Alleged NASA -Affiliated Astronomer Deciphers 'Intelligence' Signal From Nearby Stars

reply to post by SunFlare


I for one would prefer NOT to see you go. I was a bit upset by the ban, but could understand that it was the only course of action open to the mods once you had owned up to making two separate accounts.

Personally, I'd prefer to keep you around, since you appear to have inside information that would be of assistance.

I'd prefer that were only under ONE account, however. Makes it easier to keep track of who's talking.

So then, my vote is don't go, but stick to one account. Of course, in most areas of life, my vote doesn't count for much...

reply to post by nenothtu
Well, I try to abide by the T&C and am only one person.

When and what happened that Sunflare is back? I just read up from where I dropped off yesterday, I missed something here...

reply to post by SunFlare
Okay, you posted your reply whilst I was asking again.

I am a bit confused, I don't see any reference to you being 'unbanned'.

I want everyone to get a fair shake, but we get a lot of this here....

like DD! Cheerleaders with nothing real, just rah, rah, rah....

Ziss boom bah,

Judy has big fake boobs.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Well, I try to abide by the T&C and am only one person.

When and what happened that Sunflare is back? I just read up from where I dropped off yesterday, I missed something here...

Nah man, don't toss the thread. It's getting all heated up and interesting again. We might be near breaking through an informational firewall, but you gotta stay sharp and on your toes for it.

Brew coffee.

And remember, when your on a roller coaster, lean to the inside of the curves, or centripedal force will get ya!

just to remind everyone, james van greunen also fathered at least one maybe two children to marion weigand AS A MAN as well as the two children he fathered to janice falcus(fugea) AS A MAN, before becoming judith helena van greunen then judy faltskog.

thanks

rich

[edit on 24-8-2010 by RICH-ENGLAND]

edit) seems i was wrong about this, and removed it because i dont want to give anyone ideas of how to beat bans!.

thanks

rich

[edit on 24-8-2010 by RICH-ENGLAND]

Originally posted by RICH-ENGLAND
just to remind everyone, james van greunen also fathered at least one maybe two children to marion weigand AS A MAN as well as the two children he fathered to janice falcus(fugea) AS A MAN, before becoming judith helena van greunen then judy faltskog.

thanks

rich

[edit on 24-8-2010 by RICH-ENGLAND]

I can't speak for everyone, but that is going to be very hard for me to forget!

reply to post by SunFlare


I'm only harsh if I perceive a need to be. Then I'm VERY harsh. Otherwise, I roll with what's running. All I want to get at is the truth of the matter, I've no interest in beating anyone down that doesn't need it.

You must understand, though, that the initial claim had a lot of people excited. When it turned out to be a false alarm, a lot of people felt terribly let down, and some reacted harshly. I understand that from your perspective, that was Wayne's fault for releasing unverified information that was given to him in confidence.

The problems arose when someone, some where, tried to run with the story anyhow, and force it to be true, even after it was debunked, for lack of a better word. THAT action caused a lot of folks to feel betrayed, and to feel PURPOSELY misled. I DO seem to recall Judy trying to back out of it early on, but some one, somewhere, in this convoluted web of players just wouldn't allow that, it seems.

THAT tended to tick a lot of people off, and when people feel they are betrayed that badly, they will often lash out. When they felt they'd been lied to, well, they had a need to dig and find out what other untruths they may uncover. It lessens the sting of being 'taken in' if you can excuse yourself by saying that you were taken in by a pro. Not much lessening, but some. You can tell yourself it could have happened to ANYONE, since it was a pro that huckstered you.

So folks started digging to see what other hoaxes these folks may have perpetrated. In the course of that digging, a lot of leads were uncovered that might best have been left covered, dealing with personal issues unrelated, perhaps, to the central issue at hand.

That's when the strike-counter strike sort of infighting began.

Yes, indeed, it's a tangled web, but it CAN be untangled, even now. The catch is that if it is untangled by only one side or the other, THAT is the side that gets presented. Better if co-operation is involved, to get a more complete picture, an understanding of just what really happened.

Considering the volatility involved at this point, I believe that attempting to shut this thread down, legally or otherwise, would be the wrong course of action. First, this thread is the one that all the search engines lead to at this point, and it would make better sense for the whole story to be told in it. If it gets zapped, that will only raise HUGE questions in the minds of the rest of the world, wondering just what we were on to that had to be squelched.

we're not special here. Anything WE could find, WILL be found by others, with much the same result - except your side of the story won't be told, since it was shut down.

Second, human nature being what it is, I can almost guarantee that if this thread is shut down, the entire mess will pop up again elsewhere, without your input again, and most likely without your ability to shut it down at all.

Look at WikiLeaks, and the run they've been giving an entire government. When something like that is the case, what hope do you really objectively harbor that you will have more success than the United States Government?

No, I think attempting to close the thread is exactly the WRONG course of action.

Wayne came here, ostensibly to present his case, but in actuality to promote his book. Wayne wasn't honest and forthcoming with us, and Wayne couldn't, or wouldn't deal with us on our terms, he couldn't handle criticism or give honest answers, so Wayne left for a few minutes to take a shower, and hasn't gotten back to us yet.

In the end, Wayne WILL be exposed in all of his nefarious hoaxing glory. That's because he ran and hid, and we can't treat that dessertion any other way. You quoted the bible above. Try this one on for size: "the wicked flee when no man pursueth". An honest person will not run or squelch open discussion. When someone demonstrates that they have something to hide, it will generally be perceived to be dishonesty, and then it's on. What is concealed will be brought to the fore.

My advice is to NOT let that happen to Judy, as it most certainly will happen to Wayne. Wayne can't support his position, but tries to from afar, and squelches any dissent.

Trust me on this - that will NOT be allowed to go unanswered.

Edit: for pesky spelling errors, to which I am sublimely prone.

[edit on 2010/8/24 by nenothtu]

I do apologise for not answering you straight away -SunFlare,
My long red nails got all snaggled in the keys!!

I did look at the image and as you say, he/she seems to have
spent some time in the sunshine, grabbing a few rays...
But it still doesn't help us with this 'he-is/she-is' stuff.

Do you think that at some time in his/her past, that he/she may
have been a boy?... maybe just someone who wasn't understood?

This thread also won't be shut down because the claim that Judy gave confidential information to someone she didn't know well on Facebook and asked them to keep it confidential has yet to amount to anything.

As is Judy is saying Wayne blabbed in an unprofessional way and yet I'd say that Judy is the only one who claims to have professed the confidential agreement legally via contract and she is the one who supposedly broke that trust.

I'd also say that due to the publicly available court records supporting this case and the fact that there is at least one book for sale relating to this that consumer groups would be interested in checking this information if any further books were to come from any of these sources.

That and the fact the SolarFlare (no small i - it's a mobile exploit) has admitted to being both Lady Sambuca and herself whilst supplying an as yet undisclosed photo of Judy for our perusual as well as claiming to know her. Add to this the supposed legal team that were supposedly here trolling the thread then there is more than enough misconduct via a few select IPs that would have this case make front page news on any tabloid before any court of law would, beyond reasonable doubt, close this thread down.

All in all we're feeding the troll here people - but since it will only go away if we ask it to I guess we have to ask it other questions first and then see how it holds up to it's own web of deceit.

Fire away SF!!

I'm sure you can get a response or 2 in via your mobile before lunch is over.

-m0r

reply to post by SunFlare


I know I'm asking you to semi-guess at the idea and as
you commented in previous posts, you truly believed that
this was a woman stood before you at the restaurant,
but wasn't there any impression that somewhere, underneath
all that woman, a man resided?

reply to post by SunFlare


I know a hand-held device can be sluggish work and
it could be that you're indisposed right now, but please
SolarFlare, help us.
I don't think you're a troll, I think you have a lot of
valuable information about James and how he made
the decision to become a woman.

Do you think that after 'transforming' himself into a female,
James found that things hadn't changed that much and his
yearning to be accepted made him step up and create this
hoax?
I'm curious about that, can you assist?

reply to post by RICH-ENGLAND


RICH... Lady Sambucca may feel that folk like yourself
will not listen to her claims and treat her fairly.
Would you like to ask our guest a farir even-handed
question?

[edit on 24-8-2010 by A boy in a dress]

reply to post by A boy in a dress


ive asked my questions to them (and i say "them" meaning multiple accounts/personalities or whatever you want to label her) over and over and over again without getting anything in response except more deflection and more fantastical stories without any verifiable supporting evidence whatsoever!!!........

i still await my answers, and mainly an explanation of the whickham message board post.

thanks

rich

Originally posted by RICH-ENGLAND
reply to post by A boy in a dress

 

ive asked my questions to them (and i say "them" meaning multiple accounts/personalities or whatever you want to label her) over and over and over again without getting anything in response except more deflection and more fantastical stories without any verifiable supporting evidence whatsoever!!!........

i still await my answers, and mainly an explanation of the whickham message board post.

thanks

rich

Thank you RICH, I'm sure if Lady S can access this site still,
she may try to explain that little 'hiccup' and we can move on.

I think our friend as gone for the moment and so we must
look to continue the investigation of how this hoax was formed
and who was involved.

I must admit, I find it a liitle silly of Wayne Herschel to
chance his arm in all this, it's been exposed and you'd
think he'd have 'blew up' when Judy contacted after it
all.

We'll see.