but not dead centered) it was MY circle which
they were telling me was close enough.  The sightings at the 3
observatories in early 2001 were certainly not done by me, and the
reports are SteveTalk, VeroniqueTalk, and JimTalk.  In 2002 they were
OpenMindedTalk and OpenMindedDraw and PierreTalk and PierreDraw and

=> PierreORIGINAL_CCD_FROM_INFRARED_CAMERA <=

stamped by the Haute-Province observatory equipment as to date and time
and with the author, as with Steve Havas, being GUTSY enough to put his
name to it. Unlike some others I could mention, like Open Minded.