" ....one guy who took the first infra red sighting, early 2002, is John Oliver in Florida who took it to try and challenge me and, and started a thread called "OK Nancy where is it?" on Sci-Astro and er, and I pointed where the Zetas had me point, put around, a circle around it and inside that circle when you did a, ahh, a checking there it was, it was a pinpoint at time, coming in, but uhmm, that was his submission."

Nancy Lieder

Lou Gentile show July (Jason Martell Vs Nancy Lieder)

"Er, we've had more people, Steve Havas in Vancouver, there's a fellow in Washington DC who was working on our team with Steve. We have an astrophysicist in France, a number of them as a matter of fact, one guy who took the first infra red sighting, early 2002, is John Oliver in Florida who took it to try and challenge me and, and started a thread called "OK Nancy where is it?" on Sci-Astro and er, and I pointed where the Zetas had me point, put around, a circle around it and inside that circle when you did a, ahh, a checking there it was, it was a pinpoint at time, coming in, but uhmm, that was his submission. So er, its not, its not a true statement that only Steve Havas was doing the imaging."

------o------

John Oliver (AKA IMO) his own words 1st April 2003

 "IMO is John Oliver, Associate Chairman of the Department of Astronomy, University of Florida. My home page is at http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~oliver/ . I have been doing astronomical research (including imaging) for more than 40 years and have extensive experience and publications on photographic processing, the design and implementation of electronograhic cameras, and the use of CCD cameras. I am, in fact, open to ideas that are out of the main stream and my work on ways that ancient peoples could have determined longitudes has recently appeared in print in both books and journals.


On the other hand, Lieder's Planet X simply can not exist as she describes it, and it does not exist at the coordinates that she specifies, and it can not be found on the images that I have posted, nor on the images taken at Haute-Provence, nor on the recent Havas images.


Those who belive the Havas/Dell identifications of personae on those recent images should think about the following: If the full image is examined, dozens (typically 40 or more) of small spots, identical to those picked out by Lieder as her planet, are seen. What are they? Only two are identified as planet X. A few more are labeled moons ... what about the rest? If you have read my pages at http://us.geocities.com/openmindxx/ you know that I have shown that most those spots are too small to be objects in the sky imaged by the telescope and that they are all pixel defects, many caused by cosmic rays.


If you are thinking of selling your possessions and moving or otherwise disrupting your lives because of the predictions of Lieder please think again. I live in Florida with my loved ones (wife, son, mother, and dog) and if I belived there was any possible chance of the destruction she predicts I would not be here.


If you read my web pages and my posts you will find that I have not atacked
Lieder or any of her followers personally even when they have so attacked me. I would ask that you extend me the courtesy that any STO individual would extend and not attack me personally now."

------o------

Nancy is purposely distorting the facts to suit her own ends. The thread on Sci-astro did nothing but ridicule her and Steve Havas's Fits images. Indeed she stole John Oliver's images despite his insistence that she did use then refusing to give his permission and still has not. Yet she has the audacity to call others, like Hazelwood, a thief and plagiarist.

From: Nancy Lieder (zetatalk@zetatalk.com)
Subject: Re: OK Nancy, Where Is It?
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.astro.amateur
Date: 2002-01-06 07:37:00 PST


In Article <3C37825E.9050004@telocity.com> Idon't wrote:
> We have obtained a CCD exposure of the coordinates posted by Nancy for her planet. Although the CCD  image was taken with the requisite R filter and an  observatory grade telescope, and it shows objects fainter  than 18th magnitude (and hence more than 1000 times  fainter than Nancy specifies for her planet), there is no  sign of any unexpected object. All is available for  examination at http://us.geocities.com/openmindxx/CCDimages.htm Nancy, please explain.<

You CAUGHT it! I've marked the spot with a red circle. With your permission, Idon't, I've made a copy of the pertinent images and put them on my web site as this posting of mine, which I web, will want to refer to them going forward. For absolute purity of truth, one should look to IDON'T's web site, however, not my copies. Certianly the copy with a red circle has been bastardized, as my PC Paintbrush program only works in 256 colors and damages what it touches, etc. Here is the Zeta comments about your wonderful efforts, Idon't!

Given that the Jan 2, 2002 exposure in the red spectrum was 20 minutes vs the comparison chart of 45 minutes, the planet you are seeking is NOT as visible in the comparison as one would like, but is there. Our emissary, Nancy, has circled the spot where you captured the inbound planet, barely larger than Pluto in at its center and with a swirl of dust and moons about this center, not yet reflecting sunlight as does Pluto but giving an even diffuse spread of light from its surface, and certainly without any intensity of light as stars or
star clusters. Our instructions, in that the RA and Dec given are to suffice for the whole world, are to look AROUND the spot for something not on the star charts. Thus, the EXACT RA and Dec are not the guidelines, in any given search. Visibility in a magnitude range area affected by the SIZE of the spot being observed, and the SPREAD that the object takes over an area, as in the M31 example where it is considered a magnitude 3.7 but can scarcely be seen, as it is spread about a large area.Thus, Planet X, being a magnitude 11 but this light coming from its entire surface, does not take on an image as starlight or objects reflecting sunlight. Take another CCD, given greater exposure time, and come again.
ZetaTalk

The pertinent coordinates, again, for this time period:
RA 4.45623 Dec 12.13873 on Jan 17, 2002
RA 4.45631 Dec 12.14997 on Jan 08, 2002
RA 4.45657 Dec 12.15692 on Jan 03, 2002

My red circled SPOT:
http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05cir.gif which by the way shows up on an inverted JPG image that a Troubled Times member made:
http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan04inv.jpg

To compare with Idon't images:
Palomar Survey (45 Minute) in red spectrum
http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05pss.jpg

Jan 05, 2002 (20 Minute) in red spectrum
http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05zzz.jpg

Zeta Coordinates on above, identified as X
http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05xxx.jpg

------o------

From: I M Openminded (openmind@telocity.com)
Subject: Re: OK Nancy, Where Is It?
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.astro.amateur
Date: 2002-01-06 08:53:15 PST

How can Idon't give you permission to post? These images have nothing to do with Idon't. You do not have my permission to post copies of my images unless you include the statement that you are doing so without permission.

The fact is, there is no 11th magnitude or even 19th magnitude object at the point where Nancy has put her red circle on this image. This response shows exactly why no one has been willing to post an image for Nancy. It was inevitable that she would take any image and imagine that she had found her planet on it. Her talk about the RA and DEC having to suffice for the "whole world" is spurious. In fact she gave us specific coordinates to use for our observing location and her red circle lies well away from those specific coordinates. Our web site has now had those ccordinates added to them as well as Nancy's red circle so all can see for themselves.

------o------

Full thread at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF

8&threadm=a1ugi2%24scj%241%40news1.xs4all.nl&rnum=

10&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DOK%2Bwhere%2Bis%2Bit%2

Bnancy%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Da1ugi2%2524scj%25241%2540news1.xs4all

.nl%26rnum%3D10

Back