Hale-Bopp - What's Going Down
Nancy
[ZetaTalk dated August, 1995]
The Hale-Bopp comet does not exist. It is a fraud, perpetrated by
those who would have the teeming masses quiescent until it is too late.
Hale-Bopp is nothing more than a distant star, and will draw no
closer. Such is the choice for this fraud that its characteristics
cannot be affirmatively proven until some time has passed. Is it a
distant exploding star? Can't say. Is it moving, can't say for sure.
Is it drawing nigh? Can't say. All is speculation. It has the same
appearance as the 12th Planet at the current time - a blurry glowing
orb that seems to stand still. But Hale-Bopp is not even coming from
the same direction as the 12th Planet. How has the elliptical path of
Hale-Bopp been calculated, such that it simulates the elliptical path
ascribed to the 12th Planet? How was the periodic nature of Hale-Bopp
calculated to be close to the periodic nature of the 12th Planet? How
coincidental, and the results published and seared into the memory of
the populace before the data can be examined or questioned.
Science such as this would not make it into scientific journals, but
has made the press, and this is not by accident. The press was
directed to do so. The perpetrators, the establishment and wealthy,
are on the top of the heap at present and do not wish the heap to start
moving about under them. They would have the rest of mankind become
aware of the 12th Planet's approach only when it is too late to react.
They, however, have already reacted. As time passes, just as with the
Roswell autopsy tapes, the foundation of these claims will be eroded.
By 1996 or 1997, the supposed arrival time of Hale-Bopp, the truth will
be well known. What will not be well known is that the real danger is
still on its way. The 12th Planet, a true messenger of death, will not
even get the attention the fraudulent Hale-Bopp is getting today.
That's because it's a real threat, not a diversion. Don't look to
Sagittarius, look to the left of Betelgeuse in late 2001, and keep
looking!
If the newspapers print it, then it must be so. But the newspapers are
only printing what the bureaucrats have put forth. If NASA gives it
space and puts the name comet to it, it must be so. But NASA itself is
only summarizing what individual contributors have said. NASA has
boldly posted other people's comments about the exploding star that is
called comet Hale-Bopp, but NASA itself is not commenting. Why so shy?
This normally conservative organization, which does not even list a
body as an official comet unless it has been observed, tracked, and
made a cycle within the last 75 or so years, is giving center stage to
a body that has never formerly been seen and has no track record. NASA
itself avoids mentioning the Hale-Bopp orbit, as to do so would require
confirming the false 1993 image of Hale-Bopp by an Australian
observatory, an image that will be discovered, in due time, to be
incorrect. It is this sighting and this sighting alone that an orbit
is based on. NASA was not willing to sully its reputation by
falsifying its 1993 image capture. Thus, no mention of the orbit.
Why has Hale-Bopp, at this time, decided to fragment and explode,
growing in brightness? This is decidedly not the pattern that comets
present, but it is the pattern of exploding stars, super novas, which
become for a brief time visible, and then wink out. The path of
Hale-Bopp was supposed to pass between the Earth and the Sun, in a
similar manner to the true path of the 12th Planet, and now is
announced to have a turn-around closer to Mars. Just so will the tale
of the supposed comet change over time. Mark our words. We, ZetaTalk,
are telling you that the announcement will be made that Hale-Bopp has
utterly fragmented, long before its trumpeted arrival date. Why so?
How else to explain an exploding star that winked out. How convenient
for the perpetrators of the falsehood. What's next? Oh, that the 12th
Planet, when eventually sighted, is no more real or dangerous than this
clever fraud.
Hale-Bopp was pronounced a comet when it does not, truly, meet the
requirements for a comet. Do not the bureaucrats who assign numbers
and name the celestial body after the finder check on these matters?
No! They have a minimum requirement, three points, and if these line
up into what can be computed as a reasonable orbit - all is well and
all is accepted. What this means is that three people, working in
collusion, can produce a fraud. In fact, since the proofs, the three
points, can come from a single source, it only takes one person to
produce a fraud. Without the 1993 image the recorded orbit of
Hale-Bopp is so many pin-points on the head of a pin. They are all in
the same place. The diffuse brightness of an exploding star provides a
fairly large area of bright points, as the mass of the star spirals
outward with fiercely burning portions away from the star center, which
is dimming. Just which of those little pin points is considered the
so-called comet head? No one can say, as the so-called comet head has
not been located without the coma usually presented. This blur or tha
t is called a faint coma at times, and no tail has been found, so the
artists who would draw an orbit for Hale-Bopp are given a free hand.
What about Hale-Bopp marks it as a comet? On appearance it is an
exploding star - appearing suddenly and increasing rapidly in
brightness, diffuse in appearance rather than with the coma expected of
a comet, and having no tail to speak of. There are several
irregularities that should have prevented Hale-Bopp from being labeled
comet so breezily by the bureaucrats so cooperatively looking the other
way.
· First, where it has been noted that Hale-Bopp should have shown up on
a 1991 image as well as the famous 1993 image, if it were a comet, this
has been explained away as an outburst at the current time. Outbursts
occur when comets fragment on nearing the Sun, being of a composition
that cannot withstand the exposure.
· Second, the outburst story stands directly at odds with the orbital
computation, which places Hale-Bopp, so the story goes, in a regular
orbit around the Sun every 4,000 years or so!
· Third, the triangulation required is in fact not a triangulation at
all, in the case of Hale-Bopp, as in truth only the current position
and the falsified 1993 image are being used as the base. Are there not
nightly movements in the placement of Hale-Bopp? As an exploding star
increases in size and brightness, then dims and fades, the area where
these points can be placed is relatively large and, in fact, at the
current time, moving outward at the edges.
· Fourth, no one is challenging how these points are determined. Are
they the supposed comet's head? As no one has located a comet head in
the diffuse brightness, those who position points across the face of
Hale-Bopp have been given a free hand.
Pick the orbit you want, calculate back in time and alter a single
image accordingly, pepper a few hundred points across the diffuse
brightness of an exploding star - and voile, you have a comet!
(End ZetaTalk)
All rights reserved: Zeta...@aol.com
http://www.zetatalk.com/zetatalk/
Al Paglieri
: The Hale-Bopp comet does not exist. It is a fraud, perpetrated by
: those who would have the teeming masses quiescent until it is too late.
: Hale-Bopp is nothing more than a distant star, and will draw no
: closer. Such is the choice for this fraud that its characteristics
: cannot be affirmatively proven until some time has passed. Is it a
: distant exploding star? Can't say. Is it moving, can't say for sure.
: Is it drawing nigh? Can't say. All is speculation. It has the same
Nancy, you must have this confused with the "Full Of Shit" echo. You're
mistaken, this is the amatuer astornomy echo. We've all seen Hale-Bopp
and we've seen it move.
Now go away and play somewhere else.
--
Al Paglieri || Stargazer Astronomy On Line
bq...@torfree.net || HST - Apollo - ATM - Comets
Royal Astronomical Society of Canada || 905.832.3962 14.4k bps
Toronto Centre || FidoNet-UseNet-RASCnet-ImexNet
Jennifer B. Jakiel
: Nancy (sa...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: : The Hale-Bopp comet does not exist. It is a fraud, perpetrated by
: : those who would have the teeming masses quiescent until it is too late.
: : Hale-Bopp is nothing more than a distant star, and will draw no
: : closer. Such is the choice for this fraud that its characteristics
: : cannot be affirmatively proven until some time has passed. Is it a
: : distant exploding star? Can't say. Is it moving, can't say for sure.
: : Is it drawing nigh? Can't say. All is speculation. It has the same
: Nancy, you must have this confused with the "Full Of Shit" echo. You're
: mistaken, this is the amatuer astornomy echo. We've all seen Hale-Bopp
: and we've seen it move.
: Now go away and play somewhere else.
: --
: Al Paglieri || Stargazer Astronomy On Line
Well stated, Al :-) ..Nancy, I'm tired of your wacko rants and "ZetaTalk".
You can have the sci.astro group, its already full of weirdos and freaks
who like to post "alien convos" and pseudoscience Fizziks. But, this is a
group dedicated to amateur astronomy, NOONE here gives a flying ZetaDork's
Butt about any of the fecal matter you want to spread here.
Go Away ..
Rich Jakiel
P.S. ..o/~ o/~ ..They're coming to take me away, HA HA They're coming to
me away HO HO ..to the FUNNY FARM, WHERE LIFE IS *WONDERFUL* ALL THE TIME!
..o/~ o/~
...as we see the funny looking men in white suits haul all of Nancy's
Zetatalk "friends" ...(Gee, I think they're invisible - How will they
find them?..)
Casey Law
writes:
>Well stated, Al :-) ..Nancy, I'm tired of your wacko rants and "ZetaTalk".
>You can have the sci.astro group, its already full of weirdos and freaks
>who like to post "alien convos" and pseudoscience Fizziks. But, this is a
>group dedicated to amateur astronomy, NOONE here gives a flying ZetaDork's
>Butt about any of the fecal matter you want to spread here.
>
>Go Away ..
>
>Rich Jakiel
>
>P.S. ..o/~ o/~ ..They're coming to take me away, HA HA They're coming to
>me away HO HO ..to the FUNNY FARM, WHERE LIFE IS *WONDERFUL* ALL THE TIME!
>..o/~ o/~
>
>...as we see the funny looking men in white suits haul all of Nancy's
>Zetatalk "friends" ...(Gee, I think they're invisible - How will they
>find them?..)
>
Yea, I've visited sci.astro and I must say it is a mess! I hope that
sci.astro.amateur won't degenerate intosomething like that! From what
I've seen so far, this group here is much more organized and serious
about astronomy, and not 'fizziks' (ha! I love it!).
Here's hoping we can keep the quality up at sci.astro.amateur.
Casey J. Law
Dave Nash
[deletions]
>Nancy, you must have this confused with the "Full Of Shit" echo. You're
>mistaken, this is the amatuer astornomy echo. We've all seen Hale-Bopp
>and we've seen it move.
>Now go away and play somewhere else.
Like, say, sci.astro? This dork has already splattered a zillion posts
there saying much the same garbage. Apparently, she thinks that
astronomers, of all people, (a) don't know what comets look like, (b)
can't tell the difference between novas and comets, and (c) can't tell
that Hale-Bopp isn't moving. (It only *looks* like it's moving.)
Yeah, right.
This group used to be pretty kook-free; why'd our first big one have to
be this one? At least McElwaine's style is semi-funny...
<grumbles>
>--
>Al Paglieri || Stargazer Astronomy On Line
>bq...@torfree.net || HST - Apollo - ATM - Comets
>Royal Astronomical Society of Canada || 905.832.3962 14.4k bps
>Toronto Centre || FidoNet-UseNet-RASCnet-ImexNet
--
Dave Nash, School of Chemical Sciences, University of Illinois
E-mail: na...@aries.scs.uiuc.edu; WWW: http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~nash/
"Holy Smoke! Somebody blew up the Pope!"
Brian Widdicombe
>(Begin ZetaTalk on Hale-Bopp)
>[ZetaTalk dated August, 1995]
Bit of a SNIP!
>(End ZetaTalk)
Gee !!!
And I thought we had problems with people over here in dear ol'
Northern Ireland !!! :-)))
In the Land of the Blind,
The Man with one eye is King.
Thomas Michael Trusock
: : The Hale-Bopp comet does not exist. It is a fraud, perpetrated by
: : those who would have the teeming masses quiescent until it is too late.
: : Hale-Bopp is nothing more than a distant star, and will draw no
: : closer. Such is the choice for this fraud that its characteristics
: : cannot be affirmatively proven until some time has passed. Is it a
: : distant exploding star? Can't say. Is it moving, can't say for sure.
: : Is it drawing nigh? Can't say. All is speculation. It has the same
Yeah, ok...
That's a good girl, here's your valium for the day...
Phil Fernsten
(mindless drivel deleted)
This has been said before, but I'll add my $0.02:
It's very tempting (and easy) to respond to these crackpots, but it's
probably best to just ignore them. It certainly doesn't seem to do
any good to engage these kooks. They seem to crave attention, no
matter how abusive, and aren't swayed by rational discussion. Any
sort of response seems to encourage them and also runs the risk of
drawing even more of the lunatic fringe over from sci.astro. On the
other hand, if everyone ignores them, they will probably stop cross-
posting here. I would hate to see this very fine and helpful newsgroup
spammed with their mindless twittering, as is the case with sci.astro.
Phil Fernsten