1. I have no idea what you're talking about (hereafter IHNIWYTA). In any case, NASA has been anything but silent about Elenin.
2. Leonid is a common name that existed even before the meteor shower was named. ELE isn't his name — it's Elenin. You can chat with him at SpaceObs.org, unless you think he's a gubmint plant posing as an astronomer (which I've actually heard some morons like you claim).
3. IHNIWYTA.
4. There are many earthquakes every single day, and Omerbashich is a crank.
5. Who told you that?
6. Apparently, no such article ever existed. Even if they did remove it, who cares?
7. Earthquakes can't be predicted, and IHNIWYTA.
8. The fact that Piers Corbyn refuses to submit his methodology for peer review or even disclose it should tell you something. He is not 86% correct. Rather, "Weather Action's forecasts have achieved an accuracy rate of 55 per cent. That rises to 80 per cent for 24 hours either side." If you try predicting some weather phenomenon in a region within a 72-hour period, providing you have existing climate models at your disposal, you could probably approach 80% as well. Further, Corbyn's claims about climate change run contrary to known science — but again, he refuses to have his methods peer reviewed, so all we have are supporters' waving hands and some predictions that are only marginally more accurate than chance.
9. Elenin was discovered on 12/10/2010. At that time, it was already in the Solar System.
10. Natural disasters are not increasing dramatically (or increasing at all, for that matter), and you continuing to repeat this canard doesn't make it true.
11. USGS only removes earthquakes when they are false positives. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, feel free to do so.
12. That statement is incoherent.
13. IHNIWYTA. A quick Internet search reveals multiple threads and articles from a variety of sources about Elenin, all dating to before March 2011.
14. That would be THEMIS, as discussed here.
15. You forgot to mention that he was wrong.
16. Source? No, I didn't think so….
17. Source? No, I didn't think so….
18. IHNIWYTA, but even if that is true, you're talking about the Federal Emergency Management Agency. That's, you know, what they do. Why is that surprising?
19. No, it doesn't. It doesn't coincide with anything. McKenna just moved his line around to arbitrary points as he saw fit, ignoring everything else that statistically could have qualified. Fellow mystics and wackos have taken up his mantle over the last decade.
20. Source? No, I didn't think so…. You're just pulling crap off a woo site and posting it here. Do you even know what a Schumann resonance is? Probably not, since you called it a "Schulman resonance."
21. Google Sky isn't a real-time view of the sky, padawan. The images that comprise the vista in that software are decades — yes, decades — old. You can look up any of the original plates at a variety of DSS online archives, and you can view the same area via another source like Sky-Map. You could have learned this yourself with even the slightest bit of effort.
22. Because it ain't a big deal.
23. There is no alignment on December 24, 2011, except the very rough "alignment" of Mercury and Venus that I mentioned previously (and you obviously ignored).
24. Source? No, I didn't think so….
25. It was an X1.5 two days beforehand. What about all the far more powerful X-class flares that have occurred nowhere near the time of any large quakes? I guess that doesn't even factor into your thinking, does it?
26. Source? No, I didn't think so….
27. The magnetic poles move constantly. Always have, always will. It would be very strange if they suddenly didn't.
28. The comet is not named "Ele" in the film. It is named Wolf-Biederman, and it is projected to be an "E.L.E." Leo != Leonid. Yeah, it's a movie — now you know where all the cranks got their ideas, and you're helping propagate hysteria and ignorance.
29. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalyptic_and_post-apocalyptic_fiction
30. More people with cell phones and cameras, more people on the Internet, more ignorant people making ridiculous claims about what they can't identify. Makes sense. But what do UFOs have to do with anything???
31. No, as explained to you above.
TOO MANY TOO LIST!!!! All COINCIDENCES I DON'T THINK SO!!!
All bullshit, as explained to you above. It's very curious how you haven't even attempted to respond to any counters you've received so far.
Time to Wake Up
Time for you to stop being a tool.
Autumn (guest) 12 Mar 2011 23:35
