Re: ZetaBabble [tm]
In Article <firstname.lastname@example.org> Jim Scotti wrote:
> I have zero links to the Pope and in fact, I am an atheist and have
> never used the "Pope Scope" as you call it.
You and the Pope Scope are both affiliated with the University
of Arizona, in Tucson. Both center around astronomy. But
somehow you are blisfully unaware of the interests the Pope
has in looking toward Orion, from the clear skies of Arizona,
with the assistance of the University staff.
As Art Bell stated in his interview with Father Malachi Martin, before
the Father conveniently died,
"the Vatican has a very, very great deal of power. They
have, whether they admit it or not, a great deal of political
power all around the world. One of the things that they
did fairly recently, was, they muscled and I, I do intend
to use that word, they muscled their way onto a mountain
in Arizona, Mount Graham, and they built an observatory
on Mount Graham in connection with an Arizona
University. However, The Vatican has the larger part of
the control of this observatory. Looking at deep space
things. Now why would they have done that, Father?"
And Father Malachi Martin replied
"Because the mentality, the attitude, mentality amongst
those at the higher levels, highest levels of Vatican
administration and geo-politics, know that, erh now,
knowledge of what's going on in space, and what's
approaching us, could be of great import in the next
five years, ten years."
See: Pope Scope, (http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tworx464.htm)
> My only affiliation with NASA is indirectly through NASA as
> a funding agency for the project I work on to survey the
> solar system for all types of objects.
As we said in our previous post, we know you would take
umbrage at the assumption that due to your security
clearance oath, you must play dumb. Nothing has changed.
As with Mr. David Tholen, an astronomer affiliated with
the Hawaii Observatory, one of the most powerful, which
operates NEAT programs, a NASA/JPL program, he is a
free man, utterly, to do what he wishes and comment
about what he observes, and as with Mr. John Oliver, who
likewise has worked on NASA programs, though he does
not admit to this in his innoculous resume for the public,
he is likewise a free man, free to comment about anything
he observes, or so the story goes. NASA is just Mr.
Money Bags, and has no interest in restricting information.
That's why the public does NOT get the live feed from
the Hubble. That's why they give important images to
Private Investigators, NASA buddies, who jealousely
withhold them in the name of this contract. This allows
NASA to withhold images from the Hubble endlessly,
in the name of the PI mode of operation, so the public,
which PAYS for the Hubble, is denied. This is because
NASA has no interest in keeping TIGHT control of the
information flow from any project they are funding.
Right. If you say so, Jim.
>> Despite that your probes are operating OTHER than your
>> gravity math, and your Earth has, per your probes, developed
>> a fat middle, gravity wise, which it has NOT.
> A fat middle that has been there and measured since the first
> sellites orbited Earth in the late 1950s. It hasn't changed
> at all.
Oh? A quote from a RECENT BBC article, about a change
during the past 4 years, quoting the Journal Science.
Earth's Middle Getting Fatter?
BBC, August, 2002
.... new research published in the journal Science suggests
our planet is getting even wider - if only by the odd millimetre.
The scientists behind the report, Christopher Cox and Benjamin
Chao, base their findings on space-based observations from
past 25 years. Since the early 1980s, satellite laser-ranging
studies that have been used to work out the planet's gravity
field have demonstrated how the Earth has lost a bit of its
pumpkin look - it has actually become slightly more spherical.
This has been put down to a rebound effect in the mantle - a
thick layer of nearly molten rock between the Earth's crust
and its core - following the loss of the heavy mass of ice at
the poles after the last Ice Age. But Cox and Chao say their
work suggests this trend reversed abruptly about four years
See: BBC (http://www.zetatalk.com//theword/tworx472.htm)
> Sure I have failings - all humans do. Science is not one of
> our failings. ... Egos might just get in the way of doing science.
Yes, well said! You obviously have NO ego nor is it getting
in the way of seeing that mankind might have scientific
failings! Or so you say. Proved our point.
> Jim Scotti
> Lunar & Planetary Laboratory
> University of Arizona
> Tucson, AZ 85721 USA http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/