Re: More on the "Planet X" controversy.

From: Tom McDonald (tmcdonald2672_at_nohormelcharter.net)
Date: 11/28/04 

Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 23:01:50 -0600

DrPostman wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 01:36:09 GMT, jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid
> (John Savard) in accordance with The Prophecy scribed:
>
>
>>On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 07:11:15 GMT, jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid
>>(John Savard) wrote, in part:
>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:15:36 -0600, Earl Colby Pottinger
>>><earlcp@idirect.com> wrote, in part:
>>
>>>>That is your idea of a controversy? Boy, you live a sheltered life.
>>
>>>Not only that, but didn't he know that you don't dare refer to "Planet
>>>***" in this newsgroup, for fear...
>>
>>Ah, no. It is sci.astro where they quake in terror at the thought Nancy
>>might return.
>
>
>
> Not really. I have Nancy quaking in terror over the questions I asked
> her on the Lou Gentile Show a few nights ago. The old gal got so
> frazzled she tried to talk over me. Then she fired off several posts
> on GLP and TT-Watch. It was quite a meltdown.
>

        I didn't hear it, and I just checked TT-Watch after a very long
time in Sanity-Land. What astounds me is that she still has
followers. Given that she has followers, though, it does _not_
surprise me that they believe *because* there is no evidence,
and *because* Nancy is consistently wrong.

        I have to give the voices in Nan's head credit, though. They
have staying power. I fully expect her to gather a swirl of
moons...er, sheep, behind her in the run-up to 2012. That'll be
a good time. 

-- 
Tom McDonald
http://webpages.charter.net/tsmac/tmcdonald2672/

Relevant Pages